YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY Bought with the income of the ANN S. FARNAM FUND The Life of Henry, Third Earl of Southampton, Shakespeare's Patron CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS C. F. CLAY, Manager LONDON : FETTER LANE, E.C. 4 NEW YORK : THE MACMILLAN CO. BOMBAY \ CALCUTTA f- MACMILLAN AND CO., Ltd. MADRAS J TORONTO : THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, Ltd. TOKYO : MARUZEN-KABUSHIKI-KAISHA ALL RIGHTS RESERVED The Life of Henry, Third Earl of Southampton, Shakespeare's Patron BY CHARLOTTE CARMICHAEL STOPES Author of The Bacon-Shakespeare Question Answered, British Freewomen, Shakespeare's Family, Shakespeare's Warwickshire Contemporaries, William Hunnis and the Revels of the Chapel Royal, Burbage and Shakespeare's Stage, Shakespeare's Environ ment, Shakespeare's Industry, Editor of Shakespeare's Sonnets, etc. CAMBRIDGE AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS 1922 PREFACE It would have been more correct to have called this volume a collection of materials towards a Life. For anything approaching a real life can only be written by the subject himself, by an intimate friend, such as Fulke Greville was to Philip Sidney, or by one who has the command of a long series of private letters, heart-revealing writings, and contemporary information, such as Spedding had of Francis Bacon. Southampton kept no diaries, he did not pour forth his heart readily in effusive letters, he wrote no signed poems or papers, and few of his correspondents kept his epistles. The best that could be done was to arrange the facts concerning him in chrono logical order and set these in his natural surroundings, so that the work at best gives but a mosaic with many lacunae. I have not attempted to fill in the blanks as if with oil colours to make a complete "portrait"; I have attempted no oratory to move the feelings of others to judge him as I do. It is "but a plain blunt tale," but it was necessary to tell it as a background to that of Shakespeare and to help forward the writing of the Life of the Earl of Essex, which awaits some eager student. From a plain statement of facts, however, we may sometimes secure legitimate inferences. Hence I dwelt, some may think unduly, on his work in the Virginia Company. We find him there, always in the van, among all his anxieties. A troublesome minority made so much noise that the king crushed it "because ofthe disagreement among themselves," but Southampton could have pulled it through had he been let alone. And from what we know of his actions there, we may argue back to the other "brawls" with which he has been credited, feeling sure he would always be on the side which he thought was right. I must confess that I did not start this work for his sake, but in the hope that I might find more about Shakespeare, which hope has not been satisfied. In my earlier Shakespearean work, of course, I had read Drake, Malone, Gerald Massey, and Halliwell- Phillipps, and had collected a few new facts, but the person who impelled me to do this work in a thorough way was Mr Thomas Tylor. He first brought out the hypothesis which has been called vi PREFACE "the Herbert-Fitton theory" in a paper read at a meeting of the New Shakespeare Society in 1890. Everybody present (which does not mean all the members of the society) was in sympathetic ad miration of such a neatly fitted group of interesting facts, supposed to be connected with each other, and they all, including Dr Furni- vall, accepted it. As I said good-bye to Mr Tylor, I said " I hope I may live long enough to be able to contradict you!" "No, you won't, for my theory is going down Time!" "Not if I live long enough," said I, in full faith that evidence must be forthcoming to confute a theory so injurious to the good name of Shakespeare. Another relevant incident which I must relate happened some time afterwards (I forget how long). A small portrait, asserted to be con temporary, of the 3rd Earl of Pembroke had been offered to the then-existing holder of the title, for sale at a reasonable price. On the back a slip of paper was pasted containing the quotation from Sonnet lxxxi : Your monument shall be my gentle verse Which [eyes not yet created shall o'er-read]. The Earl of Pembroke invited certain leaders in art, literature, and criticism to meet at his house and give him their opinion. Dr Furnivall, having a card for himself and friend, took me as his "friend." The portrait was handed round, examined, and accepted by all as genuine and worth buying. It was handed round for a second time, in regard to the inscription. I do not remember the remarks made. I was last, and when it reached me I said, "The ink which wrote that was made in 1832!" thinking ofthe publica tion of Boaden's theory. This caused a commotion; Dr Furnivall laughingly cried "I forgot! Turn her out, turn her out. She is a Southamptonite. We are all Pembrochians here ! " This made me go on all the more eagerly in my research and attempts to convert Dr Furnivall, which I eventually did, chiefly through two articles in The Athenaum, March, 1898, on "The Date ofthe Sonnets," and another in August, 1900, "Who was Mr W. H.?" In the collection of my materials I have many to thank. The officers of the British Museum and the Record Office have been unfailingly helpful and considerately patient with my troublesome enquiries. The Librarians of the Bodleian have been as good, though I troubled them on fewer occasions. PREFACE vii I have to thank the Marquis of Salisbury for courteously allowing me to see his historical manuscripts, and his private secretary, Mr Gunton, who generously aided me in my search; the Duke of Portland for leave to include the Welbeck Abbey portraits; the Walpole Society for the loan of blocks used in the article on Wriothesley Portraits, by Mr R. W. Goulding, in their eighth volume; also Mrs Holman Hunt for the copyright of her treasured "Rubens portrait" ofthe Earl of Southampton. The Rev. Mr Matthews, formerly of Titchfield Church, not only admitted me to the Registers, but laid all his notes and photographs out before me that I might choose. Thanks are also due to Captain Charles Cottrell-Dormer of Rousham, Oxfordshire, for allowing me to spend a whole day among his manuscripts and to transcribe those concerning the Countess of Southampton. The Town Clerk of Southampton also cheerfully opened his Town-books, and Mr Chitty and Mr Jaggard sent me notes from Winchester. I have also to thank Mr R. F. Scott, Master of St John's College, Cambridge, for telling me where Thomas, the second son (and heir) of Southampton, was born, for the reprints of his articles in The Eagle, and for permission to use the College portrait of the Earl. Mr Previte Orton, the Librarian of the College, and his assistant were most kind to me in trying to solve the puzzles of the donation of books to the Library. CHARLOTTE CARMICHAEL STOPES. Hampstead, April lyd, 1921. HINTS TO READERS i. All MSS. not referred to any other collection are to be found in the British Museum. 2. All legal cases, State Papers, etc., are in the Public Record Office. 3. All wills, unless otherwise noted, are in Somerset House. 4. P.C.C. means Prerogative Court of Canterbury; P.C.R., the Privy Council Register; L.C., Lord Chamberlain's Papers. 5. The Cecil Papers and Salisbury Papers are the same, all being at Hatfield. But the former are the originals, the latter the printed Calendars, where the same articles appear as abstracts in greater or less degree. Before 1906 I did my work at Hatfield, where I have secured many originals, some of which, however, have been contracted by Mr Gunton or myself. Several volumes of the Calendar have come out since then; hence occasionally I give both references. 6. Many statements could have been referred back to several sources, but as I have lost so much of my work through the failure of my eyes and their inability to read even my own writing in pencil (which is used compulsorily in the Record Office), I have been unable to check various authorities, and have been forced to be contented occasionally with the one I could best secure. 7. My work strives to be accurate, above all things, but where, through long study and logical inference, I have used my imagina tion to fill up gaps, I always put such suggestions in large parentheses, to shew that I am aware that these passages contain an element of uncertainty, and are frequently controversial. 8. The limits of space have prevented my including many minor facts and allusions to the 3rd Earl of Southampton and his friends, as of course, I had to choose for publication the most significant. CONTENTS Preface .... chap. Hints to Readers I Lord Wriothesley's Infancy II The Boyhood of the Earl . Ill The Earl's first association with St John's College, Cambridge IV Proposals for Marriage V The Patron VI The Earl's Majority . VII Causes of Gossip . VIII Sea Dreams and Actions, 1596-7 IX The Two Countesses of Southampton X The Irish Campaign XI The Quarrel between Lord Grey of Wil ton and the Earl of Southampton, 1599- 1604 XII The Perils of "Contempt," 1599-1600 XIII The Conspiracy, 1600-1 XIV Judgments .... XV Clearing up ... XVI A Lampoon of the Day, 1601 XVII The Passing of the Tudors XVIII The Coming of the King XIX Festivities, 1604-5 XX The Fifth of November page v viii 1 7 24 34 49 62 79 96 114139 163 172 186 206 223 235 243255279 299 x CONTENTS CHAP. PAGE XXI "Some to discover islands far away" . . 314 XXII The Occurrents in England . . • 334 XXIII A Noble Gift to St John's College Library 356 XXIV A Long Progress XXV , Work in the House of Lords XXVI "Virginia Britannica" XXVII The Fifty-second Year XXVIII "Hence these tears" . XXIX The Heir of All 377 397 416447 461 473 Addenda I The Paternal Ancestors .... 485 II The Maternal Ancestors . . . 487 III The Second Earl and Countess of South ampton ....... 499 IV Southampton's Contemporaries in St John's College, Cambridge . . . 528 Note to Chapter XXI . . ... 529 Index . .... 530 ILLUSTRATIONS The Southampton Monument, Titchfield Church ...... to face page 6 The Third Earl of Southampton as a boy . „ 16 (From the monument in Titchfield Church) The Third Earl of Southampton in a suit of white, with armour ..... ,,94 (At Welbeck Abbey) Elizabeth Vernon, Maid of Honour to Queen Elizabeth . . . . . . . ,,114 (At Hodnet HaU) The Third Earl of Southampton, while a prisoner in the Tower .... „ 252 (At Welbeck Abbey) The Third Earl of Southampton in his prime „ 362 (Attributed to Rubens; Mrs Holman-Hunt's collection) Elizabeth Vernon, Countess of Southampton. „ 378 (At Welbeck Abbey) The Third Earl of Southampton . . . „ 449 (At St John's College, Cambridge) CHAPTER I LORD WRIOTHESLEY'S INFANCY* Henry, Lord Wriothesley, second of the Christian name and third ofthe title, came as the Son of Consolation to his parents on the 6th of October, 1573. His father, the second Earl of Southampton, a noted recusant, had suffered much discomfort and a very severe illness through his imprisonment in the Tower for the matter of the Duke of Norfolk. His mother Mary, daughter of Sir Anthony Browne, first Viscount Montague, had suffered nearly as much, through her intense sympathy, constant anxiety, and never-resting efforts on his behalf to move the Queen to mercy. At last the tide turned in his favour. On the ist of May, 1573, Southampton was allowed to go forth from the Tower to the comparatively com fortable house of Sir William More in Loseley, where he had pre viously been detained. There he still fretted against captivity, and his petitions were strengthened by Sir William More, who found the office of jailor incompatible with his other public duties. In July the disconsolate Earl was suddenly permitted to rejoin his wife and friends, under the hospitable roof of his father-in-law, where he was subject to no further supervision than that of Lord Montague, and was permitted even to go and see his building operations at Dogmars- field2, if he made sure he never spent more than one night out of Cowdray. The kindness of Lady More to the captive had roused the gratitude of Lady Southampton, and the relations of Sir William More to his charge had always been friendly. Thus it was first to Loseley that the g^eat news went forth post, on the 6th of October, " Yt has so hapned by the sudden seizing of my wife today, we could not by possibility have your wife present, as we desired. Yet have I thought goode to imparte unto you such comforte as God hath sente me after all my longe troubles, which is that this present morning at three of the clock, my wife was delivered of a goodly boy (God bless him.). ..Yf your wife will take the paynes to visit her, we shall be mighty glad of her company. From Cowdray this present Tuesday 1 As to ancestral matters, see also Addenda. 2 Loseley Papers, iv. 16. 2 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. 1573. Your assured frend H. Southampton."1 Thus was the only son2 of the second Earl of Southampton born, not at Titchfield, but at Cowdray, the house of his mother's people. This "goodly boy" was the first grandson born to the Viscount Montague, and it is certain that he had as much attention and care as was good for him. Besides all that the loving care of his mother could shower upon him, there was the experience of her stepmother, the Viscountess Montague3, a notable authority in the bringing up of children. It is strange that there has been preserved no record of his baptism. He must have been "made a Christian" in a much more modest way than his father was, who had a King and a Queen as sponsors; but there appears to be no later allusion to the godparents of the young Lord. It must be taken for granted that the ceremony was per formed after the ritual of the Catholic church, and that his sponsors were chosen from among his father's friends, rather for his spiritual strengthening than his worldly advancement. The Registers of Titchfield for that period are not extant. We know very little about the young Lord's childhood; but the first event that could have at all affected him was the visit of his parents to London^ Whether the Earl of Southampton had been summoned to Court to be admonished and finally forgiven, or whether he had received permission to visit his mother, the Lady Jane, we know not. But we know that he went, and meant to make it a happy pilgrimage by inviting his father-in-law and his brother-in-law to accompany him, probably leaving the child, at that early age, under the kind supervision of the Viscountess Montague. He wrote to Sir William More, "Although I have lately divers wayes pestered your howse yet sins your request is so, I mynd, God willing, with my wife, to be with you in our journey towards London on Tuesday even sennight and my brother Anthony Browne and his wiffe in my company. My Lord Montague upon this occasion is not coming, ist November, 1573."* The young people would go to London together, but would probably separate at London Bridge, the 1 Loseley Papers, iv. 18. 8 It has always been said he was "the second son," but there is no authority for that. The error must have begun in confusing the second with the first Henry. 3 See her Life by the Rev. Richard Smith. 4 Loseley Papers, iv. 21 and x. 51. i] LORD WRIOTHESLEY'S INFANCY 3 Brownes going to their town house, St Mary Overies, the Wriothesleys to Southampton House in Holborn. Anthony Browne was the eldest son and heir-apparent of Cow dray by Viscount Montague's first marriage to Jane, daughter of Robert, Earl of Sussex, and he was the only full-brother ofthe Lady Mary, Countess of Southampton. The Southamptons seem to have returned and spent some time longer at Cowdray, where, four months afterwards, another grandson came to the Viscount. Anthony Browne had married, the year before, Mary, the daughter of Sir William Dormer, and lived in Riverbank House, a dwelling which had been built for their use in Cowdray Park. There was born in March 1574 Anthony Maria Browne — afterwards heir. We may imagine the meeting of the two babes, when the new-comer at Riverbank was first brought over to his inheritance at Cowdray, their staring at each other with dim sub-conscious intelligence. The Wriothesley interloper had the advantage of four months, a period long enough to instil into the infant's mind a sense of posses sion and a scorn of new-comers smaller than himself. Four months gives a great precedence in the first year of life. I have been able to find only two MS. references to the Wrio thesley baby during his whole childhood. The first is in the will of his grandmother, the Lady Jane, 26th July, 15741. By it she left various bequests "to my Son's son, Harrye, Lord Wriothesley." That gives us at least the clue to his baby-name, and a reference to his baby "expectations." We know nothing, except by its results, of the child's education up to a certain date, save that it must have been equal to his rank and conducted on strictly Catholic lines. The other allusion to the child is made in relation to a painful episode in the family history. The Earl of Southampton was taken into favour again and was given certain county offices to perform, which, with his own interests in house-building and farming, seem to have placidly filled his time. He and his wife seem to have continued on affectionate terms until about i577> and tnen some misunderstanding arose, fostered by constant mischief-making through the Earl's gentleman servants, the chief of whom was Thomas Dymock. The Earl secluded himself more and more among his followers and estranged himself from his wife; he would 1 Martyn, 43. I — 2 4 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. have no communication with her, except verbally through the servants who had been the cause of the continuance, if not of the initiation, of the Earl's bad feeling. The friends ofthe Countess became anxious; her father wrote her a long letter asking her to explain fully her position and confess to what degree she was to blame. Unfortunately that letter has disappeared. But the full and frank reply of the poor wife has been preserved, which must be read in full to be understood in so far as she was concerned. The postscript mentions the child1. "That yowr Lordship shalbe witnes of my desier to wyn my Lorde by all such meanes as resteth in me, I have sent yowe what I sent him by my little bpye. Butt his harte was too greate to bestowe the reading of it, coming from me. Yett will I do my parte so longe as I am with him, but good my Lorde, procure so soone as conveniently yowe may, some end to my miserie for I am tyred with this life." It is to be regretted that the enclosed letter has not been preserved. By later correspondence we learn that she never saw her boy again during the life-time of his father, who kept him with himself and his servants. This letter forces the reader to sympathise with the Countess, to long to hear how the Earl could explain his conduct, and to wonder if he could possibly put himself in the right. He leaves nothing further than his will, and that only puts him still further in the wrong. It is dated the 24th of June, 1581, and is very long2. In it he describes himself as in "health and perfect memory," though its contents belie this statement, for they shew him to have disregarded time, place, circumstances, and the amount available to be distributed. The uses of the money are limited by an indenture made on 10th May, 1568, between the testator and the Viscount Montague and others deceased, "until the issue male of the testator should come to the age of 21 years." One thousand pounds were to be devoted to monuments, one of his father and mother and the other of himself. His funeral was not to cost more than another thousand. A liberal allowance to the poor was to be paid as promptly as possible, that they might pray for his soul and the souls of his ancestors. He left a ring to the Queen; 1 Cotton MS., Titus, bk. n. art. 174, f. 366. 2 Rowe, 45. i] LORD WRIOTHESLEY'S INFANCY 5 "beseeching her to be good to my little infants, whom I hope to be good servants and subjects of her Majesty and of the State."1 He left liberal allowances to servants and friends, and to his daughter Mary £2000, if she obeys his executors and does not live in the same house as her mother. As an afterthought, he remembered the father-in-law to whom he owed so much, by leaving him a George and a Garter, which could not have been his own, as he never had been made Knight of the Order, and it could not have been his father's, as the first Earl left his to Sir William Pembroke. He left as executors Charles Paget, brother to Lord Paget, Edward Gage of Bartley Co. Sussex* Gilberd Wells of Brainebridge Co. Southampton, Ralph Hare* bencher of the Inner Temple, and "lastly my good and faithful servant Thomas Dymock, Gent." For "overseers" he appointed " Henry Earl Northumberland, my Lord Thomas Paget and my loving brother Thomas Cornwallis." Of course, the bulk ofthe property was to come to his son Henry j The will also gives information as to his relatives on his father's side — his sister Katharine, Lady Cornwallis, his sister Mabel Sandys, his aunts Lawrence, Pound, and Clerke, his cousin John Savage, son of Sir John Savage, and others. From a fulsome panegyric on the Earl of Southampton by John Phillipps, called an "Epitaph,"2 we learn that both of his children were with him at the last, that he lovingly blessed them, and that they wept and wailed at his death. The account was evidently intended to pass by the wife, though "In wedlock hee observed the vow that hee had made." The Earl of Southampton died at Itchell, a house of his not far from Titchfield, on 4th October, 1581, when his son and heir was two days short of completing his eighth year. He was buried on 30th November in Titchfield Church beside his mother Jane, the first Countess of Southampton of that creation. Little public notice was taken of his departure. Camden even mistakes the year in which he died; Dugdale says, "His well wishes towards the marriage of the Duke of Norfolk and Mary Queen of Scots, to whom and to whose religion he stood not a little affected, occasioned him no little trouble." Once he is mentioned 1 Addenda. 2 Huth Ballads, 58. 6 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. i with flattery in literature. In that strange book1 Honour in its perfection the notice of the third Earl is prefaced by an account of the first Earl, his grandfather. "After this noble Prince succeeded his sonne Henry Earle of Southampton, a man of no lesse vertue, promesse and wisedom, ever beloved and favoured of his Prince, highly reverenced and favoured of all that were in his own ranke, and bravely attended and served by the best gentlemen of those countries wherein he lived; his muster roll never consisted of foure lackeys and a coachman, but of a whole troupe of at least a hundred well-mounted gentlemen and yeomen. He was not known in the streets by guarded liveries, but by gold chains, not by painted butterflies ever runing as if some monster pursued them, but by tall goodly fellowes that kept a constant pace, both to guard his person, and to admit any man to their Lord which had serious business. This Prince could not steale or drop into an ignoble place, neither might doe anythinge unworthy of his great calling, for he ever had a world of testimonies about him. When it pleased the divine goodnesse to take to his mercy this great Earle he left behinde to succeede him Henry Earle of Southampton his sonne, being then a child."2 1 By Gervase Markham. 2 The Earl of Southampton was summoned to repair the roads in St Andrew's, Holborn, near his own house in 1578 (Coram Rege Roll, Hilary 20 Eliz. f. 119) and 1580. The summons was repeated again and again to his heir (Controlment Rolls, Trin. 22-23 EUz- f- 94, et seq.). A later reference should be given here to throw some light upon tlie beginning of Lady Southampton's troubles. A Catholic in Brussels writing to a friend, warns him against Charles Paget, who is still "tampering in broils and practices between friend and friend, man and wife, Prince and Prince ... I will overpass his youthful crimes, as the unquietness he caused betwixt the late Earl of Southampton and his wife, yet living " (D S S P Eliz. cclxxi. 74, July 4-14, i59g, et seq.). PLATE I THE SOUTHAMPTON MONUMENT, TITCHFIELD CHURCH CHAPTER II THE BOYHOOD OF THE EARL It is never an easy thing to step into a great estate, and in the sixteenth century the difficulties were much increased for those under age. Henry Wriothesley, the third Earl of Southampton, would become in due order a Royal Ward; but the Queen would either sell his Wardship and Marriage, or bestow it as a gift on some of her favourites. It was probably as such that she bestowed it on Lord Charles Howard, Lord High Admiral. Then began arithmetical calculations of an abstruse nature, dull enough for readers even after the details have been mastered, but still necessary to consider, as they have a direct bearing on the future career of the minor. It is a little difficult to estimate the true character of the Thomas Dymock who had so bewitched his master that he was practically left, at the Earl's death, "the man in possession." He might have been a man of good intentions, confused only by a blind devotion to his master and obedience to his wishes, instead of the evil spirit that Lady Southampton and others described. Whatever he really was, he took the first step towards settlement. Without consulting his fellow executors, Lord Montague the next of kin, or Lord Paget the "overseer," he set off alone to prove the will in which he was so much personally concerned. It might be that he inno cently needed ready money to keep the house going, to prepare for the funeral, and to pay at once for the volumes of prayers necessary to free his master's soul, as soon as possible, from pur gatorial fires. It might have been, on the other side, a feverish haste to get his own affairs and those of his favourites settled, for he knew well there would not be sufficient assets to cover all, for years to come. It was a good lesson for him, and a great advantage for the other legatees, that the Registrar in Chief then refused to allow him to prove the will. 8 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. The widowed lady whom he had so deeply wronged had at last bestirred herself in earnest. She was no longer held back from publicity by the lingering ties of old affection, no longer afraid to befoul her own nest, to help her own children. She had no fear of fighting the "dead hand" which tried to dominate and humiliate her. She had many personal friends; so had her father. With her acute intelligence the Countess saw that nothing could be done now for herself, but that a very great deal could yet be done for her children. This could only be done by or through the Queen herself. The Crown had a right to protect the person of the heir and to super intend the settlement of his property, and in face of such a flagrant defiance of justice and precedent as the late Earl's will the Crown, and the Crown alone, could ignore in certain points the wishes of the testator. But the Crown had to be dealt with warily. In spite of his own offensive marriage, and of the Queen's French suitors, the Earl of Leicester was still the man best able to do this successfully. He could carry the Council with him; he was doubly related to Lady Southampton's family, he had helped her husband before, at her request, and he had offered again to help her if need be now; so he would be sure to do the best he could for her. She made up her mind to write first to the Earl of Leicester1. He liked to be con sulted first, Burleigh could bide his time. She wrote, accordingly2, as early as she could reasonably have done so, only ten days after the death of her husband. 1 The knowledge of how she did so came into my hands in this wayi Searching as I did for everything concerning the name, I found in the Report of the Historical Manuscripts Commission a reference to letters written by the Countess of Southampton to the Earl of Leicester in 1592. Knowing that she could not have written them then, or at least that he could not have received them, I applied to the owner of the letters, Capt. Charles Cottrell-Dormer of Rousham, to let me see them, and was kindly allowed to go down and copy them for myself. I cannot understand how these letters got to Rousham; neither does the present possessor. The Countess of Southampton's brother Anthony had married Mary, daughter of Sir William Dormer; her step-sister Elizabeth married Sir Robert Dormer, afterwards Baron Dormer of Wing. The Dormer family were also related to Lord Leicester, but it is difficult to account for these special letters travelling from the Earl of Leicester's study to the possession of the Dormers. 2 I found, as I expected, that the secretary had committed an error in date. Apparently the first of the Countess's letters dated " 14th October," and endorsed " 1582," must have been written in 1581. u] THE EARL'S BOYHOOD 9 My Lord, as ever I helde myself greatly beholding unto you, for your favour and well wyshing of me, so that yt pleased yor Lordship, now in the tyme of my greatest dyscomfort and neede of assestance to offer so honourably of yor owen mocion your helpe to raise my greved mynd and defende me from the mallis of those that my unkynd Lord (God forgeve him) hath left in over great trust behynd hym. I acknowledg myself most bownd, besechynge yor Lordship to show that favor towards me at this tyme as you have often promysed and I have assured myself to fynd when inded I should have cause to crave the same with effecte. That my boye is past yor hande I can but sorrow, not remedy but that the holl stat of this erldom he is of trust to injoy should rest in the hands of so unworthy a person as gentell Mr Dymocke voyde of either wytte, abelity, or honesty to dischardg the same doth so vexe me as in troth my Lord I am not able to expresse. How to better yt I knowe no menes but by yor menes to her Majestie to have consideracion of the man, and great matters that resteth in his hands un- accomptable but by Her prerogative, which I trust by yor Lordships menes to procure for the good of the child. Mr Dymock proved the wyll the next day after my Lord his death, by his owen bare othe without the knowledge of any of the rest of the executors, such worthy persons as are not in stat to undertake yt, which makes me hope that the wyll is not of such force as he would have yt either in substance or surcomstance, that I intend to put to the (Dr Drury's) tryall, not to undo any resonable matter my Lord hath don herin, but to defend my chyldern and my selfe from ther fingers that mynd no good to either of us. Yor Lordship's ayde and assestance I desyre herein, that yor credytt may be used for my releife cheflye with her Majestie and that it wyll plese you to bestow yor breth to Doctor Drury (befor whom the probatt is to be made) to show all the favor he may to make yt voyd, and thereby the admynistration to be granted to me, upon such sufficient assurance for the honorable dyschardge thereof as shalbe to the content of aE parties. That his Lordship contynewed his hard mynd towards me till his last, I greeve more for his sowll than any harme he hathe don to me therein, for my assurance of lyving rested not in his hands to bare. For the rest I way not, but by my troth am rather glad he hath gevyn me so just cawse to forgett him that otherwyse I should have caryed my rememberance with grefe more then enoughe to my last howere. Ten thousand tymes have I remembered yor speches to me full often touching the dyspocion of the man. I think I shall hold you for more then half a proffyt, that I wyshe sholde not prophecy in the worste parte of me. Well my Lord, I am now free, and be you sure, to the graitest prince that lyveth wyll I not put myself in the lyke condicyon nether for my quyett nor welth. Yor helping hand put to, good Lord, with so much good wyll as my affection towards yourself ever hath deserved, the matter is honorable and as resonable to be granted by yor menes whose credytt I hope shall ever be able to incounter Mr Dymocke, although my Lord of nowt made him, 10 an< I THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. and many mo. I wold not tyer you with many lines.... I rest you to God, nd myself to your Lordships affectionate rememberance, from Battell this 4th of October, Your Lordships most assured poure frend and cosyn, M. Southampton. Good my Lord, borne this and tak no knowladge of my wryting for this tyme, for I have not made any cretur prevy to yt, but cold not be quyett tyll I had don, nether shalbe tyll I here from you1. The Earl of Leicester's answer to this impulsive and perhaps slightly imprudent letter may be inferred from her next letter dated clearly 25th October, 1581. My good Lord, I have receyved by my Lord my father notis of your honorable care had of me, in this great extremyte that bade persons dryves me into, wherfore I acknowlege myselfe bownd unto yor Lordship praying the contynuance of yor favor so fare as consyence and honor may warant the sam. The hard delling of my Lord towards me in his lyffe was not unknowne unto your Lordship, and how he hath left me at his death is to aparant to all, makyng his sarvant his wyffe, by geving to him all and to myself nothing that he colde put from me. His only dawghter is lyttle preferred in benefytt before his man, who surly, my Lord, colde never deserve yt with awght that is in him, except with feding my Lord his humour agaynst me to incresse his owen credytt to that heytte as now (with dyshonor more then enoughe) yt is comen unto. What greffe yt is to me, I can not make known unto yor Lordship, the rather for that yt is now remedyles. Yt resteth now that by yor Lordships good menes and other my frendes ther may be that don for the good of the chyld and surty of that which his father hath left unto him that yor authoritie or credytt may afford, that his evell stat may not rest at the devocion of Dymocke, who hath sufficed in no way to dyschardge yt, and for my self my desyre is not unresolved ? but as a wyffe to be con- sydered, and so do mynd to dell as I am delt withall by them. That my lyttyle sonne refused to here (hear) service is not my fawlt that hath not seen him almost this twoo yeres. I trust yor Lordship esteemes me to have some more discrecion then to forbyd him that which his fewe yeres can not judge of. Truly my Lord, yf my self had kept him he shold in this howse have come to yt as my Lord my father and all his doth. I pray yor Lordship that he may understand this much from me to put her (Majestie) out of doubt I was not gylty of that folly. With my very herty well-wyshing unto yor Lordship I rest in assurance of your favor and assestance which I wyll deserve by all the good menes I may, from Cowdray this 25th of October yor assured frend and cosyn, M. Southampton2. 1 Letter xvn. Cottrell-Dormer MSS. 2 Letter v. Cottrell-Dormer MSS. n] THE EARL'S BOYHOOD n It may have struck readers of the printed series of the Privy Council Register1 as peculiar that Edward Gage, who had been sent to prison as a stubborn recusant, should have been let out so often and so long (on his word of honour to return) in order that he should superintend the settling of the late Earl of South ampton's affairs, though he was but one of five executors. It is probable that the Countess, who knew each ofthe executors personally, had dropped a hint to the Earl of Leicester that the only executor both able and willing to counteract Dymock's influence was her own cousin Edward Gage. If he could do nothing else, he could cause delay in settlement by insisting on arithmetical exactitude in each detail. A good many sums in Proportion would of necessity have to be worked out in an over-estimated will, so that the heir should not be the sole loser. Apparently Leicester's influence had been sufficient to do this at first, without attracting notice; to induce Dr Drury to quash Dymock's attempt to prove the will on his own account; and to urge the Queen to take things into her own high hand, with a view probably of securing the real wardship for himself. One item of the will was apparently set aside by the Queen, namely that compulsorily separating the daughter from the mother. There is unexpected corroboration of this opinion in an obscure corner of the Loseley Papers. Anthony Garnett, the confidential secretary and general manager of Lord Montague's affairs2, wrote to Sir William More on the 29th of November, 1581, in answer to a list of his queries about the characters of the four sons of Lady Cripps (a recusant), John, Henry, Edward, and George. Garnett said John had married Mr Roper's daughter, and lived in London, near St Mary Overies; "Henry was once my Lord's man in the household, and departed from us three years past, and since hath married Mr Culpepper's daughter of Aylesford, Kent, and dwells there." Edward formerly served the Earl of Warwick; George, the youngest "hath served in the household of the last Earl of Southampton for sundry years past, and is now one of his at Titch field till the funeral be past.... None of them have been one night 1 Privy Council Registers, 13th Aug. 1580, 20th June 1581, 19th Dec. 1581, nth Jan. 1582, ist April 1582. 2 Loseley Papers, x. 129. 12 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch, with us for these two years saving George, yesternight, who> with others, his fellows, brought the young Lady Wresley1 to us, and departed again to Titchfield." This letter was written the day before the funeral. I know not by whose authority the daughter was brought to the mother, but there she was. It is perfectly certain that Lord Mon tague would neglect no honour he could pay to the deceased as one ofthe chief mourners in the great funeral cortege of his son-in-law, and would insist on being in his due place by the side of the young heir. After the funeral the winding up of affairs would begin afresh with increased difficulty through the heavy expenses entailed by its grandeur. Unfortunately for the family, Edward Gage's time of leave from prison to attend to his relative's entangled affairs was about to expire long before the duties necessary had been overtaken. To leave things to the decision of Thomas Dymock unchecked just then was more dangerous even than it had been. So on the 1 1 th of December the Countess wrote again to the Earl of Leicester My good Lord, as from the begynning I have rested and relyed upon the honorable promyse yt plesed you to make to ayde and asseste me and myne in all resonable cawses. So am I now ernestly to requeste yor helpe in a matter that conserns my chylde so much as his well or evell doing rests much thereupon. By my father his letter yor Lordship shall understand an agreement is past between my Lord his executors and us, to our resonable contents. Yt resteth now that yor Lordship wyll afford that favor to us, as my cosyn Gage, being the only man in casse to undertake and dyschardge this great matter of my Lord his wyll, may have furder liberty upon such resonable condicions as I trust will be well lyked of by yor Lordship and all others. Mr Hare is a weak sykly body, and refuseth to deal in yt, except the other may be in casse to perform what he shall advyse and sett downe for the surety of the chyldern and dischardge of the wyll. Yf possibly yt may be, which truly, my Lord can never be (without over great hinderance to the chyld) except such travell and paynes which may ever be taken for yt, as I know none can or wyll do, but he who is tyed to the chyld, both in natur and kynship. That your Lordship shall judge my Lord my father his meaning, nor myne, is not to make an undutyfull motion to her Majestie or her state. His Lordship hath travylled with him and hath drawn him to consent to 1 Mr Bray has written on the margin of the letter, against this name, "Lady Wesley." He has altered the spelling to make it into a name he knew, not realising apparently that Wresley was the phonetic spelling of Wriothesley. n] THE EARL'S BOYHOOD 13 enter in to such band, with such condicion as in effecte was offered unto him before. Good my Lord, lett me by yor menes obtayn this resonable favor, the great nesesity of the cause reqyryng it and the good of one so nere yorself as the child is, depending upon yt. Myself wyll acknowledge myself bound unto your Lordship therfore, and myn have cause to pray for you ever, and thus my good Lord, resting in assured hope of yor favor and furderance to this my ernest request, with my hartye well-wyshing to you as to my owen self, I leve to troble yor Lordship, from Cowdray this nth of December yor Lordships most assured poure cosyn and frend, M. Southampton. I must not forget to tell your Lordship his [Gage's] day to returne is now before Crysmas eve, and therfore must crave yor helpe for longer lybertye more speedyly as also for that as yett ther is not order takyn in any thing, nor the inventory made, neither such consideracion as they are to make unto my self perfytted which makes me with great reson the more ernest to procure his lyberty1. " Addressed "To my singuler good Lord the Earle of Leycester geve this." Endorsed "nth Decb. 1581." It is evident that the Earl of Leicester moved the Queen and Court to agree to the writer's special pleading. Court feeling was with the Countess, the will was an infringement of class custom, and the widow had many friends and relatives in power. Her father's letter ofthe 14th December supports her loyally. It may please yor Lordship tunderstand that after moch travaile and other conference with the executors of the late Erie of Southampton, we have att the last geven to a quiett resolution, so muche as maybe both honorable to the wife and surtye to the children. It falleth now out that the chardge of the will is so great, and so far surmounteth the matter appoynted to dis- chardge it, thatt without an extraordinary fidelitye, care, and attendance it is hardly possible the same may be performed without2 of the younge chylde. Thereunto The cheffe (and indeede the only) personne that is reputed likely and able by care and travaill to do good therein is my cousin Edward Gage, without whom Mr Hare (being indeede wise, learned and honest, yett weake and subject to extraordinarye infirmities, refuseth in effect all dealinge), my humble sute therfor to yor Lordship is that in this case so moche towching the well or evil doing of these chylderne, yor Lordship wolde vowchsafe to putt to yor helpinge hande for the liberty of the said Edward Gage, and yett 1 Letter iv. Cottrell-Dormer MSS. 2 Spaces have been left where the handwriting becomes uncertain. 14 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. lothe in any wise, to seeme forgetfull eyther of his present state, or of my duty to the honor of that bonde, and I have ernestly delt with him to frame himselfe to accept of some such band as I learne hath bin before offered, and he then refused, the rather to move all your Lordships to favour this sute for his libertye. A note of that he is unto I sende yor Lordship herewith hoping that the same will be to your Lordships likynge. The tyme of his retorne to prison is before Crismas, and therefore I am the more bound to crave your Lordships honorable assistance and And thus my good Lord, I doo wish unto you long and happie liffe, from my howse att Cowdraye the 14th of December 1581. Your Lordships assured friend and kynsman, . , . , ' Anthony Mountague1. It would be interesting to compare the items of the will of the first Earl of Southampton, who had made the family fortune2, and that of the second Earl, who had neither earned nor gained nor been granted any new supplies, who had been appointed to no lucrative office and had not inherited anything from any one (except his mother), who had lost considerably through fines and imprisonment, and who had lived at an extravagant rate, even for his rank. He had willed in what was meant to be ready money in pounds 6830, in marks 1420, with many fees and annuities for life or periods of years, and "the Queen's Thirds." Edward Gage was to reduce the late Earl's dreams to the reality, and his liberty was extended on the 1 8th December. But Lord Montague did not use his influence, probably did not wish to do so, to shield his daughter from the search in Southampton House in Holborn ordered on the 20th December of that year. The chief question was to find sufficient ready money for urgent needs and legacies. The heralds who conducted the funeral on 30th November, 1581, would not like to be kept waiting, nor the servants, who were to be retained for three months and leave with £40 apiece (some of them more), nor the poor bedeswomen ; and there were current necessary expenses. It is perfectly certain that Lord Montague in his liberality, sympathy, and family pride, would have to advance large sums to ease the burdens of the other executors, none of them men of means like himself. The monuments could 1 Letter xii. Cottrell-Dormer MSS. 2 ThevalueofthelandsofThomas,EarlofSouthampton,is/i3so 10s 6d. Cecil Papers, Petitions, 2138. n] THE EARL'S BOYHOOD 15 wait, and would have to wait; and Lord Montague was the only person concerned, who had the taste and magnificence sufficient to select and plan the design of the tomb which still survives in the little church at Titchfield. Doubtless his influence likewise helped to hasten on the Inquisi tion Post Mortem. This was commenced on 30th May, 1582, and completed on the 18th June of same year at Alton, Hampshire, before the escheators1 Benjamin Tichbourne, Thomas Vuedale, John Snell, armigers, from the statements ofthe friends and servants of the deceased. The list of the manors is given — Bloomsbury in Holborn, Bugle Hall or Bull Place in Southampton, Beaulieu, Titchfield, etc.; the will of the first Earl is recalled and the indenture between the second Earl and the Viscount Montague and others to protect the interests of the Countess Mary recorded, as is the Earl's will of the 10th May 1 1 Eliz., when his daughter the Lady Jane was his heir presumptive, with instructions what was to be done when she attained her full age (a whole sheet is wanting here, at the most interesting part). The Inquisition then deals with the Earl's will drawn up on 24th June, 1 58 1, The will, which was attested by Thomas Lord Paget and Thomas Dymock, was proved by Edward Gage, Gilberd Wells, Ralf Hare, Thomas Dymock on 7 th November 1582, when things were settled as well as they could be at the time2. The contents of the office drawn after the death of Henry late Earl of Southampton3. First the jointure of the Countess by indenture made the io of February anno xmo Rne. Eliz. between the said Earl of the one party and the Lord Mountegue and Symon Lowe of the other party. Item that the said Earl after, by indenture dated xmodie Maii ao xmoRne. Eliz. made between the said Earl of the one party and the Lord Mountegue and John Hippesley Esquere of the other party, did for the consideration therein recited covenant with the said Lord Mountague and John Hippesley, that he the said Earl and all persons &c. should stand seized of all his Lord ship's manors lands and tenements to the use of the said Earl for term of his life natural without impeachment of waste and after his decease to the use of the Lord Mountague Raffe Scrope and John Hippesley their executors 1 Inq. P. M. Eliz. Part I. 196/46. 2 Rowe, 45. 3 Mr Gunton kindly checked my copy of some notes from Cecil Papers, 206. 99. 1 6 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. and assigns until one of the sons of the said Earl should be of the full age of 21 years, with divers remainders to his own issue and for want thereof to others upon trust that the said Lord Mountague &c. shall pay the debts and legacies of the said Earl &c. with a proviso that the said Earl may demise his manors lands and tenements aforesaid. A proviso that the said Earl may change and alter the uses. A proviso for leases to stand in force. Item, the said Earl's will, That the said Earl divided and set out the third part to the Queen's Majesty and the other 2 parts to the executors for perT formance of his will. The Queen's Majesty's third part descended to the young Earl. The part left to the executors. The tenures and values of the lands &c. Endorsed "Contents of the Earl of Southampton's Office." Undated. In a book called The Sale of Wards at the Record Office1, it is stated that the annual sum of the property by the assets had been found on the 13th day of June 1582, to be £1097. °*- II|^- There is no mention of a guardian. At the beginning of the following year a tabulated report was prepared by the executors and handed in by Lord Howard2. The yearly value of the Erie of Southampton his Lands as well in possession as in reversion. The yearely value of the Countess of Southampton her revenewe parcell of the Premises ^362. ioj. of<£ The Lands dyscended to the nowe Earle in her Majestie's hand! per Annum ^370. 16s. %\d. The Lands devysed by the late Erles last wyll to the Executors per Annum £363. lis. %\d. Summa total. ^1097. 6s. 6\d. The yerely revenue which the said Erie shall receive at his full age Imprimis his Landes which are in her Majestie's hands because of his mynoritie, and the landes which the Executors have by the devyce of the last Erie's wylle shalbe out of lease at his full age to grant which will be yearly worth^ooo, over and above the said Countess' joynture being of the yerely value of £362. ioj. ofi. Item, there wylbe made also by a greate fyne at the least £2000. Item the Leases of Micheldever, Estratton and West Stratton, and of the Parsonage of Tychfield with the other leases wylbe yearly worth £400. Sum of the said Erles yerely Revenue £4000, over and above the said Countess joynture being of the yerely rent of £362. ioj. r%d. Item the Executors may not by the said Erles wyll lett or grant any 1 Vol. 21-30 Eliz. no. 157. 2 Lansdowne MS. xxxvn. 30. PLATE II - - ?\^ cv v THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON AS A BOY (From the monument in Titchfield Church) n] THE EARL'S BOYHOOD 17 copyhold or ferme, but the same must be at the disposition of the Erie at his full age. Item that the said Erie shall have his howses well furnishyd, and stuffed with all manner of furnyture, Armor and plate, and his grounds well stocked and stored with cattell, which the executors must performe, beside the great quantitye of woode growing uppon the said Erles lands. Lands and Leases which presentlie oughte to be in the saide Erles posession The Manor of Ytchell, purchased in the Erie's name, of the yerely value of £100. Item the Leases of Estratton Westratton and Mycheldever, and the parsonage of Tychfield of the yearely value of ,£300. summa £400. Endorsed " 3rd January 1 582/3. Noting of the Erie of Southr ampton's Leases from ye Lord Howard." With the exception of attesting that the copy of the Earl's will made for probate was the same as that which the Earl had written, Lord Thomas Paget seems to have taken no trouble with his departed friend's testament; Charles Paget, his brother, is never heard of again and was probably absent in settling his own affairs, so that " the casting vote" on points of differences in opinion would always lie with Thomas Dymock; the Lord Admiral, finding this Wardship involved much trouble, some humiliation, and no present prospect of remuneration, seems to have resigned it into the Queen's hands, or sold it to Lord Burleigh. In one ofthe Wriothesley Pedigrees in the British Museum1 the note is added "Henry Earl of Southampton, now living, under age, and the Queen's Ward." No mention is made of a guardian, but later events shew that Burleigh acted as one, for the Queen as Master of the Wards. We may have gathered that the Countess rather regretted that the Earl of Leicester had not secured the office; but Lord Burleigh was in every way a better and more suitable guardian than Leicester could have been at his best. Burleigh seems to have taken the boy away, in the first instance, to a place where Thomas Dymock dared not follow, to his own home, with only occasional visits allowed to his mother and grand father. Lord Burleigh was very fond of children, his wife was educated up to the highest level of women's learning of the time, and his son Robert, about 12 years the young Earl's senior, a model 1 Harl. MS. i. 44. See also his most ambitious Pedigree, Harl. Rot. O. 12. s. s. 2 1 8 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. of industry, patience, and learning. Above all, Lord Burleigh could inculcate conformity to the Queen's will in matters of religion without undue harshness ; and we may be sure that never more would the boy have the courage to refuse to be present at the reading of the English service. Lord Burleigh also knew how to manage great estates; we can well imagine him content that the recusant Edward Gage should be free so long as he did him such excellent service in the Office at Titchfield. We have, however, no clearer information concerning the Earl's boyish education than' we have concerning his childish training, except through inferences. His grandfather would be sure to take him to see how his various manors were being kept by care-takers or tenants. He would ere long notice that there was something wanting in all of them which he found in Cowdray — the recognition of harmony, sym metry, and ordered art. The pictures of Cowdray themselves helped in his education. He would never weary of hearing his grandfather describe the portraits, the historical pictures, the curios, the carvings that surrounded them. One thing must have at some time or other bewildered the child. How was it that all this came through the " Earl of Southampton," and did not come to him ? We can jusdy imagine he asked that question, and that the grandfather kindly and wisely explained the rather mixed relations of the two. He would probably say some such words as " Long since, my boy, our family held high place. We can trace back our descent to Edward I and Edward III and John of Gaunt1- But it is enough to begin with the Nevilles. Richard Neville, Earl of Salisbury, and the Lady Alice Montacute were the parents of Richard, the great Earl of War wick, called " the King-Maker "; their third son was Sir John, who was made the Marquis of Montacute (or Montague) by Edward IV. He was slain at the Battle of Barnet in 1471. His son George died childless, but he left five daughters, co-heiresses, by his wife Isabella Ingoldsthorpe ; the eldest, Anne, married Sir William Stonor|| Elizabeth married Lord Scrope of Upsall and Masham ; MargareS Sir John Mortimer ; Lucy, Sir Thomas Fitzwilliam, of Aldwark, Yorkshire ; and Isabel, William Huddleston. The fourth daughter^' 1 British Archaeological Journal, xxm. p. 231. ' ' ii] THE EARL'S BOYHOOD 19 Lucy Neville, lost her husband. She had several sons, who, all but the youngest, died. With that son, William, she came to Court, married my grandfather, the first Sir Anthony, and had by him one son, my father, and two daughters. William Fitzwilliam adored his mother and her younger children. He rose in the favour of Henry VIII till he was rich enough to buy Cowdray from Sir David Owen, who had got it through his wife, the heiress of the De Bohuns. Then the King made him Earl of Southampton. That is why, when he rebuilt this place, he wrought his own arms on the fretted roof — W.S. and a trefoil — and an anchor, because he was Lord Admiral. He made a settlement on himself and wife for life, then on my father and his male heirs. When he died, everybody thought the King would give my father the title, as he had received the property — he deserved it! The King let it lapse. In the reign of Edward VI, when all the Councillors but my father gave themselves titles in the name of the young King, Lord Thomas Wriothesley, your own grandfather, was offered an Earldom, proposed to be of Winchester, afterwards of Chichester; but he chose Southampton, probably because the town was near his chief manor of Titchfield. So, when Queen Mary made me a peer, I chose my title from my grandmother's pedigree, and was allowed. An Earl does take pre cedence of a Viscount, boy ; but do not forget your mother comes of an older stock than your father's. "And never forget, boy, that the chief value of nobility is as a training in virtue — 'Noblesse oblige'; and our mottoes are to help us to bear in mind the thoughts of our ancestors. "The first Earl of Southampton's motto was 'Loyaulte se prou- uera,' your grandfather's was ' Ung par tout, tout par ung,' a good motto, which is now your own, and ours is ' Suivez Raison.' " I feel that I bear my uncle Southampton's motto as well as my father's. Grieved am I that my father never came to his great inheritance, though he had to fulfil his brother's will. It is not that I wished Mabel Clifford, his beloved wife, to die sooner (we all loved her), but I did wish and pray that my father should have lived longer and enjoyed the fruits of his strenuous labours, which all came to me. I try to fulfil his will, and I am completing his plans for Cowdray, which my aunt in her goodwill allowed him to use as his own till the end of his life. He had high ideas, my father; 2 — 2 ¦20 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. you can see something of his designs. I strive to complete them, for him and his memory." The boy's cousin, younger by four months, would stand by listening open-eyed, and beg some stories of their ancestors' doings— and thus young Henry Wriothesley would hear what was expected of men of his rank and learn to dream of martial glory. The young Earl's thoughts would also unconsciously be moulded by the events of which the news and the world's criticism came to that many-voiced "House of Rumour" where Burleigh dwelt. Robert Cecil would tell him of the university life he had led, of the characters of the men he met in his guardian's galleries, of the hopes he had for England. Altogether, even as a child, the Earl might secure a much broader outlook than could ever have been given to him in the narrow-circled haunts of his father. Meanwhile, though probably the young Earl knew nothing of it, Lord Burleigh had been making strict enquiries about all the tenants and dwellers in the various houses belonging to the property; all the more carefully because all of them would necessarily be Catholics, so strict had been the practices of the late Earl. One paper is interesting enough to give as an illustration1- Account of Bewley ist. The House of Bewly occupied by Mr John Chamberlain who hath the same by Mr William Chamberlain his brother who had the same of the executors of the Earle. And the said Mr John Chamberlain hath the personage and all the grounds within the wall, which by estimation is thought to be about fifty acres, and Mr Chamberlain pays to the Executors yearly, the some of £30. And also towards the repairing of the House yearely £5; and for surveing the cure to the Minister of Bewley £12, and the said John Chamberlain paid for his brother for a fyne during the yeres of the young Erie's minoritie the. sum of £200. The names of the persons remaining there Mr John Chamberlain the eldest and his wife Mr John Chamberlain his son, and Elizabeth his wife Mrs Margaret Kingston, widow, aunt to Mr John Chamberlain the elder Elizabeth daughter to Mr John Chamberlain the elder, ' 4 women servants, 6 menservants. The names of the persons lately departed Mr Thomas Gifford and Cycely his wife and Mary Lyon 1 Lansdowne MS. xliii. (63). o] THE EARL'S BOYHOOD " 21 Mr Michael Chamberlain and Elizabeth his wife Another Chambermaid with Mr Gifford, Two men of Mr Gifford'j Mr Richard Chamberlain his servants, Ursula Trussell his maide Elizabeth Hussey her kinswoman, Thomas Jennings and Nicholas Lockley Item, about the Hay, Mr Chamberlain has from certain meadows called the Fulling Mill lande for which he paid for during the minority of the Earle to Mr Coxe and Mr Dudson, my Lord Chamberlain's servants £10. Mem. All these notes are set down by me John Chamberlain the Younger and Elizabeth his Mother. 8th daie of Maie 1585. (Signatures of attesting witnesses) The Chamberlains had been well-known servants of the second Earl. One would hardly expect to find much about the young Earl in, Church Records, yet there are some references which do concern him, directly as well as indirectly. Southampton House was in the Parish of St Andrew's, Holborn, and that living was in the family gift. Ely Place, the residence of his grandfather until the days of Edward VI, stood just to the west of the church, as may be seen in the old map in the British Museum Print Room, bound up with the Cowdray pictures. His grandmother, the Countess Jane, had appointed Ralph Whytlin1 as Rector in 1558. John Proctor2, a literary man, was appointed on his death in 1578 (Humphrey Dondt pro hac vice ratione advoc. ei concess. per Henry Com. Southampton). On his death in 1 584 the distinguished Dr Bancroft succeeded, and remained Rector until 1597, when ne was raised to the Bishopric of London; and the Queen had taken the Royal Privilege of nominating the successor when the Crown had promoted the in cumbent. On raising the Rector to the Bishopric of London, she appointed John King, S.T.B., 10th May, 1597. So we may gather the character of the men who, during his life, officiated in the church which the Earl was bound to attend when he was dwelling in his Bloomsbury house. About the appointment of Bancroft we have some information from Nicolas. Sir Christopher Hatton had written to Lord Burleigh to allow his Chaplain, Dr Richard Bancroft, to hold the Rectory of St Andrew's. Burleigh replied*: 1 Newcourt's Repertorium, l. p. 272. 8 He wrote the story of Wyat's rebellion. 8 Nicolas, Life of Sir Christopher Hatton, p. 384. 22 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. I perceive by your courteous letters, your desire to procure your Chapkin Mr Bancroft to succeed in the place of the parson of St Andrews, lately deceased, the patronage of which belonging to the Earl of Southampton now in Wardship and so as you suppose, to be disposed of by us. Herein I am very willing, both for your own sake, and for Mr Bancroft, being very meet for the place, to do what in me lieth. The doubt I have is that the patronage appertaineth to the Earl in right of his house in Holborn, that was aforetime the Bishop of Lincoln's, and then the right of presentation belongs to the executors, whereof one of the heirs is principal, and Edward Gage another, and one Wells another, with whom you may do well to deal; and if it be not in them, you shall have my assent. And for the better knowledge thereof, I have given your chaplain my letter to the Auditor of the Wards, who can best inform you whether it remains to the Queen or to the Executors. From my house at Theobald's the 6th of August 1584 Yours assuredly as any W. Burleigh. Backed by Sir Christopher Hatton and Lord Burleigh, Dr Ban croft was bound to succeed with the executors, even if it were in their gift; and Newcourt says it was. Bancroft was appointed 14th September 1584. Something else happened in St Andrew's Church, in the following year, very much more interesting to the young Earl. We find from the Bishop of London's Marriage Licences1 that his only sister Mary was married there in June 1585. Though the Bishop of London was quite sure about the bride, he (or his clerk), for he was but a new-made Bishop, was not quite so sure about the bridegroom. He said he was "Sir Matthew Arundle Knt," whereas the name should have read "Mr Thomas, son of Sir Matthew Arundle Knt." (It is pleasant to note this flagrant error, as so many have tried to fix scandal upon Shakespeare 2 by a clerk's error in his marriage licence at Worcester.) Taken in full the entry should have read— "Mr Thomas Arundel son of Sir Matthew Arundel Knight and Mary Wrisley (Wriothesley) spinster, daughter of Henry, late Earl of Southampton, to marry in the Chapel of Mary Countess of Southampton in St Andrew's, Holborn." We do not know who married them, as they were both Catholics and probably would have a private marriage first. Here was the very thing the young Earl would delight in— a real brother-in-law, all 1 Harleian Publications; vol. xxv. 140; 2 See my Shakespeare's Family, p: 62, and Shakespeare's Environment, p. 92. n] THE EARL'S BOYHOOD 23 his own, young, and yet old enough in his thirteen extra years of life to have travelled, to have been imprisoned for his faith (in 1580), to have had military training and service so thorough that he had been designated "the Valiant"; a man who could fill the young Earl's soul with the stories that he most desired, of war and foreign fields and glory. Burleigh and his son Robert were too pacific to stimulate that side of their ward's nature. This Thomas was the son of Sir Matthew, by Margaret, daughter of Sir Henry Willoughby1 of Wollaton, Notts, known to gossip as a shrew. The lady would be a mother-in-law that her son's wife must have somewhat dreaded. The Wriothesleys were of the new nobility, the Arundels were oldest of the old. Many Earls were in their pedigree, some Dukes, and a few Queens. Thomas Arundel subscribed £100 to help the English fleet against the Armada in 1588, as he was then engaged in fighting against the Turks in Hungary2. All shades of Christians could unite then in thrusting back the Infidels. The Emperor Rudolf II, on 14th December, 1595, made him a Count ofthe Holy Roman Empire, a title that Elizabeth did not allow him to assume. He succeeded to his father as owner of Wardour in 1 598, and was made Baron in 1 605. Many letters about his troubles appear among the Salisbury Papers. Thomas had a highly cultured younger brother, William, who probably attracted young Southampton to art and literature3. 1 See New Review, Oct.— Dec. 1889, p. 542. 2 G. E. C. His wife Mary Wriothesley died on 27th June, 1607, and was buried at Tisbury, Wilts. He married again, and had a son baptized at St Andrew's, Holborn — "Matthew the son of Thomas Lord Arundell baptized 19th June 1609." Both Lord Thomas and his wife were buried at Tisbury, Wilts. 3 Pym Yeatman's House of Arundel and Vivian's Visitation of Cornwall. CHAPTER III THE EARL'S FIRST ASSOCIATION WITH ST JOHN'S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE In the autumn of the year 1585 the Earl's guardian sent him to the University. He was admitted at St John's College, Cambridge, as Fellow-Commoner at Michaelmas 1585. In the Register is the entry "Ego Henricus comes Southamptoniensis admissus eram in alumnum huius Collegii diui Johannis Euangelistae decimo sexto die Octobris anno Domini 1585" (St John's College). "Dec. 11, 1585, Hen. Comes Southampton impubes 12 annorum admissus in Matriculam Acad. Cant:" (Matric. University). There, young as he was, he would meet with other youths of the same age, all engaged in mental work in various branches of learning. Even at this stage in his life, we learn few details concerning him; yet we have the broad general appreciative testimony of Camden: "Edward VI, conferred the title on Thomas Wriothesley1 Lord Chancellor... and his grandson Henry, by Henry his son now enjoys that title, who, in his younger years, has armed the nobility of his birth, with the ornaments of Learning and military arts, that in his riper years, he may employ them in the service of his country."2 Henry Wrio-^ thesley did not find a fellow-student at College (as his grandfather had done) enthusiastic enough to record his youthful beauties,. his "golden hair," his talent for acting, his dabbling in the Muses' fount, attributed by Leland to Thomas Wriothesley2 in his Encomia. But, on this one side of his character, he does seem to have inherited his literary and histrionic tastes from that grandfather. Some of his College exercises were sent to Lord Burleigh, to allow him to measure the exactitude of his scholarship and the excellence of his caligraphy. These are hardly worth giving in extenso, as it is not at all likely that the thoughts expressed were his own. It is most likely that a sample of supposed good English had been given him to translate into good Latin. The earliest I have seen is endorsed "June 1586," wherein he proves to his own 1 Britannia, p. 123. s See Addenda. ch.iii] ST JOHN'S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE 25 Satisfaction the soundness ofthe title "Igitur laboriosa juventutis studia sunt, jucunda senectutis otia."1 It is written in a beautiful clear Italian handwriting, upright, and obedient to a broad margin on the left hand, but breaking through the proportional margin to the right, crowding the letters. He signed it with a larger, bolder hand, modelled upon that of his father, and, like that of the other jeunesse dorie of his day, acutely angular. Another similar exercise has been preserved, dated July 22nd, 15862. He must have had approval of this, or he would not have sent it to his guardian. It is written in a similar handwriting. The title was "Omnes ad studium virtutis incitantur spe premii." He gives his arguments in correct Latin, but he must have somewhat varied his text, as he ends with the title modified in his conclusion, *' Facile igitur videri potest quod omnes ad studium virtutis inci tantur spe gloriae." By the following year, Latin letters took the place of Latin exercises to send to his guardian, and there the thoughts and composition were probably his own, as well as the Latin. He wrote to thank Lord Burleigh for taking care of his affairs: Magnas tibi gratias ago (honoratissime Domine) quod res mea tibi tanto- pere curae sunt utinam gratitudinem tibi ostendere possem aut saltern aliquo modo earn significare sed obsecro (quia his Nuntius tam cito discessit ut tempus non erat satis longum ad scribendum amplius hoc tempore) ut in bonam partem accipies hanc meam brevem epistolam posthac spondeo et polliceor me te et pluribus verbis et sepius velle affari et te oro ut quemad- modum cepisti mihi in omnibus rebus, opem prestari, ita pergas facere id quod facis et ita me tibi semper deuinctum curabis. Deus te servet incolu- mem. Cantabrigiae x Junii 1587 Honori tui deuinctissimus. H. Southampton 3. The writing is not quite so careful as that of the two essays. The right-hand margin is still somewhat crowded by completions of words. Several letters of a similar handwriting are preserved in a volume of the Lansdowne manuscripts (No. xvn), some of which suggest that they had been written by the writing master who had taught the young Earl this style. As was to be expected, a will like the second Earl's produced a plentiful crop of little law-suits, which of course meant expenditure 1 Lansdowne MS. l. f. 23. * Cecil Papers, MS. 302. * Lansdowne MS. un. f. 51. 26 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. of the estate, whichever side won. For instance, there is one noted in the Book of Wards and Liveries*- "Charles Lord Howard, Lord Admiral of England Committee of the bodye and landes of Henry Earl of Southampton, her Majestys Ward, hath on behalf of the said Earl exhibited a bill in this court, against the executors of Henry late Earl father of the ward, to have the yearly leases of Micheldever, Stratton, and Titchfield parsonages, which are let on lease to divers persons until the said young Earl shall accomplish his age of 1 8 years," the first two for the yearly rent of £40. 1 3*. 4 when the company went on its travels, that the talks ofthe friends led them to discuss what would be done after the coming of age, and marked a poetic fervour in Sonnet civ: To me, fair friend, you never can be old, For as you were when first your eye I eyed Such seems your beauty still. Three winters' cold Have from the forests shook three summers' pride; n] THE EARL'S MAJORITY 75 Three beauteous springs to yellow autumn turned In process of the seasons have I seen; Three April perfumes in three hot Junes burn'd Since first I saw you fresh which yet are green. In regard to Shakespeare's private relations to the Earl, little is definitely known* Though I do not wish to put it forward as founded on authority, I may say that there are a good many reasons to suggest the opinion that, considering the circumstances, Shakespeare wrote ji Midsummer Night's Dream for the wedding festivities of Sir Thomas Heneage and the Countess of Southampton. The stately central figures of Theseus and Hippolyta harmonised with the representation of the Bridegroom and the Bride; the inter weaving of fairies sprang from dreams of perpetual youth; the lovers' fancies controlled by the fairies' will, was a tribute of associated ideas for his beautiful young friend; Bottom and his group was a gentle satire on his own company as they had appeared to his youthful eyes at Kenilworth in 1575. For it seems certain that Shakespeare had been taken there by his father as a boy of eleven, and had remembered the spell ofthe masque and music of The Lady ofthe Lake by Master William Hunnis, which so inspired Master Robert Laneham — "the hole armonny conveyed in tyme, tune, and temper, thus incom parably melodious; with what pleazure, with what sharpnes of conceyt, with what lyvely delighte, this moughte pears into the heerer's harts, I pray ye imagine yourself as ye may. . ., for by all the wit and cunning I have, I cannot express, I promis you." It is not at all certain that the Earl and Countess of Southampton had been there; but it is quite certain that Sir Thomas Heneage had been, and who so well as that faithful old courtier could have appreciated the memorable lines to Elizabeth1? Now, if that play was performed at his mother's wedding, it would give Southampton a chance of being stage manager, whether 1 M.N.D. n. 1. I saw... Cupid all arm'd : a certain aim he took At a fair vestal, throned by the west; And loosed his love-shaft smartly from his bow, As it should pierce a hundred thousand hearts; But I might see young Cupid's fiery shaft Quench'd in the chaste beams of the watery moon; And the imperial votaress passed on In maiden meditation fancy free. 76 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. the performance was at Southampton House, at Horsham, at the Savoy, in the rural surroundings of Copthall, or even at Titchfield; and he would have enjoyed that We do know that it was after the Heneage marriage that we have the first official record of Shakespeare's name as playing at Court, in the accounts of the Treasurer of the Chamber, Dec. 28th, I5941-] Mr Bertram Dobell on Sept. 14th, 190 1, wrote to The Athenaum1 stating that he had purchased a manuscript book entitled A Register of all the Noble Men of England sithence the Conquest Created— probably written between 1 570-90. On the fly-leaves at the end are some poems by Sir Thomas Heneage, to one of which Sir Walter Raleigh Wrote a reply. As he had not found any of the former printed, Mr Dobell includes them, as follows: Sr. Thomas Heneage Most welcome love, thou mortal! foe to lies, thou roote of life and ruiner of debate, an impe of heaven that troth to vertue ties, a stone of choise that bastard lustes doth hate a waye to fasten fancy most to reason in all effects, and enemy most to treason. A flowre of faith that wiE not vade for smart, mother of trust and murderer of oure woes in sorrowes seas, a cordiall to the hart that medcyne gives to every grief that growes; a schoole of witt, a nest of sweet conceit, a percynge eye that findes a gilt disceit. A fortress sure which reason must defend, a hopefull tayle, a most delyghtinge band, affection mazed that leades to happy ende to ranginge thoughtes a gentle ranginge hande, a substaunce sure as will not be undone, a price of joye for which the wisest ronne. Sr. Thomas The markes of thoughtes and messengers of will (my friend) be wordes, but they not all to trust, 1 See my paper "The earliest Official Record of Shakespeare's name," Jahrbuch, 1895. a Athenteum, September 14th, 1901, p. 349. THE EARL'S MAJORITY 77 for wordes be good full oft when thoughtes be ill, as fair is fake though sometymes sweet and juste, then friends to judge aright and scape the scof trust none till tyme shall putt their vysardes of. Mr Rawleigh Farewell falce love, thou oracle of lies, a mortall foe and enemy to rest, an envious boye from whome all cares arise a bastard vile, a beast with rage possest, a way of error, a temple full of treason, in all effectes contrary unto reason. A poysened serpent, covered all with flowers, mother of sighes and murderer of repose, a sea of sorrowe from whence are drawen such showers as moysture lendes to every grief e that growes, a schoole of gyle, a nest of deep deceit, a gylded hook that holdes a poysened bait. A fortress foiled whome reason did defend, a Cyren's songe, a feaver of the mynde, a maze wherin affection findes no ende, a raginge clowde that ronnes before the winde, a substaunce lyke the shadow of the sunne, a goale of griefe for which the wysest ronne. Sr. Thomas Madame who once in paper puts his thoughte doth send to daunger that was safe at home, and meaning well doth make his judgment noughte to thrall his wordes he wotes not well to whome; yet pullinge back his penne he must confesse to show his witt he proves his love the lesse. Sr. Tho. Idle or els but seldom busied best in court (my Lord) we leade the vaynest life, where hopes with feares, where joyes with sorrowes rest, but faith is rare, tho fayrest wordes be rife. Heare learne we vice, and looke one vertuous bookes, heare fine deceit we hould be courtly skill; our care is heare to waite one wordes and lookes, and greatest work to follow others will. 78 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. vi Heare scorne a grace, and pride is pleasant thought, mallice but might and fowlest shifte no shame, lust but delyght, and playnest dealing nought, whear flattery lykes, and trothe beares of test blame Yet is the cawse not in the place, I finde, but all the fault is in the faulty minde. Sr. Thomas Seldome and short be all our happiest houres we hear can hold, for why? oure hopes and joies roulinge and fake their broding tyme devoures, which when we trust, aks we finde but toyes. Hard to obtain, but yet more haistly gon, be greatest happ, with grudginge envie matcht, of fairest seedes the fruit is nought or none with good and evill our lyfe so much is patcht. Owr twisted blis by tyme is soon untwynde, to hope and love and fear doth gyve a lashe, so change gives checke to each unstable mynde to all delyght, and daunger gyves the dashe, Thus dasht who yet fast troth to vertues lynckes mak faith to shine, however fortune shrinckes. Farewell fake Love first appeared in print in William Byrd's Psalms Sonnets and Songs, 1588, says Mr Dobell, referring to Mr Bullen's Lyricks from the Song-books ofthe Elizabethan age. CHAPTER VII CAUSES OF GOSSIP No doubt one of the reasons which made the Gray's Inn men so ashamed of The Comedy of Errors was that it was an exceedingly free, if not a bad, translation of the Latin of Plautus. No wonder that they took Bacon into consultation as to how they might have something dignified and fitting. The Prince of Purpoole and his Christmas court planned another great evening on the 3rd of January. They invited the Templars, with due apologies, to come and see their actually intended plan. They reared an altar to the goddess of Amity, surrounded with nymphs and fairies who filled the air with sweet music. Then, apparently, the originally planned masque, revised, corrected and expanded, was performed in stately dignity for the benefit of the Templars. It represented a series of historical friends, Theseus and Pirithous, Achilles and Patroclus, Pylades and Orestes, Scipio and Lelius. To these they added Graius and Templarius. Then six Lords of the Prince's Privy Council discoursed, the ist on Ware, 2nd on Philosophy, 3rd on Eternize- ment and fame by Buildings and Tombstones, 4th on the Ab soluteness of State and Treasure, 5 th on Vertue and Good Govern ment, 6th on Pastime and Sports. This last Councillor advised all present to enjoy their opportunities. The Prince made a suitable reply, chose a lady to dance with, and so did all the others. "The performance of which night being carefully and orderly handled did so delight and please... that thereby Gray's Inn did not only recover their lost credit and quite take away all the disgrace that the former 'Night of Errors' had incurred, but got instead honour and good report," and Gray's Inn and the Temple were made friends. Among the honourable personages invited on the great occasion were the Earls of Essex and Southampton, Sir Thomas Heneage, Sir Robert Cecil, and many knights and ladies, who all had "convenient places and very good entertainment to their good liking and contentment" 80 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Sir Henry Helmes went on an imaginary visit to Muscovy, and a real visit to the Queen at Greenwich, where she honoured him and his company; and their revels only closed at Shrovetide. The mysterious rumours which had been floating about through November and December1 about the cause of the flight of the two Danvers and the association of the Earl of Southampton with it were intensified in January, 1594-5, when some of those concerned in it were examined before Sir Thomas West and other Justices of Hampshire. Later notes to frame an indictment before the Wiltshire assizes in the Lent term were collected in a remarkable document, of which two copies are preserved in the Lansdowne MSS.2, entitled "A lamentable discourse taken out of sundry examinacions concerning! the wilful escape of Sir Charles and Sir Henrie Danvers, Knights, and their followers, after the murder committed in Wiltshire upon Henrie Long, gent." These notes are considerably fuller than the first set, and seem fairly trustworthy as to the escape, the only unsupported evidence being that of the manner of the death of the victim. The writer, probably the attorney of Sir Walter Long, says, "The said wilful murder executed upon Henrie Longe, genfy sitting at his dinner in the company of Sir Walter Longe his brother, Anthony Mildmay, Thomas Snell, Henrie Smith Esquires, Justices of her Majesties Peace for Wilts, and divers other gents att one Chamberlain's house in Cosham by Sir Charles and Sir Henry Davers and their followers to the number of 17 or 18 persons in most riotous manner appointed for that foul facte on Fridaie the 4th of October 1594." Another account says that Henry Long had challenged Charles Danvers, that he was pressing an unfair advan-i tage and had his arm raised to kill, when Henry Danvers thrust himself between to ward off the blow, was wounded in the act, and striking upwards with his dagger killed Henry Long accidentally. > It is evident that they had confided in Southampton, before they went out, "to settle up with the Longs"; and that they had laid some plans, in case of the worst happening. On the other hand3 Lady Danvers brought a case against Sir Walter Long, and there is to be considered a letter of John 1 Salisb. Papers, v. 84-90. » Lansdowne MSS. 827. 5 and 830. 13. 3. 3 D.S.S.P. Eliz. ccli. 123-124. vii] CAUSES OF GOSSIP 81 Calley to Cecil1, later. He was servant to Lady Danvers and devoted to her and his young masters, and wrote, entreating pardon for them: "My Lords ofthe Circuit and a grand jury of gentlemen had an upright regard for justice.... We of our side at the assizes preferring one bill for the killing of our man better than a year past, the same was found accordingly as also some of Mr Danvers neigh bours preferring one other bill against Broome, a very base and lewd fellow, and a chief countenanced and abetted witness by Sir Walter Long for indictment of Mr Danvers at Lent assizes, is now at this assizes indicted of felony for robbing of a church.... Touching my poor selfe, whom Sir Walter Longe doth malice in the highest degree.... In his continual malicious proceedings he could never reprove me for a disobedient subject towards her Majesty and her laws.... I could find matter for his utter disgrace." Meanwhile he implored Cecil to help his young masters home, July 23rd, 1595. This account is supported by a later letter of Lady Danvers to Sir Robert Cecil, saying that she hears her Majesty is inclined to mercy, but still delays granting it. She suggests that this may be so as not to grieve the relatives, and asks if a reasonable composition might help. She would be willing to consider that, "beseeching you that in the matter you will not begin at the death of Mr Long, but at the murder of one of Mr Danvers' men, the cunning con triving of the saving of his life that did it, derisions and foul abuses offered to my husband's chief officers, and open scorns of him and his in saying that they had knighted him with a glass of beer; last of all, letters addressed to my son Charles, of such form as the heart of a man indeed had rather die than endure, how the beginning of all this quarrel was prosecuting of justice against thieves, harboured and maintained by the Longs, all the country knows. And if a life notwithstanding must be answered with a life, what may be trulier said than that my son slew Long with a dagger, and they have been the cause of slaying my husband with dolour and grief; and if Sir John Danvers were a worthier man, and his life of more worth than Harry Long's, so much odds the Longs have had already of our good name and house." The story of the "escape," however, can be gathered from the examinations, in reading which one is held in breathless suspense at 1 Salisb. Papers, v. 288. s.s. 6 82 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch; times, unless the result is known. The facts are interesting, the details are sometimes amusing. There is an almost universal desire evident among all they meet to help the Danvers to escape. The fugitives arrived about 8 or 9 in the morning of Saturday the 5th at Whitley Lodge near Titchfield, where Thomas Dymock lived, and there they remained till Tuesday morning, and "John, the Earl of Southamptons servant dressed their meat." The hue and cry followed them through the day. John gave Dymock's servant girl two shirts to wash, and one of them was bloody. The Danvers' servant, Gilbert Scott, stayed at Titchfield secretly for 10 days and was sent post haste to London and to the various ports, to secure a passage for France. On Sunday the 6th, the Earl remained at home for his 21st birthday. On Monday October 7th Mr Dymock and Mr Robinson had a controversy as to who should have Sir Henry Danvers' bloody velvet saddle. On the same Monday the Earl went with seven or eight followers to Whitley Lodge, supped with his friends, and tarried all night. On Tuesday morning, two hours before dawn, the Earl departed with the Knights and companyto Burselldon Ferry, where Henry Meedes awaited them by command of Dymock. The Earl required Meedes to take the party either to Calshot Castle or Bewly, a-hunting. They went towards Calshot Castle, but did not land until Wednesday the 9th. Now the Captain, Master Perkinson, was a great friend of the Danvers, and he was absent from the Castle at the time, whether by accident or intention is not clear. The Deputy also was absent for a shorter time. In their absence the master gunner admitted the party, but, having some doubts, took their arms from them and put them in the Deputy's room to wait. There were five in the first boat, the Knights and Thomas Dymock included, and thirteen in the second boat. Mean while " Mr Francis Robinson, the gentleman of the Earl's stables, told Dredge the stable-boy to go into the kitchen to Austin, the cook of Sir Thomas Arundel (who with his lady was then at Titchfield), and get a basket of cooked meats, and carry it to Mr Dymock"; and the party in the Deputy's room supped there, the Deputy arriving] in time to join them. They stayed at the Castle till Friday the iith, many messages coming and going. Then Captain Perkinsonfsent private information to the Earl that he had received official letters from Sir Thomas West to apprehend them. Southampton sent his vn] CAUSES OF GOSSIP 83 servant Payne to warn his friends; the master gunner gave them back their arms, though all knew by this time that they were the men wanted; and they hurried out pell-mell, overcrowding the boat in their haste. It is not quite clear where they went; but on Friday night seven strange men supped in Whitley Lodge kitchen and rode away. Then more arrived, who only had boiled milk for food, but spent the night there and went away on foot in the morning with Dymock. On Saturday, Master Captain Perkinson sent to his Deputy to apprehend the fugitives, but the latter told the messenger they had already gone, and he feared he would lose his office; but the Captain said he was very glad they were gone, whatever it cost him. Master Lawrence Grose, Sheriff of Southampton, being at Hamble, the Constable there told him about the murder and asked him to inform the Mayor of Southampton of what was going on, which he did. "The said Grose, passing over Itchen's Ferry with his wife that Saturday the 1 2th, one Florio an Italian, and one Humphrey Drewell a servant of the Earl of Southampton, being in the said passage boat threatened to cast Grose overboard, and said they would teach him to meddle with their fellows, with many other threatening words." So "resolute John Florio," being even then "in the pay and patronage" of the Earl, backed his friends in their efforts to escape. We do not know where they were meanwhile; but on Monday night, the 14th, Mr Robinson ordered Dredge to saddle seven horses and go to bed, and the horses went away at midnight; one of the Earl's servants brought back four of them on Thursday at daybreak to Titchfield, telling Dredge to feed them and treat them well, for the Earl was going to London with them that day. The author of "the lamentable discourse" concludes with the words, "names of the principal menservants of the Earl of Southampton, not yet examined, but it is very necessary they should." Thirteen are noted, of which the first are "Hennings, his Steward; Payne, keeper of his wardrobe; Robinson, gentleman of his horses; the Barber, Humphrey Drewell, who threatened Mr Grose the Sheriff; Signior Florio, an Italian, that did the like; Richard Nash, the Earl's Bayly at Tichfield." The Danvers brothers, apparently secreted in Titchfield House itself, by theEarl's help managed* to escape from some port to France, 6—2 84 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. where they were well received. The Earl of Essex was ready to believe in his old soldier and receive him to his service again. On the ist of January, 1594-51, Sir Henry Danvers wrote to the Earl of Essex from Paris thanking him for his "royal proceeding in my favour.... I am informed you intend a journey this spring where or whether I little regard to know (so it be without the confines of a constable)." He added that if he were allowed to follow him, he would await his directions; if not, he would attend the King to Lyons. "The end of my life is the limit of your commandment and without exception are the bounds against whom you will employ me.... I wish to give a blow wherein you may equalise your fortune to your worth." 2 The King of France became personally interested in the brothers, and wrote to Essex on September 25th, 1595, that he would be very ungrateful did he not employ himself on behalf of Danvers and his brother, who had proved their affection in his service, in trying to obtain her Majesty's pardon for them. He wrote in a similar strain several times. The brothers did not escape a certain amount of suffering for their sins3. Their estates were forfeited and taken into the Queen's hands, and they wrote pitifully to their friends of their lack of money4. Yet Fynes Moryson, after having been robbed of all his gold by soldiers in France, reached Paris, with but little to go further6. There he met Sir Charles and Sir Henry Danvers "who for an ill accident lived there as banished men,... yet did they not cast off all care to provide for me but with great importunitie perswaded a Starveling merchant to furnish me with ten French crowns,'? which brought him home to England by May 13th, 1595. From London (in June?) Southampton wrote to Sir John Stanhope about an advowson6 — (it is strange how often the Queen's rights interfered with his gifts): "I hear that the Queen's answer to my suit about bestowing the Worthing parsonage, which is in my gift, hut in the Queen's disposition by promotion of the Bishop of Winchester, is that she stays a grant to the person recommended by me, on pretence of an advowson granted to Mr Carew by the late 1 Salisb. Papers, v. 90. 2 Ibid. 389 3 Ibid. 129. > * Ibid. 463, 464, 532. 6 Itinerary, part 1. p. 156. 6 D.S.S.P. Eliz. cclix. 42. vii], CAUSES OF GOSSIP . " ¦ 85: Earl's (my father's) executors. This advowson being made in my minority is void unless I were still a ward. Had the advowson fallen in otherwise than by procuration, I should have bestowed it without regarding the advowson, and now it cannot affect the Queen's prerogative. It would have been in the Master of the Wards, if it had fallen in during my minority. For all these reasons, I hope the Queen will admit the person recommended by me." The overweening ambition of Southampton's cousin Anthony tempted him to challenge precedence over Lord Thomas Howard, the second son of the late Duke of Norfolk. The case was decided against him on January the 16th, 1 594-5 x. Now, for twenty years I had been searching in vain for some account of Southampton's methods of escape from matrimony, when quite by accident I came upon the fact. It is involved in a con temporary story which deserves to be introduced because of its own interest. Among Southampton's most brilliant contemporaries had been Ferdinando Stanley, Lord Strange, the Amyntas of the poets. He succeeded his father, Henry, as fifth Earl of Derby on September 25th, 1593; and on the 16th of April, 1594, he died in great pain, so mysteriously that many said he was "bewitched." The legal heir to the Earldom was William Stanley, the second son of Henry, fourth Earl of Derby, his brother having left only daughters. Apparently, however, he was not immediately forth coming. Here ensues an imbroglio, caused by there being another Sir William Stanley2, openly serving the Spaniards against England. A well-known ballad of Sir William recites a semi-fabulous account of wonderful exploits on his travels, which have been fathered on this William Stanley. He had been travelling, and apparently by the time he came home the estate had been- wound up in favour of his brother's widow and daughters. But as the indubitable heir to certain estates and to the title, Lord Burleigh bethought himself he would be a suitable match for the granddaughter who had been waiting five years for the Earl of Southampton. The new Earl of Derby accepted her at once, and they were about 1 Eg. MS. 1047. f. 2646. 2 See Stanley Papers, Cheetham Society, and BaUad of Sir William Stanley. 86 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. to be married. But there is a letter from Henry Garnet, the Priesty in 1 594 \ which states : "The marriage of the Lady Vere to the new Earl of Derby is deferred, by reason that he standeth in hazard to be unearled again, his brother's wife being with child, until it is seen whether it be a boy or no. The young Earl of Southampton^ refusing the Lady Vere, payeth ^5000 of present payment." And this is the hitherto unsuspected cause of Southampton's poverty. Just at the most critical time of his finances, when he was trying to plan a harmonious life of travel and economy, he was called on to pay this heavy sum, and was succeeded by his son Thomas, who was seventeen years and eleven months old at that date1. In 1597 ne had g°ne with Essex on the Island Voyage without permission, and was sent to the Fleet on his return for a short imprisonment; in the spring of 1 599 he had volunteered to follow Essex to Ireland, and had been permitted to do so. There the Earl of Southampton had been appointed General of Horse and was there fore Grey's military superior. At an action in the south of Ireland Grey had charged on his own initiative; and, though he had been successful, the Earl of Southampton, as a lesson in discipline to an undisciplined army, had sent Grey to the care of the Marshal (Sir Christopher Blount) for one night. Little was thought of it at the time. Sir Robert Cecil, writing to Sir Henry Neville on the 9 th of June, said, "If you chance to heare any flying tale that my Lord Gray should be committed in Ireland, the accident was only this, that he being only a Colonell of Horse, and my Lord of Southampton Generall, he did charge without directions, and so, for order's sake, was only committed to the Marshall one night."2 Lord Grey never forgave what he thought an unjustifiable indignity, reproached Southampton openly, complained of him privately, and finally sent him a challenge. His complaints intensified the Queen's indignation against Essex for appointing Southampton, and then came the thunderous order to discharge his chief officer at once. Essex 1 Inq. P. M. 140/92. 2 Winwood, Memorials, 1. 47. 11 — 2 1 64 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. expostulated and then yielded. Southampton bore the affront with dignified manliness, sympathising most with his friend Essex. It seems to me that an undated letter of Grey's to Lord Cobham should come in this year: "Of late my Lord of Essex, doubting whereuppon I should be so well favoured at Court and especially by her Majesty, has forced me to declare myself either his only, or friend to Mr Secretary and his enemy, protesting there could be no nutrality. I answered that no base dependency should ever fashion my love or hate to his Lordship passions; as for Mr Secretary, I had sincerely tasted of his favour, I would never be dishonest or ungrateful."1 July 2 ist. Though he headed the list of the knights made by Essex in Ireland, it is evident that he must have left Essex's army on its march to the north, shortly after that date; for Whyte, writing on 4th August, says, "My Lord Grey is newly come to court, some say discontented. He is named to be captain of a company of horse."2 He would be able to give his own version of Irish affairs before Essex returned. No information is given as to whether Grey stayed at Court or went~back to Ireland, and again returned in front of Essex. The next notice of him was on the day before Michaelmas at Westminster, when Essex was racing home to surprise his enemies and see the Queen for himself. By November, 1599, Lord Mountjoy was appointed to be the new Lord Deputy in Ireland. Whyte said on 5th January, 1599- 1600, that reinforcements were to be sent, and that Lord Grey desired to command them. " Lord Mountjoy opposes this as a thing dishonourable to him, so some unkindness grows between them."a On the 24th January Whyte tells us: "My Lord Southampton goes over to Ireland, having only charge of 200 foot and 1 00 horse. My Lord Grey hath sent him a challenge which I heare he answered thus: That he accepted it, but for the weapon and the place, being by the laws of honour to be chosen by hym, he would not prefer that combat in England, knowing that danger of the laws, and the little grace and mercy he was to expect, if he ran into the danger of them. He therefore would let him know ere yt were long, what 1 Salisb. Papers, ix. 269. 2 See my articles on Southampton and Grey, Athenceum, Nov. 12th and' 19th, 1904, pp. 658, 695. 3 Sidney Papers, 11. 156. xi] QUARREL WITH LORD GREY OF WILTON 165 tyme, what weapon and what place he would choose."1 Whyte seems to have been pretty well informed of the matter in its early stages, but his notes do not clear up the whole affair as well as their letters do. Unfortunately the challenge itself has disappeared. The letters which have been preserved are in two groups among the Cecil Papers, undated, but with conjectural dates affixed, which rarely can be correct. The fourth letter of the second group (sug gested to have been written in August) I would place first, with a conjectural date before 20th January, 1 599-1 600, based upon Whyte's reference. This runs If you ask why I have so long deferred to seek right of the wrong you did me in Ireland, I answer my Lord of Essex's restraint hath been the cause, for I seek not advantage, not to brave mine enemy in misfortune. Now your return [to Ireland], likely to prevent [precede] his deUvery, I cannot longer defer to call you to perform what you there promised, and to right me in the field, referring unto you your due elections, you are too honourable by denial or distinction to seek evasion, for thereby the wrong wiU be more unworthy and the end less noble. My Lodging in King Street London2. The fifth of the second group gives the reply alluded to by Whyte on the 24th of January. I have received your letter and am resolved to satisfy you in the answer you desire, not as to right any wrong I have done you, for I acknowledge none, neither am I ignorant that in this case, the question between us arising about a command of mine when I had a place in the army above you, I ¦might with my reputation refuse your chaUenge, though I never meant to claim that privilege, being determined from the beginning to bring myself to some such place to answer you (if you should caU me) as there you might fuUy discharge your heart of the spleen you bear me. But you weU know that I have reason to proceed in this with much caution, you having now so great advantage of the time, by reason of the Queen's disfavour to me. You know also that the laws of England are severe to those that in this fashion compound their controversies. Wherefore if I now go into Ireland, I shaU hold that the fittest place to end this matter, which, in respect of the friend ship of the Deputy shaU be no ways advantageous to me, for I will bind myself by my promise to meet you in any port town of Ireland, assuring myself you may make choice of such a one where you need not fear any partiality to me. If I go not thither I wiU, at any time, agree to put myself in a bark with you, and go into what part of France you wiU choose where we may soon, and with much safety, bring this business to a conclusion. 1 Sidney Papers, n. 164. 2 Salisb. Papers, x. 263. 166 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Whatsoever you determine, keep your counsel, and I will assure you by my means it shaU not be spoken of1. The evident reply to this has strayed to the first group of letters, undated, but entered as circa Feb. ioth 1 599-1 600, possibly on January 23rd. Lord Grey says: Your right in nomination of place extends not to my disadvantage, but you propounding divers, I must elect one. To which end you have offered me two Ireland, France. In the former, how unlikely for us ever to draw sword the general notice of our question, the respect of our quaUties, the danger to those in whose government we must dispute it concludeth; how disadvantageous to me the partiaUty of the Deputy, the command and adherents you possess demonstrate. I therefore conclude of the latter, most indifferent, least distant, and expect to hear from you the day you wul arrive at Dover; the sooner, the more wiU be your honour, the less your impediment to Irish affairs. I seek not disputation, but a speedy and honour able conclusion. Grey2. The Earl of Southampton to Lord Grey of Wilton, circa Feb. ioth (probably January 26th): Though I love disputation in this kind as iU as any, yet understand I so weU how to maintain my right, as I shaU not lose the least part of it. What offer I made you in my first letter I wiU be ready to perform, which, if you read again, you wiU find France not spoken of, unless I go not into Ireland; for how little leisure I can have to make other journeys before my departure you may easily imagine, since my Lord Mountjoy, to whom I am engaged for that design, is appointed to take his leave on Sunday next. If I stay any time, it is likely I am detained by some occasion of that importance as will tie me to this place, and not yield me further Uberty. Ireland therefore is the fittest and only place I can now appoint to meet you in; the country you know is large, and there are in it many port towns, far off from either deputy or governor, to any of which I wiU not fail to come, according to our agreement. As to any doubt you have to receive bad measure by means of some friends or dependents of mine, you may banish the thought of it, for I assure you I hate to think of any unjust proceeding, and therefore wiU engage myself so far as to undertake you shaU have no wrong offered there by any that is tied to me in friendship or otherwise. (A copy in Southampton's own hand.)3 ¦ Lord Mountjoy having gone to Ireland, Lord Grey next wrote: As the chief impediment why you refused France, you aUeadged the deputies speedy departure. Hee is gon, you are heer, and yet I hear not of 1 Salisb. Papers, x. 263. 2 Ibid. 34. 8 Ibid. 34. xi] QUARREL WITH LORD GREY OF WILTON 167 you. But to conclude aU wordy disputations (worthy rather of women than of men of war). If I made it clear to you by my third letter, I expect the performance of your first, that you, going not presently into Ireland wee may into France, but if by the Queen's leave you hast for Ireland, I may now receive from you, tlie EngUsh port (on the way by this passadge) and day wee shale meet in thence to imbark together and with equaU number, for sum such indifferent place in Ireland, as by the liberty of your first I am to chuse? If you accept not this what can I offer? Only my cleering must be the divulging of your slack proceeding. Grey1. Southampton answers: I wonder you can so rightly censure verbal disputations in matters of this nature, and yet yourself wade so deeply into the error. For my part, I have given no cause to multiply words, but do assure myself you might have been satisfied by my first letter, wherein you know I offered more than I was bound to, making no doubt but that a reasonable answer would satisfy a reasonable creature, which, if you be, I have said enough; if not, I wiU cease to think further of this business, referring to your choice the pubUshing of what hath past, which I am sure is not such as I shall ever blush to hear repeated2. Lord Mountjoy left London; Southampton delayed, still hoping to be allowed to kiss the Queen's hand before his departure. On March 30th Lord Buckhurst wrote to Sir Robert Cecil that the Earl of Southampton had asked him to "move her Majesty on his behalf for her favour to kiss her hand, and yf that may not be for licence to go again into Ireland." But he was too ill to do this himself, and prayed Sir Robert Cecil to do it for him, "though the first may be denied, yet that her Majesty will be pleased to grant the last, whereby he shall the better redeem his fault, and do his country some service." On the 3rd of May Whyte wrote, "My Lord Southampton, upon his going away, sent my Lord Grey word that what in his first letter he promised, he was now ready in Ireland to perform, and if he would send him word of his being in any Port Town, he would not faile to come unto him, and so it rests."3 Sir Charles Danvers on the 5th told Southampton, "You are not like so far as I can hear to see my Lord Gray in Ireland, but of that Sir R. Drury will yield you an account."4 1 Cecil Papers. 2 Salisb. Papers, x. 34. 3 Sidney Papers, 11. 192. * Salisb. Papers, x. 139. 168 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. On May 1 3th Whyte told Sidney that Lord Grey "is resolved to follow the wars in the Low Countries in hope to have the command that Sir Francis Vere had." On May 28th Chamberlain wrote The Lord Gray and Sir Robert Drury are gon over with 12 or 14 horse to serve the States, but it is geven out underhand that the Lord [Grey] means to make a start into Ireland to meet with the Earl of Southampton in Mounster, whither he caUed him, but methinks it is very far set and might be dere bought to take such a compas1. The present writer has fortunately found a letter from Sir Robert Drury himself to Southampton: Noble Lord, ye small power I have leaves me only power to observe your commandments to give you advertisements of what worthy matter of action was to be looked for in this place. All that I can by any meanes of inteUigence receave at this tyme, is that order is nowe giuven for ye army presently to drawe to a head and in aU mens expectations is to goe into Flanders. If one may beleve ye greatest, they pretend great actions to be proiected this somer. If your Lordship lose contentment in Ireland, he hath such as that this place may give you expectation of better, in any particular. I shold have great cause to be gladd to see you here, And in our general envy to be revenged of my Lord Graye who overtopps us with a baronny, we should be very gladd that you were here, to shadowe him with your earledom. Now whether it happen or otherwyse, I shaU desyer in aU places to do your Lordship any service. R. Drury2. The letter is addressed "To the Rt. Hon. Earl Southampton in Ireland" and is slightly damaged. Grey was fortunate in the Low Countries, and the praises of his valour were sounded in the Queen's ears and were reported in Ireland in July. Shortly afterwards, hopeless of doing any good there, the Earl of Southampton left the Irish army and went to Flanders. There are two copies of a letter written to him by Grey ap parently about the end of July: Your cominge hether shews your repentance of your former coole answers, now neither disadvantage of times, periUe, or your promise can be pretended. I call on you to right me and your former letters. Grey3. 1 D.S.S.P. cclxxiv. 438. 2 Lansdowne MS. cvn. 84. 3 D.S.S.P. cclxxv. 58, 59. Cecil Papers, xcvin. 1083.. xi] QUARREL WITH LORD GREY OF WILTON 169 But the Privy Council had directed special letters to both the adversaries and sent them by Sir Robert Drury to stop the combat. These were dated 3rd of August, and would not reach their destina tions until some days later. Southampton seems to have received his copy at Middleburg, earlier than Grey received his in Brabant. Southampton replied to the above: I perceive you wiU ever mistake me, and as you have misunderstood my former letters, so you wiU not rightly conceive of my coming hither, which, assure yourself was not caused by any repentance, for I know too weU what hath passed between us I need not wish undone; though it shah little trouble me if you stiU please yourself in your error. But you are acquainted with the commandment I have received which forbids me to answer you, which howsoever you respect not, I must obey, and therefore do directly refuse your challenge. But because you shaU not think I dare not walk alone for fear of you, I wiU tomorrow in the morning ride an EngUsh mile out of the ports, accompanied by none but this bearer, and a lacquey to hold my horses who shaU bear no weapons. I wiU wear this sword which I now send you, and a dagger, which you shaU see before my going, when you shaU know the way I intend to go, where I wiU attend you 2 hours. If in the meantime I meet you, you may do your pleasure, for I wiU give no ground, but defend myself with the arms I carry against whatsoever you shaU offer1. The royal order to Southampton was as follows: Her Majesty, understanding that your Lordship hath withdrawn yourself out of Ireland into the Low Countries, where the Lord Grey is also at this present, because it is pubUcly known there is unkindness and heartburn between you and him, and that you are noblemen of valour who are fit to reserve yourselves for her Majesty's services, and not to hazard them upon private quarrels, it has pleased her Majesty, from her own mouth to give express directions unto us to command your Lordship in her name (upon your aUegiance) in no sort to offer, accept, or hearken to any chaUenge or meeting with the Lord Grey. Wherein as your Lordship is a nobleman, and knoweth more than a common 'person, with what respective care you ought to obey the express commandment of your Sovereign, so it is expected that you carry that heedful regard to her Majesty's commandment hereby deUvered unto your Lordship, as her Highness may have no cause to note any contempt in your Lordship, by anything that may happen between you, for she neither can nor wiU suffer the breach of any of these notorious and wilful disobediences to remain unpunished, according to the quaUty of so great an offence. And because you shaU pretend no note of disgrace to be 1 Salisb. Papers, x. 262. 170 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. offered unto you in imposing this upon you, the Uke commandment is given by Uke letters and directions to the Lord Gray, whereof we send you a copy. From the Court at Nonsuch 3rd August 16001. The letter to Lord Grey is also preserved. The question is, then, did Lord Grey, knowing that the Privy Council had sent to stay the combat, though he had not yet received his dispatch, take Lord Southampton at his word, meet him, and attack him? It is probable that he did meet and attack his opponent, and that he was worsted in the first encounter. His own letter to the Lords of the Council, dated August 1 2th, runs: You either are, or shortly wiU be, informed of my disobedience. My letter was at Middleburgh, and there faiUng, was here deUvered, though after I received that from your Lordships, yet before I could make stay of it. How, if in time deUvered, your letter would have swayed, my future conformity to your pleasure shaU best demonstrate. Berges2. Lord Grey wrote to Cecil, probably some time in September, " I cannot think myself at home until you know of my return by whose command I expect my direction. I have a message of ceremony, but would willingly rest two or three days if you so think good."3 About the same time, Southampton wrote to Cecil that it was not his fault that he had not seen Cecil since his arrival, but he was assured by Lord Cobham that the Secretary purposed not to be in London last week. Otherwise he had resolved to attend his coming, as Lord Cobham and Lord Thomas Howard can bear witness4. Whyte says on 3rd October, "The Earl of Southampton and Lord Grey are both in London, little speech of their quarrel." On the ioth Chamberlain tells Carleton that they had both "come out of the Low Countries unhurt, though it were constantly reported they had fought and spoiled each other." Early in the new year, 9th January, Lord Grey with a party of attendants attacked Southampton in the streets of London near Duresme House, when he was quietly riding alone with only a boy to hold his horse. Southampton defended himself till help came, but the boy lost his hand in helping his master. Sir Henry Neville told 1 Salisb. Papers, x. 262. 2 Ibid. 273. 3 Ibid. 333. 4 Ibid. 333. xi] QUARREL WITH LORD GREY OF WILTON 171 this to Winwood on 29th January, 1600-1. "My Lord Gray, upon some new conceived discontent, assaulted my Lord South ampton on horseback in the street, for which contempt against her Majesty's commandment given to them both he was committed to the Fleet."1 Grey was soon released, and lost no favour by his "contempt" and breach of the peace. The malcontent Earls renewed their scheming, and before they knew what they were about, they were branded as traitors to the Queen. Within three weeks of his breach of the peace and "contempt" of the Queen's orders, Grey was put in charge of the little army sent out to take them. 1 Winwood, Mem. I. 292. CHAPTER XII THE PERILS OF "CONTEMPT" i 599-1 600 The Earl of Essex on October 2nd, 1 599, was committed as prisoner to the charge of a friendly jailor, Sir Thomas Egerton, Lord Keeper at York House. It was a large and rambling old building, where Essex was allowed to take his choice of rooms and where such com- 'forts as could be given him were provided. But, as Sir Thomas said, " I have always found the air and accidents of this place noisome and unwholesome to my weak body. I wish it may be good for his."1 In this undesired residence,separated from his wife and new-born child, from his relatives and friends, Essex was examined and re-examined on his actions and the causes of his actions during the preceding six months. Whyte said, "Never any one answered with more temper, more gravity, more discretion to the matters laid to his charge." On October 6th he said, "Essex is ill, no one goes to see him. Old Lady Walsingham begged the Queen to let him write to his wife, but it has not been allowed as yet." The main charges against him were: that he did not march northwards against Tyrone immediately on his arrival in Ireland, as had been arranged; that he had made the Earl of Southampton General ofthe Horse against the Queen's will; that he had made too many knights; that he had made a treaty with Tyrone dishonourable to England; and that he came home against orders2- He might have appealed to his Commission, as all these points were allowed him therein; but in detail he said that he had planned to go north at once, it was true, but when he saw the state of the country and the supplies, he yielded to the advice of the Irish Council and settled the southern provinces first. To the second charge he acknowledged that the Queen had objected to his nomination of Southampton in December, 1598, as being too soon after that youth's "contempt" in his marriage, but he had answered that he was willing to cast his Commission and himself at her 1 Salisb. Papers, ix. 412. 2 See Licence Carew Papers, p. 295. Lingard, History, vi. 597. ch. xn] THE PERILS OF "CONTEMPT" 173 Majesty's feet; yet if he were to do any good, he must be allowed to choose his own instruments, and it was some months later that he had appointed Southampton, after his "contempt" had been purged by the punishment usually inflicted in such cases. The making of knights was of those who had deserved well for their service under great difficulties and without other reward. He did go north against Tyrone, but he made no overtures of peace; Tyrone had come and humbly begged an armistice, which he felt would work out better for the conclusion of his enterprise than anything else which could be done; and when the Queen wrote severely, he felt it was necessary that he should see her at once, face to face, that he might explain the position. "All the Lords that were his friends would have released him; but the Queen angrily told them, such a contempt should be publicly punished."1 Southampton's wife and Essex's sister had evidently been staying with the Countess of Essex in her anxious time, and to Essex House Southampton himself would naturally go on his return from Ireland, there to rest, and await his friend, who, to the anxiety of them all, did not come home. We may be sure he would do what he could for him and his. "A house is kept at Essex House for the Lord and Lady Southampton and the family," wrote Whyte on the 3rd of October. The press of people who came to visit them annoyed the Queen, or at least the Court, and, being prudent for their friends' sakes, the Ladies Southampton and Rich went out of town, evidently not far off. Whyte wrote on the nth, "The Ladies Southampton and Rich were at Essex House but have gone to the Country to shunne the Company that daily were wont to visit them in towne because yt gave offence at Court. Essex's very servants are afraid to meet in any place to make merry, lest it might be ill taken. At the Court, my Lady Scrope is only noted to stand firm unto him. My Lord Southampton and Lord Rutland come not to the court, the one doth, but very seldom, they pass the time in London merely in going to plaies every day."2 Southampton probably went to stay with Rutland at the time, his own house being leased out. Rutland's town house was in Holywell, a stone's throw from the site of the Theatre and the house of the Curtain. But the materials of the Theatre by this time had been 1 Sidney Papers, 25th October, 1599, "¦ *35- 2 Ibid- 132- 174 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. carried away by the Burbages to the Surrey side of the water, and had reared their heads high on Bankside under the new name of "The Globe." Interested in the drama, the players, and the poets, these two would find some rest and relaxation in witnessing even daily performances, some strength and consolation in the philosophy of human life as sketched by Shakespeare. We know that Henry V was on the boards that year; it would probably be forbidden when troubles grew great in Ireland. We are not sure of the other performances, but there is reason to believe that Hamlet was even then soliloquizing. Before the 16th of October "My Lady Essex's daughter was christened by the Earl of Southampton, the Lady Cumberland and Lady Rutland, without much ceremony." So the Earl was for the second time at least a godfather to a girl. By November the speeches in the Star Chamber1 shewed the laboured efforts of the Council to please the Queen by finding Essex guilty of something serious. He said himself that he might have been in error, but there was no contempt in him, only an effort to serve the Queen, and to seek the greatest good for England. But he grew very weary of the wrangles. The speeches in the Star Chamber against Essex were eagerly followed. The general feeling in this country found expression in a letter of John Petit from Antwerp in December. "We hear that the Earl of Essex is still deprived of Liberty, and that his enemies, wanting substantial matter to charge him, make mountains of molehills. The Council of England's repute for wisdom and dis cretion is much lost, men say that they are either carried away with passion, or yield too much to the passions of others. All wonder that for an imputed contempt, one who has so well deserved of her Majesty and the Commonwealth should be so deeply disgraced. His troubles are imputed to proceed from the malice of his adver saries, and the Queen's inconstancy, suffering herself to be carried away by the false information of his known enemies."2 About that time Essex wrote his memorable letter to his friend and cousin, the Earl of Southampton: "I have ceased to be a Martha caring about many things, and believe with Mary I wish you the comfort of unfeigned conversion. I was only called by Divines, 1 D.S.S.P. cclxxiii. 35, 36, 37, 38. 2 Ibid. 45. xn] THE PERILS OF "CONTEMPT" 175 but your Lordship now has the call of one who knows the end of all this world's contentment. I have explained the way of salvation, and will never go to sleep or awake without prayer for you."1 His sister Penelope begged to be allowed to visit her brother; both of his sisters implored the Queen to let him be removed to a more healthful place; reproachful criticisms regarding his treatment were hung up in the Court. For the overspent and weakly body finally succumbed to the wear and tear, the anxiety of mind, the aching of heart, the hopelessness of his prospects, combined with confinement in unwholesome air, and he had fallen very seriously ill. He was prayed for in the churches. He was said to be at the point of death — it was even reported that he was dead2. The Queen at last sent eight physicians. He managed to survive them all, and by the new year he was able to get up and be dressed. There was no improvement in his position, but his wife was allowed to come during the day and nurse him. The Queen did not like to leave Ireland ungoverned, and wanted to send Lord Mountjoy. At first he refused, hoping to induce the Queen to send Essex back. Many in Ireland as well as England hoped he would return and solve their difficulties. Elizabeth was determined he should not. By ist December Lord Mountjoy's patent was signed, and he was ordered to make himself ready. Seeing that he could do no good to his friend Essex, Southampton agreed to return with Mountjoy. He had many things to arrange before then. There is one curious letter to Julius Caesar, Master of Requests. A certain Francis Marr has brought a case against BuUock, the bearer, a late servant of Mr Heneage and mine, concerning a pretended title unto the BaiUwick of the Strond. Her Majestie referred the case to you, but she evidently does not know that it has already been beard thrice in Mr Heneage's time, once in the open court before the compkinant, when Mr Secretary was ChanceUor, and he saw no reason to rippe up a suit decided by his predecessor, which were a bad example. . . . From the Savoy this 16th of December, 1599. Your very frynd, H. Southampton. He prays Caesar's careful consideration to this. Whyte's letters to Sir Robert Sidney are very full of the "young 1 D.S.S.P. Add. xxxiv. 17. 2 Add. MS. 12,507. 176 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch; Lord Herbert," Sidney's nephew. His ague was keeping him at Ramsbury, "to his own greatest griefe who desires to be here at this time." A little later he notes that Lord Southampton, my Lord Effingham, and Sir Charles Danvers were at Ramsbury; that Lord Herbert was better and hopes to come to town; and that "Mrs Fitton is sick and gone from court to her fathers." "My Lady Pembroke desires some of your excellent tobacco." This was for the use of Lord Herbert, whose frequent headaches it eased. In 1599 the Countess of Southampton also had a dedication. Anthony Gibson, who either wrote, translated, or edited a little volume called A woman's woorth, defended against all the men in the world, dedicated it "to the Right Honourable Lady Elizabeth, Countess of Southampton." The Love (most honoured Lady) that I owe To your high vertues, cannot be confin'd In words or phrases; nor can paper show The obiect-lesse endevours of my mind. How then shall any (though the purest spirit That sucks the seau'n-fold flower of art) expresse The genuine glories of your AngeE-merit, Which shine the more, in that you make them lesse ? Now could I wish I had a plenteous braine, That thence (as from Invention's clearest floud) Those forms might flow, compos'd in a rich Vaine: That crowne your noblesse, and enrich your bloud. Then would my zeale breake forth Uke morning's fier That now lyes spent in sparkes of my desier1. Whyte wrote on the 1 5th of March, " My Lord of Southampton is in very good hope to kiss the Queen's hand before his going to Ireland. Mr Secretary is his good friend, and he attends it. His horses and stuffe are gone thither." On the 16th he wrote again to Sidney, "The time draws near her Majestie should send to Embden to discuss the controversy with the King of Denmark's Commis- si6ners. The Earl of Southampton was named, and yourself also, as fittest for that employment." By the 22nd of March Southampton had not kissed the Queen's hand. The Dutch Commissioners had come to court. On March 8th 1 Printed by John Wolfe, 1599. Three sonnets follow the dedication, the first to Mistress Anne Russell, the second to Mistress Margaret Radcliffe, the third to Mistress Mary Fitton. xn] THE PERILS OF "CONTEMPT" 177 Whyte wrote to Sidney, "All this week the Lords have been in London and passed away the time in feasting and plays.... Upon Thursday my Lord Chamberlain feasted Vereiken, and made him a very great and delicate dinner, and there in the afternoon his plaiers acted before Vereiken, "Sir John Oldcastle" to his great contentment."1 (This suggests a literary puzzle.) On the 29th of March Whyte said, "My Lady Rich and Lady Southampton are gone to Lies in Essex." Southampton's cousin, Lord Montague, had got into some trouble, probably about his religion. On the 13th of April, relying on the support of his father-in-law, the Lord Treasurer Sackville, he wrote from Sackville House to Cecil, " I am emboldened to make my suit unto you that whereas I am by her Majesty's favour now shortly to appear before you and the Council for my further enlargement I may by your favour be graced with such equal and upright conditions as may be offered to a Subject; who giveth place to no man living in obedience to his Prince, nor holdeth any other religion than by which I am taught to prefer her Majesty to all other Potentates " — a letter suggestive of many things2. Whyte on 19th April said, "My Lord of Southampton deferred his departure for one week longer, hoping to have access to Her Majesties presence but it cannot be obtained. Yet she very graciously wished him safe going and returning."3 On 26th May, 1600, he notes, "This morning my Lord Herbert and Sir Charles Danvers have taken water and gone to see my Lady Rich and Lady Southampton almost as far as Gravesend, it will be Thursday ere they return."4 Lord Mountjoy was to go to Ireland after the holidays; rein forcements were to be sent over to strengthen his army. Whyte said on the 5th of January, 1 599-1 600, "Lord Gray desires the command ofthe forces. ... Lord Mountjoy opposes this as a thing dishonourable to him, so some unkindness grows between them."5 This was but a reflection of the "unkindness" grown between Lord Grey and the Lords Essex and Southampton. Already Lord Grey had sent the challenge to the latter. In February they stopped the proceedings in the Star Chamber 1 Sidney Papers, n. 175. 2 Salisb. Papers, x. 109. 3 Sidney Papers, 11. 189. l Ibid. 197. 6 Ibid. 156. s. s. 178 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. because they could prove no offence against Essex, and this made the Queen furious again. She also was very angry when she heard that his mother, Southampton, and some of his friends had gone to a house next door to York House and from a window saluted the captive as he was walking in the garden. Lady Rich was com manded to keep her own house. The Queen made up her mind to send Essex to his own house, as Egerton was weary of his responsi bility; but that was delayed, it was said, because some of his friends had gone thither to welcome him. Whyte says on nth March, "By command Lady Leicester, Lord and Lady Southampton, Mr Greville and Mr Bacon are all removed from Essex House. My Lord is expected to remain with 2 keepers, Sir Drue Drury and Sir Richard Barkley."1 He was removed thither on 19th March, and things seemed to mend. Southampton was to follow Mountjoy, delaying only to take his leave of the Queen, if he could find sufficient grace. Lord Buck- hurst wrote to Sir Robert Cecil on March 30, 1 600, " I had for gotten to write you of the earnest desire which my Lord of South ampton yesterday did make unto me, that I would move her Majesty on his behalf for her favour to kiss her hand, and yf that may not be for licence to go again into Ireland. Since my indisposi tion will not permit me to accomplish his desire \myself I pray that you will in my behalf, and though the first part may be denied, yet that her Majesty may be pleased to grant the last, whereby he shall the better redeem his fault, and do his country some service."2 It seems to have been April before he actually started. Whyte, writing on the 26th,said, " My Lord of Southampton went away on Monday last, Sir Charles Danvers brought him as far as Coventry, and returned yesterday night. He is a very fine gentleman and loves you well." It is a little dubious which of the two Whyte means to praise, but I believe that in this case the last sentence refers to Southampton rather than to Danvers. In his following letter he says that on his going away Southampton wrote to Lord Grey, to say that he was now ready to perform what he had pro mised him. Sir Charles Danvers wrote to Southampton on the 5th of May: "I will not let any messenger pass without a letter to the end, 1 Sidney Papers, 11. 179. 2 Salisb. Papers, x. 86. xh] THE PERILS OF "CONTEMPT" 179 though I can write you nothing, you may at the least, know there is nothing to be written. I have not heard from you yet from the sea-side, but the wind having served you so well all this week I make no doubt you have been in Ireland three or four days and that, at the first turning of the wind, your friends here shall hear from you. My Lord of Essex is still where he was, and as he was, with no more hope of better than when you left him. All other things stand likewise in the same state. You are not like so far as I can hear to see my Lord Gray in Ireland, but of that Sir R. Druery will yield you an account. PS. I have just received your letter from Lerpoole" [Liverpool]1. The next day Danvers wrote again: "Three letters of mine to yourself, my Lord Deputy, and my brother went away this morning, whereby your Lordship may guess that I have little to write. Only this news, that Doctor Herbert shall on Sunday be sworn a Coun cillor and Secretary."2 On 2nd June the Lord Deputy writes that in some skirmishes by the way the rebel was beaten back, and that my Lord South ampton with a few horse, finding some of our foot engaged, " made a valiant charge and brought them off to his reputation here." On Saturday 7th June Whyte wrote: "On Thursday the matter passed with my Lord of Essex His speech was very discreet. My Lord Keeper said that the Contempts deserved imprisonment in the Tower, to be fined, and to have all his offices taken from him. My Lord Treasurer left out the Tower, my Lord Admiral the fine. Mr Secretary made a wise grave speache of these contempts of his towards her Majestie It was concluded he should return to the place whence he came till her Majestie's further pleasure were known. The poor Earle then besought their Honours to be a means to her Majestie for grace and mercy, seeing there appeared in his offences no disloyalty to her Majestie, but ignorance and indiscretion in himself. I heare it was a most pitiful and lamentable sight to see him that was the mingnon of Fortune, now unworthy the least honour he had: many that were present burst out in tears at his fall to such misery."3 Sir Gelly Meyrick wrote to Southampton more fully on the I ith 1 Salisb. Papers, x. 139. * Ibid. 140. 3 Sidney Papers, 11. 200. 12 — 2 180 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. (Sir Charles Danvers had been present): "The first charge was the making of your Lordship General ofthe Horse, being clouded with her Majesties' displeasure. It was bitterly urged by the Attorney, and very worthily answered by my Lord.... Many invectives were urged by the attorney, with letters shewed from Ormond, Bowcher, and Warren Saintleger. My Lord in answer ing that said God knew the truth of things, and has rewarded two of them for their perfidiousness. Then his Lordship was interrupted, and wished to continue as he had begun, which was to submit to her Majesty's gracious favour. In the end the Lords did deliver their opinions, and in that council did sentence that my Lord should forbear the execution of his Councillor's place, and the Marshall's place, and the Master of the Ordnance' Place until it were her Majesty's further pleasure to restore him.... To all my Lord spake with a reference to his ends. The Lords and the rest freed his Lordship from any disloyalty. All delivered their opinion concerning the sequestration of the offices saving my Lord of Worcester. My Lord of Cumberland dealt very nobly. The rest all had one counsel, which was fitting to clear the Queen's Honour, with which, God be thanked, I hear she is well satisfied, and yet a part is tomorrow to be handled in the Star Chamber, and a Sunday Liberty. Then will we all thank God."1 One can imagine how interested Southampton was in his home despatches just then. A strange project of his own, however, seemed to have taken shape, either suggested by some friend, or elaborated by himself. He wished to be made Governor of Connaught in these stormy times. I gather that the two following letters refer to this. Sir Henry Danvers, who was in Ireland, but not serving near him, wrote his friend on June 14th: I have imparted to my Lord Deputy your desire, which he seems most desirous to satisfy, as you shaU find more at large by his own letters.... I have sent you hereinclosed aU such "letters as here I find for you, with a particular EngUsh relation of their good fortune in the Low Countries, to increase our misfortune here, that can never have the Uke occasion, but, buried in obscurity, die like dogs. The news that I know wiU best please you is the liberty of my Lord of Essex, yet at Walsingham House, and preparing to lie at Grafton, rather advised than commanded to retain few followers, and to let Uttle company come unto him. My Lord hath not yet received the 1 Salisb. Papers, x. 178. xn] THE PERILS OF "CONTEMPT" 181 packet that brings the resolution concerning yourself, yet particular letters shew that the 2000 foot and 200 horse are granted. The famous Earls of Rutland and Northumberland moved with the Low Country Honour, are embarked thither, where the report goes my Lord Gray received a hurt in the face, and had lost his Ufe if Sir Robert Drurye had not rescued him.... My Lord wiU be within twoo days at the Nanau, and Sir OUver Lambert goes out of Leace into the County of Washfourd with those forces.... Your horses are arrived1. The letter is endorsed in error "Ch. Davers." On June 9th Southampton wrote to Cecil from Dublin: My Lord Deputy having at this time written unto you to move the Queen in my behalf concerning the government of Connaught, I must of necessity be so far troublesome unto you as to let you know how I affect it and then to leave it to your discretion whether you think fit to farther it or no. It is a place I protest unto you I am nothing greedy of, neither would I at aU desire it, but in hope by that means to effect somewhat whereby to recover her Majesty's good conceit, which is my only end, and all the happiness I aspire unto. If she hold me fit to do her service in it, I shaU gladly employ my time and hazard my Ufe, to perform what can be in reason expected; if not, I shaU without grudging receive her denial. My only suit to you is to procure an answer with as much expedition as may be: and how ever it prove I assure you I shaU account myself exceedingly bound unto you2. A letter of the Lord High Admiral, the Earl of Nottingham, to the Earl of Southampton, which has been entered as of 1599, evidently should come in here: Your first letter I received a fortnight since by Sir Francis Rush, but could do nothing in Sir Edward Herbert's absence. Now he is come I wiU assist his reUef the best I may. Another letter I received yesterday from your Lordship, which signifies a purpose of the Deputy to employ you in Connaught, of which charge, and a much greater, I know you to be very worthy, and the first sight I get of Mr Secretary, I wiU labour to make for you a speedy, and I hope a good answer, knowing no cause but that the State should be glad to be sufficiently served by a nobleman of your quaUty in those pkces of trust, and in these barren times that afford so few so wiUing ,as yourself. But my fear is that a former despatch before the arrival of Mr Fenton doth appoint Sir Arthur Savadge to that place to hold it as he did before, may give impediment to my Lord Deputy's purpose, for so much I heard Mr Secretary say he had written by command. I wiU not fail to assist these captains you have named with my best help for their employment. By the next despatch I wiU give you an honest account of my devotion to 1 Salisb. Papers, x. 182. 2 Irish State Papers, vol. ccvn. pt. 3, no. 101, Calendar, 231. 1 82 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. do you service in these things you have committed to me.... Howard House une 19th J Nothing followed. For the third time Southampton's valiant services went without royal recognition, and for the second time the Queen's representative in Ireland thought him suited for a command, and the royal grant was refused because of his "con tempt" in marrying the woman of his choice. The next letter from Sir Charles Danvers on the 29th June was a disappointing one2. All things stood still. Essex's delivery from his keeper had been expected; but delay after delay had taken place "lest he should think mercy to be showed without discretion." The Queen would hear of no motion for his release until plans were made for the degrading of the knights that he had made. Many had represented to her the inconvenience of doing this. "You will hear of the success of our great battle in Flanders from Deputy." Danvers would have delayed writing until he could give Southampton clearer information, but his messenger could wait no longer. Essex really remained a prisoner in his own house through July. The Carew Papers give much information regarding Irish affairs, which cannot here be followed — but it is worth noting that on ist July, Lord Deputy Mountjoy told Sir George Carew "one day in the morning Tyrone did think to have taken a great advantage over the Earl of Southampton and the Sergeant Major in their passage, but by the valour of them two especially, and by my drawing out the forces at the same time to meet them, he departed with loss."3 Probably this is the year of a letter dated July 14th from Mountjoy to Southampton, saying that he had given Fitzgarret a protection against his will, not fitting the course he held with the knave Udall*. Southampton wrote to Sir Robert Cecil on July 22nd from Dublin: I wrote unto you not long since by Sir Geoffrey Fenton, about a request which my Lord Deputy made in my behalf for the government of Connaught, of which he hath of late received no answer, wherewith he hath acquainted me. The trouble you put yourself to in moving it is an addition to the many favours you have been pleased to shew me, wherefore for that with 1 Salisb. Papers MS. 93, 144. 2 Salisb. Papers, x. 208. 3 Carew MSS. « Cecil Papers, cvi. 1. xn] THE PERILS OF "CONTEMPT" 183 the rest, I must and will acknowledge myself bound unto you, though for the bad success you found (more than I am sorry her Majesty thinks me so Uttle able to do her service) it grieves me notning, the place being such that I protest unto you I think any that doth understand it aright wiU not greatly desire it. How far and why I did affect it, I made you know in my last letter, my hope being by that means to cancel her Majesty's iU conceit of me, and to be settled in her good opinion, which if I have already recovered by any punishment I have endured, or service I have done her, I am much more happy than if I were put there to seek it with so great pain and hazard as must of necessity belong to him that undertakes that work. And now since I have here nothing to do, but as a private man, which condition cannot afford me means to performe aught worth the thinking of, and that I do desire to spend my time so as I may best be enabled to serve her Majesty, I doe intend, God willing to go hence into the Low Countries, to live the rest of this summer in the States' army, where perhaps I may see somewhat worth my pains, and I hope her Majesty wiU not be offended with it, seeing both now and ever I wiU study nothing more than to direct my course to do her service. Sir, I have still found you kind and friendly unto me, and therefore I beseech you in this which concerns me nearest, which is the recovery of her favour, yield me aU the furtherance you may, and assure yourself I will never be ungrateful but ready to deserve it any way I may, and remain always wining to obey your commandments1. [Endorsed " 1600."] Sir Arthur Chichester, asking Cecil for some promotion in Ireland on August 23rd, said, "My Lord of Southampton's horse are, as I hear, already given."2 On the 2nd August Cecil wrote to Carew; the last paragraph runs: "I pray you, commend me affectionately to the Earl of Thomond, of whom the Queen is infinitely satisfied. For the feare he had to be commanded by any other, named to Connaught, let him be assured he shold never have come under him, but that is dissolved, for the Earl of Southampton is come away, and goes into the Low Country."3 It is evident that promotion of any kind was to be denied South ampton in Ireland. Whyte by the 8th of August had heard that Southampton was in the Low Countries, and that Sir Robert Drury had letters to stay the combat between him and Lord Grey. Royal orders were sent to both, forbidding a duel4. Apparently, however, Southampton, 1 Irish State Papers, 1600, vol. ccvn, part 4, 42, Calendar, p. 328. 1 Salisb. Papers, x. 285. 3 Camden Series, 82, p. 14. 4 Salisb. Papers, x. 285. 184 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. though outwardly obedient, put himself in a position of peril, and Lord Grey, not having received as yet his official instructions, attacked him, but no wounds seem to have been received on either side. By August 23rd Cecil heard from Middleburg, "My Lords of Northumberland and Southampton are here. My Lord of Rutland is in Hollan, and my Lord Gray in service with the horse troops in Brabant."1 The Earl of Essex was still a prisoner in his own house on July 24th2, so the Earl of Southampton may have seen him in passing. Chamberlain wrote on the ioth October, that Essex was at Barne Elms. "His frends make great means that he may run on Queen's Day (November 17 th) and are very confident to see him shortly in favour, beleve as much as you list, I nere a whit."3 Essex made one last pitiful appeal to be received back into the ranks of the Queen's loyal servants, and his letter remained un answered. He was, however, allowed to go to his own properties, to visit his friends and relatives in the country, and his health was doubtless benefited much by his freedom, rest, and change of air. An undated letter to him is placed in the Calendar as about this period, but must have really been written in 15894- It is from the Countess of Essex (his mother), announcing that her marriage to Sir Christopher Blount was "to come a Tuesday sennight," and regretting that her son could not be present. This was an unfortunate marriage; Sir Christopher had but little money of his own, and got through his wife's with amazing rapidity. He was devoted to his stepson, who made him one of the trustees of his property, with the Earl of Southampton. There is no clear record of Southampton's doings through the last three months ofthe year, but one dedication. "To the most Noble and aboundant president both of Honor and vertue, Henry Earle of Southampton. " Ihe Historie of the Uniting of Portugall to Castill." Right honorable and most woorthy Earle, It is not my fortune to be so infortunately read, as to begin (after the common stampe of dedication) with a grai-headed apophthegme, or some straied sentence out of Tully, but in such proper and pkine language, 1 Salisb. Papers, x. 291. 2 Ibid. 243. 3 D.S.S.P. cclxxv. 89. 4 Cecil Papers, clxxix. 164. xii] THE PERILS OF "CONTEMPT" 185 as a most humble and affectionate dutie can speake, I do heere offer up on the altar of my hart, the first fruits of my long-growing endevors; which (with much constancie and confidence) I have cherisht, onely waiting this happie opportunitie to make them manifest to your Lordship : where nowe if (in respect of the knowne distance, betwixt the height of your Honorable spirit, and the flatnesse of my poore abilities) they turne into smoake and vanish ere they can reach a degree of your merite, vouchsafe (yet most exceUent Earle) to remember it was a fire that kindled them, and gave them Ufe at least, if not lasting. Your Honors patronage is the onely object I aime at; and were the worthinesse of this Historie I present such as might warrant me an election out of a worlde of NobiUtie, I woulde stiU pursue the happines of my first choise; which has since beene confirmed to me by my respected friend the translator, a Gentleman most sincerely devoted to your Honor: For the subject it selfe I dare say nothing; since it is out of my element to judge. But I have heard others report it (and some of them also judicious) to be a thing first and exceUently written in ItaUan; then trans- kted into French, and generaUy received in both these toongs through aU christendome for a faithfull, elegant, sinewie, and weU digested historie: what the beauties of it are now in this EngUsh habite, I make your Honorable Lordship the first and most competent Censor; wishing that before you hegin to read farther, you could but reade my sUence, By him that wants much to expresse his dueties to your Honor Edw. Blount1. 1 The printer of the book. CHAPTER XIII THE CONSPIRACY i 600-1 The Earl of Essex returned to London after Christmas, still hoping against hope for access to the Queen's presence. His friends became all the more eager to help him to attain his desire. The blow that struck the knell of peace was Lord Grey's attack upon the Earl of Southampton1 in the streets of London on the 9th of January, in contempt of the Queen's definite order to both of them to keep the peace. It is true that Grey was shortly after sent to the Fleet prison, where, according to Chamberlain2, he remained only until the 2nd of February, when he was released and restored to the Queen's favour. This incident deeply affected the Earl of Essex, and made him feel that some action had become necessary. To his soldier's mind a forlorn hope might even yet succeed, if it were but brave enough. He and his friends were busy with plans. To limit the number of his visitors and avert suspicion from some of them, he arranged that those who meant business should meet at Sir Charles Danvers' lodging in Drury House in Wych Street (now removed for the widening of the Strand). He never went there himself; South ampton took his place. The subject of discussion was always the same, "How can we best help the Earl to remove his enemies from the Queen's ear, and leave him free to plead his own cause with her?" Every answer was hedged with difficulty The Earl of Southampton must have been sometimes absent from these meetings. On January 26th, 1600-1, Sir Gelly Meyrick wrote to Captain John Jephson, then at Carriekfergus, " I was the other day at Itchin at my Lord of Southampton's, where I saw your noble brother."3 ("Itchin," or Itchell, was one of Southampton's places in Hampshire, the house in which his father died.) This 1 Sir Henry Neville to Winwood, Winwood Papers, I. 292. 2 D.S.S.P. cclxxviii. 27. 3 Salisb. Papers, xi. 20. ch. xm] THE CONSPIRACY 187 remark must be remembered, and one or two contemporary facts must also be noted. William, Lord Herbert1, on the 5th of January desired to stay at Wilton with his sick father. On January 18th he said, "I doubt he will not live 48 hours. There have been many false and scandalous reports forged of me."2 The Countess of Pembroke had written for herself and her lord to thank the Queen for her kindness to their son3. On the 19th Henry, second Earl of Pembroke, died4, bequeathing his title, his property, and as much of his possessions as he could to his elder son William, and leaving as little as possible to his wife. Whyte's letters to Sir Robert Sidney follow the young lord's career closely. In Chamberlain's letter of 3rd February5 he foreshadows trouble for him through his amour with Mistress Mary Fitton. On the 5th Cecil wrote to Carew, "We have no news but that there is a misfortune befallen Mistress Fitton... the Earl of Pembroke being examined confesseth a fact, but utterly renounceth all marriage. I feare they will both dwell in the Tower awhile, for the Queen hath vowed to send them thither."6 The contrast of Pembroke's with the Earl of Southampton's dealings with a Queen's maid of honour, and the consequences to each, are worthy of close consideration. In discussing grievances, plans for amendment, methods of action, the time passed until the ist of February, which was a Sunday. Essex had been filling his house with friends, sympathisers, preachers, and advisers — a sort of exoteric court; but whenever he became sure of his men, or thought he might be so, he sent them to the esoteric teaching at Drury House. Friends were being collected from a distance. One such friend was Sir Charles Percy, brother of the Earl of Northumberland, of whom we know one interesting fact. He had married a Miss Cocks, and through her had become Lord of the Manor of Dumbleton in Gloucestershire. He found the society and intellectual atmosphere there very dull, and he heartily endorsed Shakespeare's view of the inhabitants. Then, on the 27 th day of an uncertain December, queried in State 1 Salisb. Papers, xi. 3. 2 Ibid. 13. 3 Cecil Papers, xc 147. 4 Salisb. Papers, xi. 14. 6 D.S.S.P. cclxxviii. 6 Camden Series, R. Ac. 8113/82, p. 64. 188 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Papers as 1600?, he wrote to his friend Carleton, "I am so pestered with Country business that I cannot come to London. If I stay here long, you will find me so dull, that I shall be taken as a Justice Silence or a Justice Shallow, therefore take pity of me, and send me news from time to time, the knowledge of which, though perhaps it will not exempt me from the opinion of a justice Shallow in London, yet will make me pass for a very sufficient gentleman in Gloucestershire. If I do not always answer, pray do not desist from your charitable office, that place being so fruitful and here so barren, that it will make my head ache for invention. P.S. You need not forbear sending news hither in respect of their staleness, for I assure you they will be very new here."1 It is possible that this letter belongs to the end of the previous year, but that Essex's need was sufficient to bring him to London, the place where news were manufactured. At any rate, we find him among the Drury House band in February. It was on his suggestion that Richard II was played. It is a possibility the first part of Henry IV was played, in the rendering which included the killing of Richard II; that he had not seen Richard II performed; and that quite innocently he wished to do so, in order to relate it to the Henry IV Pt. I, which in 1597 included old Blunts and Vernons and Percys among its characters, and to Henry IV Pt. II, which in 15982 had introduced Justices Shallow and Silence to the gorgeous humours of Falstaff. Also, he wanted to know what the joke was which made the assembled gallants at Plymouth so wonderfully merry in 15973 over Sir Robert Cecil's "conceipt of Richard II " according to Sir Walter Raleigh. It is quite possible that all the "evil intent" of the play had been conceived and inserted by unwise friends and interested enemies of the fated Earl. It was one of their methods of attack. So we can picture the party who went over the water to the Globe, possibly to listen to Shakespeare's company playing Shake speare's tragedy in the poet's words, some of them, perhaps, from his own mouth, on February the 7 th, the eve of the fatal day4. True, it is quite possible that it was a play by some other dramatist; for the subject was very much discussed at the time. 1 D.S.S.P. cclxxv. 146. 2 Supposed date of play. 3 D.S.S.P. cclxiv. 10. See ante, p. 106. 4 Feb. 8th, 1600-1. xm] THE CONSPIRACY 189 Essex did not go out of doors that day. In the morning he had been warned that there was a plot among the Jesuits to kill him; in the afternoon he had been cautioned by a friend in Court that on no excuse was he to leave the house, for there was a confederacy to kill him either as he went or returned. In the evening he was summoned by Secretary Herbert to come before the Lords at Whitehall. He had been freed from such subordination when he had been allowed to go to the country, and no charge had been laid against him since, so he refused to go. Many men slept in Essex House that night who had not intended to do so. For things had come to a crisis: Essex was in a worse case than when he was a prisoner, for then his life at least was protected. The morrow was fixed for the adventure, but even then few knew on what lines it was intended that it should move; he trusted few with the whole of his schemes; one examinate incidentally said that they could not trust Rutland for more than two hours before anything was to be done. It is necessary to realise their actual position at the time, and not read into it all the weighty matters which have been since imported into it. Essex felt himself deeply wronged. He attributed all his troubles to the ill-will of those courtiers to whom the Queen listened, and who had made up their mind that the only safe course for them was to prevent her from seeing theEarl and"hearing the other side." He knew that too, and it was in order to circumvent them that he desired to force a way into her presence, and with humble rever ence pour forth his passionate pleadings at her feet. He knew that he could move her. There was no thought of treason, as we under stand it, in any of their hearts. Rather was it, if I may draw a simple parallel, like the boys of a great public school, where troubles had arisen through some of the bigger boys turning tell-tales on their enemies to such an extent that the head-master refused to hear the other side, or to see them, or indeed even to listen to witnesses for them. And the ostracised boys, feeling hot and injured, agreed to force their way into their master's study, and when they had caught his eye, and he had realised there were so many of them discontented, he would be sure to hear them, and with fair play all would be well. The worst that could happen to them would be expulsion. So they would plan how to prevent 190 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. janitors, butlers, and tutors from interfering in what they thought their righteous plan of self-defence. In some such way Essex sketched his little plan of surprising the Court, a very similar one to that which he had tried on September 28th, 1599. But he was taking followers now. Sir Christopher Blount was to guard the outer gate, Sir John Davies the hall, Sir Charles Danvers the presence chamber, and the Earls of Essex and Southampton alone were to enter the privy chamber. They were stirring early on the 8th if, indeed, any had slept at all. Evidently Essex had originally intended to make his attempt on the Court before divine service began. But some friends, ap parently Sir Ferdinando Gorges and Sir Charles Danvers, brought back the news from Court that alarm had been taken and that they had doubled their forces. Sir Christopher Blount advised Essex first to secure his friends in London; Sir Charles Danvers advised him to fly to the sea-coast. Hesitation ensued. An interesting MS.1 rendering of the story of that 8th of February says that the Queen, having, of course, heard of the preparations, sent about 9 o'clock to Essex House Sir Thomas Egerton, Lord Keeper, the Earl of Worcester, Sir William Knollys, and the Lord Chief Justice, with a message that Essex should dissolve his company and himself speedily come to the Court, and promising that his griefs should be graciously heard. The house was buzzing as if it were a hive of angry bees when they knocked at the gate. They were suffered to enter, but none of their followers. The Earl met them in the court, which was filled with men, took them through two rooms well guarded; then they asked him to speak with them privately. He led the way to his study, which they unsuspiciously entered; whereupon he told them he had business in the city and would come back in half an hour. He turned the key in the door, put them in charge of Sir John Davies and Sir Gelly Meyrick, bidding that faithful adherent, if he loved him, not to let them go before his return. He himself, with the Earls of Rutland, Bedford, and Southampton, and about 60 followers, went out and turned eastward towards Ludgate, calling out that he would have been murdered by the Lord Cobham and Sir Walter Raleigh. The gates were shut; but they opened for them, and they went into Cheapside to Sheriff Smith's house, then 1 Lent me by Dr Smedley. 10 o'clock is the time usually given. xm] THE CONSPIRACY 191 to Gracechurch Street, where they had some parley with the mayor. Their numbers had now risen to 300, and thereupon Lord Burleigh was sent with the King of Heralds to proclaim them traitors, with the promise of £1 000 reward to any one who should take Essex's person, and of pardon to all who should forsake him. Lord Burleigh's horse was hurt under him — "at which time the Earl of Bedford and the Lord Cromwell left him and many others." Seeing his company lessened, Essex turned to Ludgate again, in tending to pass to his house1. But the Bishop of London and Sir John Leveson had put up the chain there, under St Paul's, and there was a body of pikemen drawn up to withstand them. There Sir Christopher Blount (the unlucky) was sorely wounded in the head and Essex's page slain, so he turned and went to the water and took boats to Essex House. " It was about 4 of the clocke when the Earl came to Essex House. The Lords whom he had left there prisoners were by a happie accident delivered by Sir Ferdinando Gorges who, as it seemeth, in policie to save his owne life came with a feigned message from the Erie to Sir Gillie Meyricke and Sir John Davies for the setting of them at libertie, upon which they were suffered to go to court by water, taking Sir Ferdinando Gorges with them." They must by this time have been badly in need of food, if the Countess and Lady Rich did not provide for them when Sir John Davies went and brought them down, "to pass the time more quickly." Half an hour afterwards Essex returned, foiled in his secondary scheme, to go with the Lords to the Court. The postscript to Sir Robert Cecil's letter ofthe ioth to Carew says, "The Commanders of our little army were the Lord Admiral, Lord General; Earl of Cumberland, Lord Lieutenant; Lord Thomas, Marshall; Lord Gray, General of the Horse; Lord Burghley, Colonel General ofthe foot."2 These were sent to Essex House, the Lord Burleigh on the street side, and the Lord Admiral and Sir Robert Sidney on the water side, who soon had taken the garden; Lord Burleigh had broken the gate and entered the court, in which only two common soldiers were slain3. The Earl with four or 1 Salisb. Papers, xi. 3. 2 Camden Series, 82, p. 67. 1 Egerton MS. 2606. Sir Egerton Brydges' Life of Sir Thomas Egerton, P- 29- 192 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. five others shewed themselves on the leads, flourishing their swords, and went in again. They had fortified the doors of the house and set books in the windows, which made shot of little effect. About 9 o'clock the Admiral sent Sir Robert Sidney to summon them to yield, a parley sounded, and the Earl of Southampton came upon the leads and replied, "Dear Cosen Sidney to whom would you have us to yield, to our enemies?" "Noe," said Sir Robert, "You must yeald yourselves to her Majestie." "That would wee will- inglie," answered Southampton,"but that thereby we should confess ourselves gyltie, before we had offended, yet if my Lord Admirall will yeald us honorable hostages for a safe returne to this place, wee will goe, and present ourselves before her Majestie, to whom God knows wee never intended the least harme and whose royal! disposition we know to be such that if wee might but freely declare our mindes before her, she would pardonne us, and blame them that are most blameworthy, those Atheists and Caterpillers, I meane, that laid plottes to bereave us of our lives, for safeguard whereof as the lawe of nature willeth us, wee have taken up these armes though wee both doe and will acknowledge our dutie and obedience to her Majestie to our lives' end, for is it likelie that wee who have so often ventured our lives in defence of her Majestie and this Realme should now prove traitors to the Queen and state? Noe, Noe, Cosen we detest that name, and all traitorous actions." "My Lord, you must not capitulate with your prince, and knowe that my Lord Admirall will not yeald to any such conditions of hostages." "Good cosen, I doe not capitulate with my prince, I doe but expostulate with you. You are a man of armes and knowe well what belongs thereto, you know we are bound by nature to defend ourselves against our equals, much more against our inferiors. And cosen, you cannot but knowe, or at least wiselie conjecture, that if wee shall yeald ourselves, we shall willinglie put ourselves into the wolves' mouth e, I meane these hands who will keepe us farre enough from coming to her Majestie to speak for ourselves, or if that were admitted us, yett coming before her as captives, theire lyes through the greatnes of her favor towards them overballance our truthes. Then good cosen Sidney what would you doe if you were in our case?" "Good my Lord, put noe such questions. I hold you are best to yeald, for you knowe this house is of no such force as yt can longe xm] THE CONSPIRACY 193 preserve you and my Lorde Admirall hath already sent for powder and ordnance for battery, and if that will not prevaile he is purposed to blowe it up, and then there is but one waie with you." "Let his Lordship doe his pleasure, wee purpose not to yield without hostages, for will rather make choice to dye like men with our swords in our hands, then goe ten days hence to end our lives upon a scaffold." "By standing out there is noe hope, but by yealding there is some hope offered you." "Well Cosen, that hope is so little that without hostages, we will rather make choice of this noe hope then of that hope." And at these words came the Earl of Essex to Southampton and said to Sir Robert and the people, "Good brother Sidney, and you my loving countrymen, nothing doth so much grieve me as that you who my conscience tells me doe all love me, and for whose safetie I have so often exposed myself to perill, that you, my friends whose least drop of blood would greatlie perplex me, should be made agents in this quarrell against mee, who would rather flinge myselfe headlonge from hence then you should be endangered, and that those Atheists my enemies keepe aloofe off from perill and dare not once aproache me, in fighting against whom, if I might but end my life, I would thinke my death most honorable yf by my death I might lykewyse end their lives, and that I had done God, my prince, and my contry good service by rooting out such Atheists and Caterpillers from the earth." Sidney. "I hope my Lord you doe not mean my Lord Ad mirall?" Essex. "Noe, God knowes I have ever taken him to be as honorable in minde as he is by birthe, though there hath bene some publique jarres amongst us, which I knowe, on his parte came by others' provocations, rather than anie waie by his own disposition ; but I mean men of more base condition, though in greater favour with her Majestie, who have laid secret plotts and damnable devyces to bereave me of my liffe, from which purpose my conscience tells me my Lord is free. Yet good brother, excuse me if I yeald not, for I will stand to my Lord of Southampton's resolution. As for my liffe, I hate it, I have lothed to live anie tyme this twelvemonth and more, and I have thought it one of the greatest punishments that ever God laid uppon me to scape that sickness which then attacked me, for judge you, brother, whether it be a griefe or noe s. s. *3 194 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. for a man discended as I am to have lived in accord and of estimacion that I have done, to be pinned up for long together, to be trodden underfoote by so base upstarts, yea, and more, that to have my liffe so nearlie sought by them? Would it not trouble you? Yes I know it would. Well it is no matter, deathe will end all, and sithe I must die and they enioye their wishes, I will dye so honorablie as I maie, and soe good brother enforme my Lord Admiral." "Well, my Lord, I will returne your answere to his Lordship." The Lord Admiral would not hear of hostages to rebels, but sent Sir Robert again, who told Southampton that the Lord Admiral understood that the ladies and gentlewomen were in the house, and that he would delay in order that they should be sent forth, and they should be safely and honorably conveyed to any place they pleased. Southampton thanked the Lord Admiral, "but we desire him to pardon us if we prefer our safetie before their freedom. We have now fortified our doors, which stood us in a good whiles work; if we should unfortifye them to sett our ladies forth, we shall make an open passage for your forces to enter. Yet if the Lord Admiral would grant us an hour's space to open the passage for our ladies, and another hour when they are gone to make it good againe, we will willinglie suffer our ladies to depart." To this the Admiral agreed, and it was about 9 o'clock. Great store of powder, shot, and ordnance had come from the Tower. This made them prefer to take some of their time in consultation; they would then realise that they were not determining a death glorious for themselves, but preparing one for many followers who were willing to fight, but not willing to die for them in that manner. Doubtless Lady Rich had a word of common-sense to say, and Lady Essex would tearfully wish them to seize the little hope, rather than accept the "no hope" terms. So "they came forthe again upon the leads and the Earl tould Sir Robert they would yeald upon these con ditions, first that they might be used as honorable prisoners; secondlie that the Lord Admirall should make faithfull relation to her Majestie of what they should say for themselves in their own defence; thirdly that they should have an honorable trial; and lastly during their imprisonment they should have divines to instruct them in matters of religion." To this the Lord Admiral agreed, whereupon they went down, opened their doors, and each xm] THE CONSPIRACY 195 of them upon their knees delivered up his sword. The Earl of Essex desired the Admiral to request her Majesty to inflict all her punish ments upon him, and that the punishment of the rest might be diminished, who had entered into that accord with .him some for friendship, some for kindness, some for affection, and some as servants to their lord. "And the Earl of Southampton requested that things doubtfully said or donne might be construed to the best, which the Lord Admirall said should be done. Soe they went to their several places of imprisonment." I could not omit much from this narrative; the tragical picture haunts the imagination. The Strand, St Clement Danes, Essex House lit up by the lurid light of smoky torches — for it was the dark night of a gloomy February day; a seething flood of men around, silent and spell-bound, and the slight figures of the doomed men, against the smoky light, first standing on the leads, then coming down to yield all that life holds dear; and the group of tear-stained ladies in the hall seeing them depart. Perhaps after all the ladies did not leave the house that night. If they did, it would probably be to go to Walsingham House, where Lady Essex's loving mother tearfully waited. One part of the Lord Admiral's promise was not kept. Lady Rich was not allowed to go whither she would; she was taken prisoner and sent to the care of Mr Sackford. She had been helping her brother all day. There is no record of either Countess of Southampton. The elder one was still at the Savoy, and I believe that Elizabeth Vernon had been purposely taken down by her husband to Itchell and left there with her child, to keep her out of the way, while he did a little bit of business in town, which completed, he expected he would return to his family. The so-called "Rebellion" was crushed, the Queen slept1, and probably far away from London Elizabeth Vernon also slept, unwitting of the disturbances in which her husband was engaged. The undated and unaddressed letter that he wrote to her would seem to have been written that night by him, trying, in order to comfort her, to minimise his danger. This, written under such tragic conditions, is the only one of his love-letters which has come down to us (though undelivered then), through Cecil. 1 She had said she would not go to sleep till they were secured. 13—2 196 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Sweetheart, I doubt not but you shaU hear ere my letter come to you of the misfortune of your friends. Be not too apprehensive of it, for God's wiU must be done, and what is aUotted to us by destiny cannot be avoided. Believe that in this time there is nothing that can so much comfort me, as, to think that you are weU, and take patiently what hath happened, and contrariwise I shaU Uve in torment if I find you vexed for my cause. Doubt not but that I shaU do well, and please yourself with the assurance that I shaU ever remain your affectionate husband1. The letter is addressed only "To my Bess," and is endorsed "My Lord of Southampton to his Lady." Sometime within the next few days that poor lady wrote to Cecil: Fear to have my doings misconstrued hath hitherto made me forbear to shew the duty of a wife in this miserable distress of my unfortunate husband. Longer I could not, and Uve, suffer the sorrow sustained in the place where I was, in not shewing some effects of my infinite and faithful love unto him, therefore have I adventured hither, having no other meaning but prayers to God, and umble petitions to His holy anointed, prostrate at her feet if it might be to beg some favour, and by unfolding this my simple intention to obtain your good opinion of aUowance that my doing be not mistaken; but may move you to pity me, the most miserable woman in the world, by my Lord's miserable state. And in that, through the heavy disfavour of her sacred majesty unto myself, I am utterly barred from aU means to perform those duties and good to him I ought to do, this being of aU others my cross the most heavy, easily in your wisdom can you look into my woeful condition, which, if you be pleased to do I doubt not but you wiU pity me, and aUow of this I do2. "In twelve hours' time was this commotion suppressed" says Camden. The great leader who had hitherto always led his followers to victory was at last defeated by fate. Unwillingly he yielded, to save the lives of others, and to let her Majesty go to sleep. The two chief prisoners were taken by the Admiral to the Archbishop's Pakce at Lambeth, because the night was dark and the river not passable under the bridge. Thence, by the Queen's command, they were shortly afterwards carried to the Tower3 by water; some of 1 Cecil Papers, clxxxiii. 21. 2 Ibid, lxxxiv. 12, also Salisb. Papers, xi. 70, dated c. 19th February but it must have been earlier. 3 D.S.S.P. cclxxviii. 31, 34, 35, 38, 39, 43, 44. Their rooms were not comfortably furnished till two days later. Salisb. Papers, xi. 39. Belvoir Papers, xiv. Feb. 9th. xiii] THE CONSPIRACY i97 the others followed— "The Earl of Rutland, Lord Sandys, Lord Cromwell, Lord Mounteagle, Sir Christopher Blunt, Sir Charles Danvers." "The Earl of Sussex was committed on suspicion to Sir John Stanhope's house; the Earl of Bedford committed on suspicion to the Alderman Holliday of London. He was afterwards taken to Sir John Stanhope's; and Lady Rich to Mr Sackford's." Another list gives 28 in the Compter, Poultry, the chief of whom are "Sir Francis Smith, John Arden, Thomas C.undell, Francis Manners, Sir William Constable, John Vernon, Gregory Sheffield. In Wood Street Sir Thomas West and others. In the Lord Mayor's house Sir Henry Carew, Sir Henry Parker, Sir Charles Percy, Sir Joscelyne Percy, Sir Ferdinando Gorges. In Sheriff Camble's house Sir Robert Catesby, Sir John Littleton. In the house of one Holland, at Paul's Chain, Sir Christopher Blunt." Many others follow: Edward Bushell, Sir Gelly Meyrick, Sir Christopher Heydon, Sir John Heydon, Sir John Davies, Sir Henry Linley, Sir Robert Vernon, Sir Edward Bainham, Henry Cuffe, Charles Ogle, etc. Another list appears among the Conway papers. Another list of 1 00 includes " Lady Rich at Mr Sackford's, the Earl of Bedford at Sir John Stanhope's." " Dr Fletcher, committed to Alderman Lowine, Dr Hawkins committed to Alderman Lee."1 Captain Owen Salisbury, an enthusiastic follower of Essex, when he saw that hope was fled had courted death by standing as a mark in a window. He is said to have been killed by a shot from the steeple of St Clement Danes Church. An entry can still be seen in the Register of the church: "Owin Salisbury, Captain, slain within Essex Gallery, and James footman to the Earl of Southampton, who both were buryed at night the 1 oth February 1600." The proclamation of the earls as traitors was suspiciously prompt. It was read on Sunday, printed on Monday, published on Tuesday. Cecil had already made up his mind. He immediately empowered the Deputy Lieutenants to instruct the people to arm in defence, Essex and his confederates having taken up arms against the Queen. 1 Salisb. Papers, xi. 34. 198 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. His letter to Sir George Carew with the Proclamation on the ioth of February, from Whitehall, runs: "Because I am not ignorant that greatest accidents are most liable to be misreported. .. I have thought it very fit to acquaint you with a most dangerous attempt which hath happened on Sunday last, wherein both her Majesty's own person and the usurpation of this kingdom was openly shot at1. By this Proclamation the proceedings of the Earl of Essex will appear, and therefore I shall onely need say this unto you, that I thinke by that tyme my letters shall come unto you, both he and the Erie of Southampton, with some others of the principals, shall have lost their heads.. . . If the Queen had not put herself in strength that morning and barricaded Charing Cross, and the other back parts of Westminster, their resolution was to have been in court at noon."2 Official letters were likewise sent to all ambassadors. "The long Proclamation" mentioned could hardly have been exactly the same as that read to the people on Sunday morning, copies of which are preserved in the British Museum. There was a busy week of examinations and depositions, during which all other legal business came to a standstill. A curious little side-light is thrown on the case by a paper among Stratford-on-Avon Records. The town had a suit against Sir Edward Greville, who claimed certain rights as Lord of the Manor. John Shakespeare was mentioned among those who helped to draw up the case (the last public duty he did); Richard Queeney and Thomas Greene went up to London to take counsel on it. Among the town expenses for January and February 1600-1 appears: "Given to one of Mr Cooke hys clerkes, and his door keeper, that we might have accesse to their master for his councill, upon whom the said Clerk, Mr Green and myself did often attend, and Mr Morgan, Mr Greene and myself 3 dayes together, but could not have him at leisure, because of these troubles. For privy seale, and other expenses together 38.C 4^."3 The indictments were sent out on Saturday the 14th. Besides the general charges, printed in every history of the period, the examinations yielded many little biographical details. Edward Whitelock called for the Earl of Rutland about 9 o'clock on 8th 1 Camden Series, 82, p. 65. 2 Ibid. p. 66 3 Strat. Misc. Doc. v. 148. xm] THE CONSPIRACY 199 February to go to Court, but found that he had gone out at 6 to the Earl of Southampton's lodgings; he followed him, but found that Rutland had gone thence to Essex House, where Whitelock sought him, and went out with the Earl and other gentlemen1. William Reynolds (probably brother of Essex's secretary, Edward Reynolds) on February 1 3th "marvelled what had become of Piers Edmonds, the Earl of Essex's man, born in the Strand near me, who had many preferments by the Earl. His villainy I have often complained of. He was Corporal General of the Horse in Ireland under the Earl of Southampton. He ate and drank at his table and lay in his tent. The Earl of Southampton caressed him, and gave him privileges2." Piers Edmonds wrote to Mr Wade in February 1 600-1. He had spent 20 years in the Queen's service. For his old hurts received in that service bursting out afresh, he was enforced to come to London for remedy but "two days before that dismal day," by which mischance, being among his Lordship's people innocently, he stands in the like danger they do. He asks Mr Wade's advice whether he should give himself up, or wait for the general pardon8. John Bird speaks of John Barlow, "an Esquire of a thousand pounds in land, a noted recusant, near Milford Haven," whose power was sufficient to prevent the serving of indictments4. His son and heir, Geojge Barlow, had married one of the Vernons, a cousin to the Earl of Essex and sister to the Countess of South ampton. "Sir George Devereux, uncle to the Earl of Essex, came and stayed with him at Christmas and lives with his father all in one house." Sir John Davies (Surveyor of the Ordnance in the Tower) wrote to Robert Cecil on March 2nd: I know that it is the course of men in misery to make protestations of their affections. But if you wiU consider from whom this cometh, it wiU work no, doubt better effect, in your noble heart. If I knew of the least hurt intended to her Majesty, let me be made an example to aU ages. If I were true to him whom I once served, and from whom I received aU my advancement, 1 Salisb. Papers, xi. 40. 2 Ibid. xi. 48, 93. Cecil Papers, lxxxiii. 62. . 5 Salisb. Papers, xi. 99. Cecil Papers, xc. 76. * Salisb. Papers, xi. 92. Cecil Papers, lxxxiii. 54. 200 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. it is a good consequent that I wiU ever be true to you.... I pray that either my Lord Harry Howard, my Lord Gray or Mr Fulke GreviUe may hear my overtures. I humbly beseech your Honour to command my bolts to be taken off, which have almost lamed me already1. On the same date there is another letter, entreating that he should not be brought to trial. He will give up his wardship or anything; let them consider "how much any further disgrace will disable and deject a spirit of a modest carriage and never before tempted." The Earl of Bedford on February 14th2 said that he had only spoken once with the Earl of Essex since he had his liberty. He was preparing to serve God about 10 o'clock on the 8th when Lady Rich came to his house and desired to speak with him. She said her brother had need of him, and he went to Essex House in her coach about 1 1 . The Earl of Essex went to a secret conference to which he (Bedford) was not invited. When the Lords went out he followed them, but escaped at the earliest opportunity. Captain Thomas Lea said that since Christmas "there had been many secret meetings in Lord Mountjoy's house in Holborn,"3 but, however he might sympathise, his Lordship was safely away in the bogs of Ireland, carrying out the policy that Essex had pknned to pacify it. The prosecutors did not want him to stop his work, and they turned their blind eye in his direction. Cuffe4 said that he had seen Lord Essex destroy a book of his own writing, being the story of his troubles, and wished he had not done so. (This was the real book that was imitated by other people and misnamed his Apology, which his enemies used against him.) Sir William Constable dined at Gunter's and went to the Globe. He said "Owen Salisbury, espying Mr Bacon passing by, said 'There is one of them; let us pull him in, to be doing withall.'"5 Bushell said "There supped at Essex House on the 7th Lord Southampton, Sir Christopher Blunt, Sir Charles Danvers, Lady Rich, Robert Vernon."6 Lord Sandys of Sherburn (Cowdray, Co. Southampton), held out till the last, but confessed that he saw Essex burn papers, "to tell no tales to hurt his private friends."7 1 Salisb. Papers, xi. 101. Cecil Papers, lxxvii, 21. ¦ Salisb. Papers, xi. 50. s D.S.S.P. cclxxviii. 61. * Ibid. 70. 6 Ibid. 72. » Ibid. 69. » Ibid. 75. xm] THE CONSPIRACY 201 Christopher Blount1 does not contribute much that others did not tell to the story ofthe action on February 8th; but he mentions one fact which no one else knew — that in Dublin, when he lay wounded in the Castle in a chamber that had once been the Earl of Southampton's, the Earl of Essex came to him (no one else being present but the Earl of Southampton), and asked their advice whether he should take over with him on his return 2000 or 3000 soldiers to secure his access to the Queen the more easily. They both advised him against that plan, and therefore he came but poorly attended at Michaelmas 1599. Sir Gelly Meyrick on Saturday dined with the others at Gunter's, and a party of them, on Sir Charles Percy's motion, afterwards went all together to the Globe, where the Lord Chamberlain's men used to play, and were there somewhat before the play began, Percy telling them that the play would be of Henry IV, and the ¦killing of Richard II. He could not tell who procured the play, but thinks it was Percy. He himself did not arrive until after the play began2. Sir John Leveson declared how he defended St Paul's Chain3. Sir Ferdinando Gorges, on the Tuesday before the rising, was summoned to Drury House, and was told their plans. He could not see how they meant to work it. Sir John Davies took ink and paper, and began to make a plan as to how they meant to dispose of their men. When he saw what they led to, he went back and released the Lords. Gorges said he utterly misliked it, because of the horror as well as the impossibility of the thing. At Drury House he would not agree to that course, whereupon Southampton in a rise of passion demanded, " Shall we resolve upon nothing then ? " Davies said, "Let him have his friends well placed in the city," but they resolved upon nothing, and left all to Lord Essex4. Augustine Phillipps on February 18th on his oath said: "On Friday last was a sennight Sir Charles and Sir Joscelyn Percy, Lord Monteagle and others spoke to some of the players in his presence, to have the play of the deposing and killing of Richard II on Saturday. They thought it too old a play to fetch an audience, 1 D.S.S.P. cclxxviii. 77. 2 Ibid. 78. 3 Salisb. Papers, xi. 59. 4 D.S.S.P. cclxxviii. 84. Salisb. Papers, xi. 69. 202 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. but Sir Charles Percy offered them 4.0s. beyond their profits, so they agreed to play it, and had their forty shillings."1 (It may be noted that this deposition is signed with a very good signature.) Sir Christopher Blount further remembered that on 20th January, when sending letters of compliment to his wife, the Earl of Essex asked him to come up to town soon to settle affairs2. (Blount's wife, it may be remembered, was the Countess of Essex, the mother ofthe present Earl, and afterwards Countess of Leicester; she married Blount in July 1589.) He did not advise the surprising of the Court, because Gorges had assured him the guard was doubled. He did not like to put the Queen in fear, though Essex was a man not disposed to shed blood. He acknowledged that the Earl had said to him that if he came to authority he should have toleration, for he liked not that any man should be troubled for his religion. Blount also reminded his examiners that he had served the Queen for many years, and that he had laid open the way of the Earl of Leicester and Mr Secretary Walsingham to discover the practices of the Queen of Scots. If the Queen knew his clear heart towards her, she would never take his life. Sir Charles Danvers was the last to yield and confess. But when they shewed him the signed depositions of the others he disburdened himself3. When he came back from the Court on Saturday morning, finding there would be resistance, he advised Essex to give up the notion and fly to Wales. He came to London about a month after Essex had been put in the Lord Keeper's care. Southampton and Mountjoy, to whom Essex had committed the care of his fortunes, advised him then to go to the continent, and they would go with him. Ireland was forced on Mountjoy; Harry Lea was sent to the Scotch King, to say that they looked to him as suc cessor. Southampton and he were willing to risk their lives for Essex, but not Mountjoy. Sir Henry Neville had prepared to return to France as am bassador, but was arrested on the way for complicity with Essex and taken to the Tower. He had been somewhat unwillingly made 1 D.S.S.P. cclxxviii. 85. 2 Cecil Papers, lxxxiii. 32, printed Camden Series, 78, Appendix. 3 Birch's Mem. 11. 470. D.S.S.P. cclxxviii. 89. xiii] THE CONSPIRACY 203 cognizant of the designs of the discontented ones, and in his examination1 said that he had not seen Lord Essex, but had seen Cuffe, who desired him to come and consult with the Earl of Southampton and Sir Charles Danvers at Drury House. On Monday, Candlemas Day, at four of the clock, on coming out of Sergeant's Inn he saw a coach pass by, containing the Earls of Essex and Southampton, Sir Christopher Blount, and Sir Charles Danvers. As they had seen him, he thought it wise to pay his long promised visit, so he shortly afterwards went to Drury House, where he found the Earl of Southampton and Sir Charles Danvers. "There, after some ordinary salutations, because I had never spoken with my Lord ,of Southampton since he was a child in my old Lord Treasurer's House, my Lord began to break to me their plans." He misliked them, and had had no further communication. He saw now that he should have given information. It is interesting to note here what the Venetian ambassador said two years afterwards: "It has now been discovered that the whole action of the Earl of Essex was based on a document signed by six conspirators. This contained only two points, first that there was to be a rising in which Secretary Cecil and Councillor Raleigh were to be killed, as the cause of the Earl of Essex's disgrace, and second that they were immediately to cry 'Long live the Queen and after her long live King James of Scotland, the sole and rightful heir to the English Crown '...a declaration which the Queen had always refused to make."2 (Indeed any discussion of the succession she had threatened to proclaim an act of treason.) Among the speeches at the Star Chamber on the 1 3th February, . Sir Robert Cecil stated that for five or six years before the Earl had been working to become King of England. Lord Dudley3 said to Sir Robert Cecil that it was vulgarly re ported last summer that Mr John Littleton was in the Low Countries and that (as his followers gave it out) by commandment of the Privy Council, to stay the quarrel between the Earl of Southampton and the Lord Grey. He was sure Littleton was in the Essex plot. 1 Salisb. Papers, xi. 76, 88, 103. D.S.S.P. cclxxviii. 598. 2 Venetian Papers. Ambassador's letter 15th May, 1603. 3 D.S.S.P. cclxxviii. 85. 204 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. The Bishop of Winchester told Cecil that Mr Richard Gifford of Somborne, near Winchester, was known to have cleaned his armour on the 8th. " He is a great follower of the Earl of South ampton, and his two cousins now at home with him, as also some of his brethren, served in Ireland under the said Earl pf Southampton and were very kindly used by him. It would be well to examine them." He had written to the mayor and justices of Winchester about the ammunition1. Winwood, the junior ambassador at Paris, waiting for the return of his chief, Sir Henry Neville, wrote to him on 17 th February: Yesterday, being at the Louvre, the King took me aside and asked me what news I had from England. I told him I had not lately received any. He then told me of a strange commotion which should lately be in London (which he compared to the Barricades at Paris), intended he said by the Earls of Essex and Southampton, foUowed by divers Knights and other QuaUty, to the number of 2000. I asked him if he had received this news from his Ambassador. He said no, but by M. de Rohan, who freshly came out of England, and arrived this morning in post. He told me many other particulars, which I take no pleasure to recite. Your Lordship may judge of the affliction I feel of that I know and the fear I conceive of that I know not. I attend hourly to hear from your Lordship so far to be informed as in your Discretion you shaU think the knowledge of the truth to be available to her Majesty's service. These men here soUace the remembrance of their kte miseries with the hopes of their neighbours' calamities, and speak that which my heart doth break to think of, and my hand trembles to put down2. This letter never reached Sir Henry Neville, and Winwood had no reply, except the formal announcement, until Sir Robert Cecil wrote to him on 7th March, "A late unhappy accident hath thrown a cloud over my cousin Sir Henry Neville's fortunes."3 A letter of Sir Walter Raleigh printed among the Cecil Papers and dated 1600?, printed also on the last page but one of Murdin's State Papers, evidently should be entered here. It must have been written between the 9th and the 23rd of February that year, or it would tell even mord against the writer's character. I am not wise enough to give you advice, but if you take it for a good counsel to relent towards this tyrant, you wiU repent it when it shaU be 1 D.S.S.P. cclxxviii. 89. 2 Winwood, Mem. 1. 294. 3 Ibid. 299. xm] THE CONSPIRACY 205 too late. His maUce is fixed, and wiU not evaporate by any your mud courses, for he wul ascribe the alteration to her Majesty's pusiUanimity and not to your good nature, knowing that you work but upon her humour, and not out of any love towards him. The less you make him, the less he shall be able to harm you and yours, and if her Majesty's favour fail him, he will again decUne to a common person. For after revenges, fear them not; for your own father that was esteemed to be the contriver of Norfolk's ruin, yet his son foUoweth your father's son and loveth him. Humours of men succeed not, but grow by occasions and accidents of time and power. Somerset made no revenge on the Duke of Northumberland's heirs. North umberland that now is thinks not of Hatton's issue. KeUeway lives that murdered the brother of Horsey, and Horsey let him go by aU his lifetime. I could name you a thousand of those, and therefore after fears are but prophecies, or rather conjectures, from causes remote. Look to the present and you do wisely. His son shaU be the youngest Earl of England but one, and if his father be now kept down, WiU Cecil shall be able to keep as many men at his heels as he, and more too. He may also match in a better house than his, and so that fear is not worth the fearing. But if the father continue, he wiU be able to break the branches and puU up the tree, root and aU. Lose not your advantage. If you do, I read your destiny. Yours to the end, W. R. [P.S.] Let the Queen hold BothweU1 while she hath him. He wiU ever be the canker of her estate and safety. Princes are lost by security and pre served by prevention. I have seen the last of her good days and aU ours after his Uberty. W. R. [Endorsed "Sir Walter Raleigh."]2 Anything more unknightly to the man who had been his chief and his benefactor, anything more contemptible than the methods by which Raleigh here tempts the Prime Minister, I have not met in the chronicles of English history. It is true that we must weigh each word, that we must read between the lines and study the examples given; but the meaning is clear. The advice is Death to Essex means a life of prosperity to Cecil. How else could "the son of Essex" become the youngest Earl in England but one? 1 A name given here to Essex. 2 Salisb. Papers, x. 439. CHAPTER XIV JUDGMENTS The degree of success that attends political actions determines the phrases by which they are known. What would have been remembered as a coup d'etat, as a new method of turning out an old government, was entered in history as a "rebellion," because it failed. An independent attempt of Captain Thomas Lea1 to force the Queen to send a pardon to the imprisoned Earls, and an order to have them brought before herself to be heard and judged fairly, hastened and embittered proceedings. When apprehended in the court and reproached with his intended coercion of his sovereign, Lea said with some insight into her character and her future that he "would have made her angry for one half hour, to have lived the merrier all the rest of her life." He loved his general Essex more than his own life, and was willing to risk it to bless his Queen and country by trying to get him set free. Short work was made with him; examined on the 13th, to ensure consternation, he had a hasty form of trial on the 16th and was executed on the 17 th of February. Eleven days after their apprehension, Essex and his main sup porter, Southampton, were brought before their judges "in West minster Hall in a court made of purpose, square and spacious. . . . At the lower end of the Hall sat the Queen's Counsell, and at their backs, a space railed in for the Earls."2 In a bill of the Queen's charges3, rendered on 28th September, after all the domestic decorations and the Robes of the Garter for the French King, the last item runs, "For Brodecloth, Saye, canvas nailes and workmanship employed and used in Westminster Hall at the arraignment ofthe two late Earls of Essex and Southampton." Everyone knows the pitiful story, every historian and letter writer 1 D.S.S.P. cclxxviii. 61, 62. Vincent Hussey, 94. Cecil to Carew, March 4th. 2 Ibid, et seq. * Add. MS. 5751. ch. xiv] JUDGMENTS 207 of the period record it more or less fully, and it need not here be repeated in extenso. I have made transcripts at the Record Office of over 200 closely written pages concerning the whole matter, but they cannot be utilised here. Some of the special incidents and sayings which bear on the main question must, however, be pointed out. The prisoners did not seem to notice the names of their judges or jury, as read out to them, until the name of Lord Grey was called. Then Essex jogged Southampton on the elbow and laughed a scornful laugh. He knew no good was intended then, when a chief enemy was set in power of place over them. Essex asked if they might challenge any of their peers for known inimical feeling, as meaner persons might. This right of English jury custom was denied them. Chamberlain's account becomes interesting because of his evident impartiality, and it shews how the list of charges, like a ball of snow, gathered as it rolled. On February 24th, 1 600-1, he wrote to Carleton : "The 1 9th hereof the Erles of Essex and South ampton were arraigned at Westminster before the Lord Treasurer, the Lord High Steward of England for that day, and 25 of their peeres, of whom were 9 Erles and 1 6 barons. The only matters objected were his practice to surprise the court, his comming into London to raise rebellion, and the defending his house against the Queen's forces. To the two later he answered that he was driven for safety of his life, to the former that it was a matter only in con sultation, and not resolved upon, and if it had taken effect, it was only to prostrate himselfe at her Majestie's feet, and there manifest such matters against his enemies as should make them odious, remove them from about her person, and recal him to her former favour. This was the summe of his answer, but delivered with such bravery, and so many wordes that a man might easilie perceve that, as he had ever lived popularly, so his chiefe care was to leave a good opinion in the people's minds now at parting. But the worst of all was his many and lowd protestations of his faith and loyaltie to the Quene and state, which no doubt caught and carried away a great part of the hearers; but I cannot be so easilie led to beleve protestations (though never so deep) against manifest proofe, yet I must needes say that one thing stickes much in many men's mindes, that, whereas divers preachers were commanded the Sunday before 208 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. to deliver to the people, amongst his other treasons, that he had complotted with Tirone, and was reconciled to the Pope, and whereas Mr Attorney (Coke), at Tom Lea's arraignment, averred the same combining with Tirone, and that he had practised by the means of Seminarie priests with the Pope and the King of Spaine to be king of England, there was no such matter once mentioned at his arraignment, and yet there was time enough for it between nine o'clock in the morning until almost seven at night. "..."The Erie of Southampton spake very well (but methought somewhat too much, as well as the other) and as a man that would faine live, pleaded hard to acquite himself, but all in vaine, for it could not be, whereupon he descended to'entreatie, and moved great com miseration; and though he were generally well liked, yet methought he was somewhat too lowe and submisse, and semed too loth to die before a prowde ennemie." In most accounts, together with the true facts, Essex was charged with the "seeking to deprive her Majestie of life and government, to sett the crowne upon his own head." Dr Smedley kindly allowed me to see his manuscripts belonging to this period, among which is an account of the proceedings. It does not vary much from other accounts, but has been written by a more friendly auditor than most. "The chief points were the rebelling at Essex House, the seeking to deprive her Majesty of life and government, to set the Crowne upon his owne head," etc. Mr Attorney Coke declared Essex guilty of treason upon each count — and taunted him with ingratitude for the favours he had received from her Majesty! "My hope is that you shall be Robert the last Earl of your house, that would have been Robert the first King of this land." "Also the Earle of Southampton hath received divers favours from her Majestie, though for his misdemeanour, it hath pleased her to thinke worse of him." Essex in his reply said: "That which I speak is more in justifica tion of this noble man that stands by me, and the rest that are ingaged with me, whose hartes are purely affected and whose bodies are able to serve their Sovereign and Country." He saw, indeed, that "the commandment of allegiance could not protect the Erie of Southampton from the late injury done unto him by the Lord Gray," and therefore he resolved to stand upon his guard, "having certen xiv] JUDGMENTS 209 advertisements that his private enemies were up in armes against him.... I have had verie unjust courses used against me, papists sought out to accuse me, scriveners to counterfeit my hand.... Here the Lord Gray stood up and protested he did not now malise the Erie of Southampton, for he delighted not to presse men of an abject fortune, and that which he offered to him in the street was in respect of an injurye (which quoth the Earl of Southampton, was never meant you). The Lord Steward commanded an end of private expostulation." Depositions were read. Sir Ferdinando Gorges, Governor of Plymouth, had been written to that he should come up and meet Essex on 2nd February. He came up without leave, "which being known to Sir Walter Rawley his kinsman and friend, he asked him to meet him on the water, and advised him to depart instantly." Then were urged their consultations at Drury House, and "the Earl of Southampton replied with protestations of all loyalty in his hart towards her Majestie. And in that he offended her, he was hartilie sorie and did in all humbleness beseech her pardon, but touching the consultation at Drury House manie things were propounded but nothing resolved upon (all being left in the end to the Erie of Essex himself). 'But' (quoth he) 'put the case as you would have it, it was advised both to attempt the Court and the Tower at once; neither ofthe two was done, how then can it be treason? It is true that we did consult at Drury House about the securing my Lord of Essex his accesse, free from impediments, and that for no other end than to prostrate ourselves at her Majesty's feet, humbly submitting ourselves to her mercie, and laying forth our grievances to herself, whereof we thought she had not soe true information from others. This was the end of our meeting, and with no treasonable thought When I was in London I heard not the Proclamation... I never drew my sword all day. I am charged to have carried a pistol. I had none when I went out, but (being in the street) I saw one having a pistol. I desired it of him arid had it, but it had no stone, nor could it have hurt a fly. At my return to Essex House I did what I could to hinder the shooting. For that I was too far carried away with love to my Lord of Essex I confess to have offended, that being the only scope of all my purposes in this business Good Mr Attorney' (quoth he) ' let me ask you what s. s. 14 210 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. you think in your conscience we would have done to the Queene, if we had gained the Court?' 'I protest upon my soule and conscience ' (quoth Mr Attorney) ' I doe beleeve she should not have long lived after she had been in your power. Note but the pre cedents of former ages, how long lived Richard the Second after he was surprised in the same manner? The pretence was alike for the removing of certain counsellors, but yet shortly after it cost him his life.'... The judges were required to deliver their several opinions for the question before propounded by the Earl of Southampton, and they said it was treason." Then was read the deposition of Sir Charles Danvers, that before Christmas Essex had deliberated to secure his access to the Queen by surprising the Captain of the Guard. He had rather wished the Earl to fly with a few friends; but he had agreed to the consultations at Drury House, from the love he bore to the Earl of Southampton, to whom he owed his life. Then the deposition of Sir Christopher Blount was read. Essex answered: "These men are in the same case as we are, and speak as men that would fain live. I was drawne into this by those which have the Queen's ear and do abuse it, informing unto her many untruths of me Being demanded who were the persons at whom he principally aimed, he answered Mr Secretary, My Lord Cobham, and Sir Walter Raleigh. The Lord Cobham rose up to excuse himself, but the Lord Steward cut him short. Then Bacon spoke against the Earls." Essex resumed at the close: "'I was informed by those of good credit that an honourable, grave and wise councillor did with tears lament the courses which they were taking with us When I spake in London about the Infanta it was because it had been told me that Mr Secretary should say to one of his fellow councillors that the Infanta's title comparatively was as good as any other in the succession. Besides, I saw so many oppressions in the State that I was desirous to sacrifice myself in the redress thereof by doing anything that a loyal subject could do for the prevention of these imminent evils.' Herewith Mr Secretary on his knees asked leave to answer the Earl: 'I stand here in the person of an honest man, and you there in the place of a traitor, wherefore I do challenge you, if you dare, to name the Councillor.'" *iv] JUDGMENTS 211 Essex naturally refused, but said that Southampton had heard it too; on which Cecil turned to Southampton: "Then, my Lord, I conjure you by all the love and friendship that hath been betwixt us... to name the Councillor." Southampton asked the opinion of the court as to whether he should. " I protest (quoth Mr Secretarie) before God and heaven that you shall do your prince and country a most acceptable service, for I were a very unworthie man to hold that place I do in the state if I were touched in that sort." South ampton named Sir William Knollys, and Cecil begged he should be sent for, which was done, and Sir William Knollys cleared him by saying it was only in the discussion of the seditious book by Doleman the Jesuit (which had been dedicated to the Earl of Essex in 1595). Cecil had thought it strange that Doleman should give equal right to the Infanta in succession. I pause over this incident to consider Cecil's terror and excite ment at Essex's reference to himself, so out of all proportion to the statement, even if it had been true. The laws of inheritance in this country formed one bar, the determinations of Henry VIII's will formed another, which would prevent any legal mind accepting the Infanta's title, though she had descended from the blood royal of England. But it may be remembered that Essex, calling to the people in London on the 8th, had said not only that his adversaries "would give the Kingdom to the Infanta!" but also that "the crown of England is sold to the Spaniard!"1 It is more than likely that, through some of the many spies who had sought the liberality of Essex, some hint had been given that Cecil was among the English pensioners of the King of Spain. Unable to charge him without producing authority which might have injured others, Essex found himself in the position of Hamlet, when, unsure of his ghost, he made up his mind to test its utterances by a personal method and said The play's the thing Wherein I'll catch the conscience of the King (11. 2). Thus Essex hazarded the remark about the Infanta as possible heiress to the Crown — a statement which could more easily be 1 Comp. note to Cecil's Letter to Carew. Camden Series, 82, p. 68, also Add. MS. 5482, f . 20 b. 14—2 212 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. discussed. Cecil's consternation would prove to his satisfaction (though he was either generous enough or prudent enough to say no more then) that there was something in the charge. As we now know certainly that Cecil received not only secret presents from Spain during his whole life under James I, but also a regular pension, it is much more than likely he had begun to do so even towards the close of Elizabeth's reign. This was a much more fitting period for the Spanish King to begin to tempt the English courtiers than the commencement of the reign of her legitimate and approved heir. One phrase among the letters of Sir John Digby, ambassador at Madrid, who discovered this weighty secret, suggests the idea that the pension was "con tinued."1 No wonder that Cecil was excited. It was bad enough to discuss the Succession at all, to discuss a Spanish Succession worse, but to be charged as guilty of taking Spanish gold ! That would soon make him change places with the "traitors" (prisoners at the bar). Meanwhile "the Queen's Council objected to the Earl of Essex his hypocrisy in having in his house continual preachers, yet he was content to promise toleration in religion." The Earl of Southampton said he was ignorant of the law; that he had stirred only because of his love to the Earl. He saw his friend's case very desperate for favour, and so he consulted with him and others to clear the passage to her Majesty for him. He craved pardon if he had transgressed. "Her Majestie being God's Lieutenant upon earth, I hope she will imitate Him in looking into the heart." The deposition of Sir John Davies was then read. The judges agreed that to make a passage to the Queen was treason. Then they read the examinations of the Earl of Rutland, Lord Cromwell, and Lord Sandys. The Earl of Essex interrupted and said: "Make me as wicked as any of your harts would, but do not make me so absurd as to go into the city after such a fashion, if I apprehended any imminent danger." Mr Attorney objected to the Earl of Southampton that he was a papist and had conversation with priests. He answered that he knew no priests but only Wright,, and he had had no conversation with him. The Attorney next 1 Letters of Sir John Digby. in S. R. Gardiner's History of England, 1863,. vol. 11. app. p. 356; also note p. 68. -xiv] JUDGMENTS 213 charged Lord Essex with directing Captain Lea to attempt the ¦Queen, which he denied. Mr Attorney then stated that the Earl of Essex had said he must go home for a black bag, that it should tell no tales how he had been betrayed in London. "You were confident the city was with you, and in your pride and overweening of your heart, you contemned the Queen's Royal authoritie, and the Herald would not be hearkened unto." The Earl said that he did not believe the herald had authority to read a Proclamation, being a man of noted dishonesty1- "I never attempted anything but to serve my Queen and country by making her understand us." Mr Attorney told him, "It was impossible but your purpose must be to sett the Crown upon your head for you had brought so many Earls, Barons, and gentlemen of great houses into this business with you. How could it be thought you could have rewarded them out of such a broken estate as yours?" Then Bacon remarked that "the variety of matters hath severed the judgments of the Lords," and pointed out the legal bearings of each step. The Lord Steward bade the Lieutenant of the Tower remove the prisoners from the bar, and asked each Lord singly if they were guilty of treason. And all held them guilty. They were recalled to hear their sentence. Essex said that he would not contemn the Queen's mercy, but he would not desire it. The Earl of Southampton desired her Majesty's mercy according to the innocency of his heart. He never had a disloyal thought in his life. He desired the Lord Steward and the Peers to be intercessors for him. The Commission for the trial was dissolved at 6 o'clock in the evening, having sat since 9 o'clock in the morning. The axe turned towards them, the prisoners were led away back to their cells in the Tower that Thursday night — Essex to come forth no more until the last scene at the block. It may be noted in this account, as well as in that of Chamberlain, that, except in the words of the Proclamation charge and the vituperations of Attorney-General Coke, there was no allusion to Essex having intended usurpation ofthe crown, no evidence brought forward, no judgment made upon such a charge. The advisers of 1 There is a case against Dethick in the uncalendared Court of Requests Papers. 214 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. the Crown evidently thought it a sufficient, as it certainly was an easier and more logical, process, to try to secure against him a particular rather than a universal affirmative conclusion. If they convicted him, that was all that they wanted. It seems almost necessary to cite a third report of the proceedings, partly because it records some facts not mentioned in any other account, and partly because it shewed Englishmen at that crisis 'as others saw them.' It was preserved among the papers of Winwood, the ambassador in Paris, being a copy in his own handwriting of a letter purporting to have been written by the French ambassador in London, M. de Boisisse, to the Due de Rohan. Doubts have been thrown upon the letter by some, because the ambassador afterwards -denied having written it; but, if the details are carefully examined, one can find no reason to doubt that either M. de Boisisse was present at the trial and made a report of it, or that some one representing him did so. An official denial might have been based on policy, on its being only a copy, on its having been improperly secured, on many things. Apart from natural errors in proper names, even in dates, the facts seem to be fairly accurate, though stated in a partisan spirit. Copy of a letter from Monsieur de Boisisse (the French ambassador then residing in England) to Monsieur de Rohan1. De Londres 4 mars 1600. O.S. Monsieur, Je croy que le malheur qui est arrive au Conte d'Essex quand vous esties en Angleterre, vous a fait juger soudainement queUe seroit Tissue de ceste tragedie. LaqueUe ayant este accompagnee a son commencement de beaucoup d'infortuns et de disgrace, il s'en est ensuivi la fin, teUe qu'un chacun la redoubtoit, pleine de cruaute et de tristesse; qui a este un Jugement de mort, contre le Conte d'Essex, et le Conte de Southampton. Auquel ayant assiste, par un desir de veoir une chose si nouveUe, et aussi de remarquer la contenance de ses Ennemis, qui l'avoyent petit a petit pousse a ceste ruine; j'ay pense que ce feroit trop oubUer mon devoir, si je ne vous escrivois particuUerement, tout ce qui e'est passe en ce Jugement. Le I7™e de Fevrier, le Conte d'Essex s'estant rendu entre les mains de l'Admiraut sur les onze heures de la nuict, avec promesses d'infinies curtoisies, fut mene le lendemain a la Tour; et peu apres les Contes de Southampton et de Rutland, le ChevaUer Christophe Blond beaupere dudit Conte, Ferdinando Gorge Gouverneur de [Plymouth] Charles Davers, et quelques 1 Winwood, Mem. 1. 296. xiv] JUDGMENTS 215 autres Gentilshommes, qui furent imprisonnes autre part. Ou ayant este quelque temps, il arriva qu'un Capitain nomme Lee, estime un de plus braves d'Angleterre, fort serviteur dudit Conte, se hazarda de dire a un sien amy, n'y a-t-il point moyens, que sept ou huit bons compagnons commes nous sommes, puissent se jetter aux pieds de sa Majeste, en despit de ces Milords et de ce petit Bossu, pour luy remonstrer l'injure qu'on fait a tant de brave noblesse, qui est du tout innocente de ce qu'on luy impose, et qui pourroit quelque jour luy rendre quelque bon service. L'autre luy respondit froidement, qu'il ne trouvoit point de moyen. Or bien dit il, je luy en parlera quant je devrois mourir; aussi bien, j'ay une requeste a luy presenter pour mes affayres, et par mesme moyen, je pourray aisement executer mon desseign. Ce que l'autre ayant entendu, il ne falUt (comme c'est la coustume des Anglois de se trahir l'un l'autre), d'en advertir le Secretaire Cecille. Lequel prenant 1'occasion par les cheveux, se servoit de ce que ce Capitaine avoit dit, et le changeant tout au rebours, fait acroire a la Royne avec ceux de son party, qu'un tel avoit este trouve par le ChanceUer en sa Chambre, ou eUe a accoustume de manger, avec un pistolet pour cest effect. La Royne tout epouvantee, et craignant fort la mort, commandait qu'il soit crueUement puni: Ce qui ne fut pas differe car il fut plus tost execute, qu'il ne sceut 1'occasion pourquoi on le faisoit mourir. La peine fut teUe, on luy arracha la nature, puis on la jetta au feu; apres, on luy ouvroit le ventre, luy arrachant le cceur et les entraiUes, ce qu'estant consume par le feu, on fait plusieurs quartiers de son corps, lesqueles ils meirent en parade sur les Tours de la ViUe (Hz ont accoustume de punir ainsi, ceux qu'ik appeUent Traistres). Or l'execution de ce Gentilhome estant fait, les ennemis du Conte d'Essex ayant beau jeu, ne manquent point de belles raisons pour retenir ceste princesse en sa premiere craincte, et luy persuader, que cela venoit de la part du Conte d'Essex, qu'il y en avoit bien d'autres qui trainoient un mesme desseing. Surquoy, eUe commande a ceux de son Conseil d'examiner le Conte d'Essex et le Conte de Southampton, et d'en faire brieve Justice. Lesquelz ne voulantz respondre, demandent d'estre juges devant leurs payrs. Ce qu'estant accorde (plutost pour forme de Justice, et pour faire mieux acroire au peuple qu'ik estoyent Traistres, que par desir qu'ik y eussent), ik sont conduictz en la grande SaUe de Westminster le premier jour de Mars, pour respondre aux accusations qu'on leur mettoit dessus. Leur juges, estoyent neuf Contes et Seize Barons. Le Grand Seneschal, qu'ik appeUent Stuuard, estoit le Grand Tresorier, fort mal propre pour ceste charge. II y avoit aussy huict ConseUiers de leur Parlement, lesquek estoyent assis un peu bas que les Pairs. Les Noms de Contes estoyent, le Conte de Oxford, Parent fort proche du Secretaire, le Conte Shreusbery, \>rand Ennemi du Conte d'Essex, le Conte Derby, le Conte Sussex, le Conte d'Erford, le Conte Oustre, le Conte Nottingham qui est I'Admiral, le Conte Cumberland, le Conte de Lyncolne. Les Nom s de Barons, Chandos, Darcey, 216 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Thomas Havart, Cobham, Gray, Bourgley, frere du Secretaire, Riche, beaufrere de Conte d'Essex, Compton, Lumley, Hunsdund, qui est le ChambeUan, De la Wane, Morlay; il y avait aussy un Viconte que s'appeUe Byndon. Les Accusateurs estoyent un sergent en Loy, et Advocat de la Royne qu'ik appeUent le Atturnay Bacon. Les Accusations estoyent en General, qu'il n'estoit Sorty de sa Maison que pour esmouvoir le peuple a le suivre; qu'il avoit empesche l'Heraut de faire sa Proclamation, qu'il avoit fait resistence en une rue, ou son escuyer fut tue, son beaupere fort blesse, et luy mis en grand danger de sa vie ayant eu le chapeau perce de deux harquebuzades; qu'il avoit retenu le ChanceUier, le Chef de Justice, le Conte de Oustre, et KnoUes son oncle, prisonniers en sa Maison; qu'il estoit papiste; qu'U retenoit les Jesuits en sa Maison; qu'il vouloit usurper la Couronne; qu'il avoit de grands Intelli gences en Escosse, et en Irelande avec le Conte de Tyrone. Bref, qu'il avoit vendu la ViUe de Londres a Plnfante, et qu'il en avoit receu quelque Argent. Voila ce que generaUement ilz luy objecterent. Les Accusations principaUes, et dont ils f aisoyent plus de bruit, sont ceUes cy : D'avoir retenu le ChanceUier, le Chef de Justice, le Conte de Oustre, et KnoUes, prisoniers; d'estre sorty de sa Maison; et d'avoir escrit une lettre, par laquelle ik se forcoyent de le rendre coulpable. Les autres n'estoyent que pour le charger d'avantage, et pour le rendre plus odieux. Ayant fait que bien peu d'instance devant que respondre a toutes ses Accusations, il pria ses Juges de luy permettre une chose, que n'est point refusee aux personnes les plus Viles; c'estoit, de n'estre point juge par ses ennemis propres, et de reprocher ceux qu'il voudroit. II luy fut respondu par les huict ConseiUiers fort maUcieusment, qu'il n'estoit pas possible, que ses ennemis, Gens de grand qualite, quand ils avoyent fait le serment On mi honour, comme ik disent (qui vaut autant que sur mon honeur), qu'ik voulussent rompre un serment, qui leur doit estre plus cher cent fois que la vie. Cette demande luy estant deniee avec beaucoup d'iniquite, il respondit a tout mot a mot avec une teUe asseurance et contenance, qu'il rendoit ses ennemis si estonnes, que voulant parler contre luy ik demeuroyent muetz; ou s'ik parloyent, c'estoit avec un begayement qui tesmoignoit assez leur crainte, accompagnee d'une mauvaise volonte. II disoit soventes fois, qu'il n'estoit pas venu la pour sauver sa vie, mais pour deffendre son honneur; qu'il y avoit long temps que ses ennemis le desiroyent la pour avec leur chiquanries et leur tortues inventions luy faire perdre la teste, ce que cer- tainement n'estoit point si cache qu'U ne le fut connu a un chacun. En outre, cecy doit bien tenir le premier Ueu de la plus grand mechancete qu'il se puisse commettre, c'est, que les loix d'Angleterre veulent, que les tesmoigns soient examines devant les juges, et devant le criminel; au contraire, boule- versant les loix, et les servant a leur poste, meirent en avant quelques fausses examinations du Conte de Rutland et du ChevaUer Christophle Blond et Charles Davers, lesquek devoyent estre ouys, et non pas le papier, qui xiv] JUDGMENTS 217 estoit rempU de tout ce qui pouvoit nuire audit Conte d'Essex. Et pour mieux joiier leur role, ils feirent venir Ferdinand Gorge, le plus grand Amy qui eust le Conte d'Essex, etle premier qui sortit avec luy; lequel, corrumpu par ses ennemis avec promesses de ne mourir point, accusa le Conte d'Essex, mais depuis, vaincu par sa Conscience, et des demandes du Conte qui le pressoyent fort, il confessa que le dit Conte ne luy avoit jamais park qu'U eust desseing de sayser la Royne, comme ses ennemis luy reprochoyent. Or ne se contentant pas de ceste faussete, et d'autres petites Galanteries de leur bon esprit, ik font venir le Secretaire, comme personne interposee en leur tragedie. Lequel ayant plus de deux ans passes, bien songe a ce qu'il avoit a dire, tonna une quantite de paroles contre le Conte d'Essex. Lequel n'eut faute de responce de moyens pour maintenir au Secretaire, qu'il avoit «u IntelUgence avec le feu Roy d'Espagne 1'annee de la Grande Flotte. Ce que picqua si fort le Secretaire (pour en estre paraventure quelque chose) qu'il se prit a crier tout hault, qu'il ne feroit jamais service a sa Majeste, si on ne luy ostoit la teste comme a un Traistre. Et continuant son discours, il se mit a genoux, protestant devant Dieu de sa FideUite (il n'avoit pas oubUe ce jour la petite boiste, car en ma vie je ne le veis plus beau). Aussitost les Pairs se leveront de leur places, et le chapeau au poing, le prierent se relever; disant, qu'ik croyoyent fermement, que sa Majeste n'avoit point ¦de melUeur Serviteur que luy, et que sa FideUite leur estoit assez connue (a leur contenance ik redoubtoyent plus ce petit homme, que leur conscience et que leur Royne). Le Secretaire ayant done relasche a ses injures, un peu apres les Advocatz meirent fin a leur Accusation, et Messieurs les Pairs a leur confitures, et a la biere; car ce pendant que le Conte et les Advocatz playdoyent, Messieurs bauffroyent comme s'ik n'eussent mange de 15 jours, prenant aussi force Tabac, entre autres le Conte Cumberland; puis, s'en aUerent en une SaUe pour donner leur voix; ou, bien saouls et bien yvres de Tabac, condemnerent les deux Contes au mesme suppUce que le Capitaine Lee, les appeUans Traistres et RebeUes. Le Conte d'Essex oyant prononcer son Arrest, fut aussy content et asseure comme si on l'eust mene dancer avec la Royne. Le Jugement dura depuis huict heurs de matin jusques a sept du soir, auquel une quantite de Gentilz- homes et de Dames se trouverent; lesquek ayant lasche la boucle de leur yeux, verserent tant de larmes, que si les Juges n'eussent eu un courage de Tygre (que ne cherche que le sang) ils eussent sans doute revoque leur Sentence. Depuis peu U a couru un bruit, que le Conte Southampton avoit sa grace, et que le Conte Rutland, qui n'est pas encore juge, seroit quite pour d'Argent. II m'a este dit aussi de bonne part, que le Conte d'Essex le petit Cecue ayant celebre la Cene ensemble, est qu'Uz estoyent recon^ cilies. Voyla tout ce que j'ay peu veoir et recognoistre de ce malheur; lequel pour estre arrive a la personne d'Angleterre qui a plus de vertus, et qui cherit plus la France, ne peut qu'il n'apporte un extreme regret a un chacun, 2i 8 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. principalement a vous, qui pour estre extremement vertueux et scavant en la valeur de ses gaknds, la recognoissies mieu que personne cette perte inestimable. C'est pourquoy je mettray fin a ce triste discours me contentant seulement du jugement que vous en ferez, et de l'honneur que j'auray, si j'ay tant de faveur en vostre endroit, d'estre tenu Monsieur, pour Vostre tres humble & tres obeissant serviteur, de Thumert. De Londres 4 Mars 1600, S.N. Winwood wrote to Cecil on 20th April that M. de Rohan, or one of his people, divulged this French libellous letter. A copy came to the States agent, as written by Boisisse, from whom he received it. The signature seemed to avow the same and many other circumstances, as well as the date. The day afterwards the ambassador despatched La Motte with letters to the King. M. de Messe said that his brother-in-law Boisisse was too wise to write such a letter, but his son might do it, and their signatures were alike. "M. de Fontaine will return soon and may clear it, he has seen the original letter, and thinks it by the son." He had been told that one jealous of the good reputation of M. de Boisisse had written it. Boisisse is willing to deny it1. Southampton's wife and mother, probably present at the trial among the ladies mentioned, certainly, if they had courage to be present, among those who had shed tears, wrote to Cecil at once. ' The first is dated by the writer's words. The woeful news to me of my Lord's condemnation passed this day makes me in this my most amazed distress address myself unto you and your virtues as being the only likely means to yield me comfort. Therefore I do beseech you and conjure you by whatsoever is dearest unto you that you wiU vouchsafe so much commiseration unto a most afflicted woman as to be my means unto her sacred Majesty that I may by her divine self be permitted to come to prostrate myself at her feet, to beg for mercy for my Lord. Oh ! let me I beseech you in this my great distress move you to have this compassion of me I sue for, and in doing so you shaU obUge me to acknowledge myself most bound unto you, to pray for your honour and prosperity. So kept aUve only with hope to obtain mercy I restlessly remain the most unhappy and miserable Elizabeth Southampton2. 1 Winwood, Mem. 1. 315. 2 Salisb. Papers, xi. 70. xiv] JUDGMENTS 219 About the same date the mother pleaded : God of heaven knows I can scarce hold my hand steady to write and less hold steady in my heart how to write, only for what I know, which is to pray mercy to my miserable son. Good Mr Secretary, let the bitter passion of a perplexed mother move you to plead for her only son for whom, if he had led the dance of this disloyalty, I protest to God I would never sue, but being first surprised by an alUance, seduced and circumvented by that wicked acquaintance and conversation, good Sir give me leave and believe that with duty nature may speak and my continual tears may plead for mercy. It appeared to me many times his earnest desire to secure her Majesty's favour, his doleful discontented behaviour when he could not obtain it, how apt despair made him at length to receive evil counsel and foUow such company. I rather fear it than know certainly what bewitched him that he should not know of practice and conspiracy before the execution of it, this induceth much upon my duty. I have examined and do beUeve wiU be found true, he had not forty shilUngs about him nor in his store, yet, upon sale oi land lately before, he might have received a far greater sum, which he refused, and willed it to be paid to his creditors, a thing I think no man would have done that had such a business in hand and at hand. O Good Mr Secretary, as God hath placed you near a Prince, so help to move her Majesty to do Uke a God whose mercy is infinite, which I hope may be with her safety, when the head of this confusion is taken away. Nothing is fitter than her safety, nor any virtue can better become her place and power than mercy, which let my prayer move you to beg for me and God move her Majesty to grant the most sorrowful and afflicted mother. M.S.1 Failure seems to change the characters of men who have ex perienced nothing but success. Hardly had Essex been condemned than a radical change came over him in thought, speech, and behaviour. There is an often repeated romantic story regarding him at that period, which has been doubted of late; but several other incidents tend to corroborate it, and it is very much in harmony with the romantic nature of the relations between Elizabeth and her favourites. In the palmy days of his fortunes it was said that the Queen gave Essex a ring by which he could appeal to her favour when he should come into dire straits. He is said to have remembered this, to have relied on her word, and to have sent the ring to her by the Countess of Nottingham, who shewed it to Cecil, and he advised her to refrain from interfering 1 Salisb. Papers, xi. 71-72. 220 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. with the course of events. It is no argument against this story that no official record has come down of it; such state secrets were "controlled," at least, at that time1. The story survives under various embellishments and variations. Another account finds the cause of the change in Essex in the ultra-Puritanism of his attendant chaplain. Something definite at least had changed the feelings of the unfortunate man. Feeling that he was doomed to die, he gave up all further concern with the affairs of this world. The imaginative nature of his deep-seated religious feelings magnified his faults, even to himself, into crimes, and, with exaggerated humility, he begged pardon of all those whom he had rightly called his enemies. In his utterances there is a pathetic relevance to those of his father in his closing days, when he is said to have written and sung the lines which appear in the 1596 edition of the Paradise of Dainty Devices*. His other- worldliness did not desert him at the block on Ash Wednesday, February 25th, though he would fain have cleared himself, even then, of any disloyalty in intention to the Queen. The reports of his closing hours appeared in every record of the time; Camden's ends as follows: "Thus most piously and truly Christianly died Robert Devereux Earle of Essex in the 34th year of his age No man was more ambitious of glory by virtue, no man more careless of all things else."3 A long breath was drawn in the nation at large when the news spread — by the adversaries of Essex with a sense of relief; by the bulk of the people with a feeling of awed repulsion; by the condemned men in the Tower with a new terror. It is one thing to meet death bravely in a field of battle, with dreams of patriotism, love, and glory; it is another thing to meet it in the shambles of an attainder, with loss and shame and execration. Many confessed what they were told to confess, even though they did not all escape. Bacon, as charged with part of the prosecution, wrote The Declaration of the Treasons of the Earl of Essex to justify the 1 Strickland's Elizabeth, p. 772. 2 " The Complaint of a Sinner " sung by the Earl of Essex, on his death bed in Ireland. It is not in early editions of the collection. 3 Camden, Elizabeth, ed. 1630, book iv. pp. 179-188. xiv] JUDGMENTS 221 Queen and the Council in the eyes of the people (Robert Barker, 1601). It would be interesting to know how much of it he believed. The people responded by singing "Well-a-day" and other ballads in honour of the departed hero, who had carried the fame of England so far1- Richard Bancroft, Bishop of London, was on the hunt for this ballad, as if it had contained a pernicious heresy. "A fellow goeth about the streets selling the Ballads whereof here is a copy enclosed. He giveth it out that the Countess of Essex made it, which induced many to buy. I am told the ballad was ready half a year ago, upon some other occasion. I have sent for the Wardens of the Stationers. These villainous printers trouble me more than I write of."2 (27th Feb. 1 600-1.) Essex had urged James of Scotland to send up ambassadors by the ist of February3 — they did not start till the middle of the month or reach London until the 6th of March. Too late. Their instructions were delayed by "that unfortunate accident." In James' first letter to Cecil under cipher numbers 30 to 10 he says, " 30 doth protest upon his conscience and honour that Essex had never any dealing with him which was not most honourable and avowable. As for his misbehaviour there, it belongs not to 30 to judge of it, for though 30 loved him for his virtues, 30 was in no ways obliged to embrace his quarrels."4 Camden himself said of this "conspiracy": "This commotion which some call a fear and mistrust, others an oversight; others who censured it more hardly termed it an obstinate impatience, and seeking of revenge; and such as spoke worst of it called it an unadvised and indiscreet rashness, and to this day there are few that ever thought it a capital crime."5 A later comparison was drawn between Essex and the Due de Biron. "After Biron had been condemned to death, it was found that he had not been guilty of any of these conspiracies for which he was arraigned; but only had offended the King by writing a discontented letter, and had given the charge of the army to one 1 Roxburgh Ballads, I. nos. 402, 563, 571. 2 Cecil Papers, lxxxvii. a Secret Correspondence of James (Lord Hailes). 4 Camden Series, lxxviii. 73, no. 1. 5 Camden, Elizabeth, ed. 1630, bk. iv. p. 178. 222 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch.xiv whom the King did not like Though Biron had offended in Law he might have been pardoned."1 The tragedy filled the hearts of foreigners with horror, especially in the States and in France. It is not likely that Elizabeth ever heard what people abroad thought of her action. It is impossible to dwell on it here, but there is one letter which I should like to quote. It is written at some place in Flanders, not far from Liege, on the 23rd of March (N.S.), 1601. Good Mr Halynes....Your last I take the date to be about the end of February, or the first inst with you. AU newes here have been of the late Essexical Stirres in England. The States of HoUand do take that Earles death grievously, some have written from thence that England is more bloody than aU the world besydes. I am unwilling to wryte what else they wryte and speake as it soundeth so il and reprochful to that country and nation. This fal of the Earle of Essex, with the late great arrest and con fiscating of HoUanders ships and goods by Spaine, together with the peace of Savoy are three things that concurring at once, can make the States wel able to keep their countenance from laughing.... Many are of opinion and great presumption they have thereof that som few of the States of most secret counseU were privy to the Earl of Essex's designe, and should have concurred to his assistance, some of them have said since his death that their very patron and father was now taken away by the bloody axe of England, who, if he had prevailed, would never have abandoned them. Yours, J. Sauf:2 The Venetian ambassador in Rome wrote to the Doge on April 28th (N.S.): "I am informed from a very sure quarter that the tumults in England, which have cost the Earl of Essex his head, are of Spanish intrigues."3 In his chapter on "Impresses" Camden says, referring to an earlier occasion: "Excellent was that device of the late Lord Essex, who, when he was cast down by sorrow, and yet to be employed in arms, wore a black mourning shield without any figure inscribed 'Par nulla figura Dolor'."4 1 Cecil Papers, xcvn. 13. 2 Foreign Correspondence, Flanders, 1. 3 Venetian Papers, ix. 4 Camden's Remains, 1605. CHAPTER XV CLEARING UP The chief offender having paid the extreme penalty of his audacity, the Privy Council turned to minor matters and smaller men. On February 26th was drawn up a list1 of the prisoners and what course to be taken with them: "Persons already indicted and fit to be arraigned, Sir Christopher Blunt, Sir Charles Danvers, Sir Gelly Mericke, Sir John Davies.... Not yet indicted, but fit to be indicted, five. Already indicted, but to be forborne to be arraigned, but to be fined, 16," among whom are "Sir Henry Carew, Sir Robert Vernon, Sir Ferdinando Gorges, Sir Charles Percy, Sir Joscelin Percy, Robert Catesby. Attainted, and fit to be executed " (a blank, probably intended to have been filled with the name of Southampton). "Fit to be forborne from being indicted but yet to be fined, 16," among whom are Francis and George Manners, John Vernon, Sir Edward Littleton. "To be discharged without bonds, without indictment, arraignment, or fines, 32," among whom were Edward Throgmorton, John Vaughan, John Arden, Francis Kinnersley. "Such as were in the action, and not yet taken, seven," among whom was Sir Christopher Heydon. "Fit to be kept in prison without indictment or any other prosecution against them, Francis Smith," etc. On the 2nd of March Sir John Davies wrote to Cecil that he had not had the help he expected from others, but to him he owed everything, "at what tyme you gave order unto Sir W. Rawley that if I were endited, that it should be stayed, if otherwise that it should go no further."2 He thanks Cecil warmly and offers his faithful service. On the same day Cecil wrote to Mountjoy, "The man that grieveth me to think what may become of him is the poor young Earl of Southampton."3 Then he uses the same phrases as he does in the following letter. 1 Cecil Papers, lxxxiii. 92. 2 Add. MS. 6177/73. * Irish State Papers, cvn. p. 198, also D.S.S.P. cclxxviii. 125. 224 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. In Cecil's historical letter in March to Sir George Carew, explaining fully the course of events, he says that on March the 5th Sir Christopher Blount, Sir Charles Danvers, Sir John Davies, Sir Gelly Meyrick, and Henry Cuffe were all arraigned and condemned. " It remayneth now that I lett you know what is lyke to become of the poore young Earle of Southampton, who, meerely for the love of the Earle hath been drawen into this action, who, in respect that most ofthe conspiracies were at Drury House, where he was always cheefe, and where Sir Charles Davers laye, those that would deale for him (of which number I protest to God I am one, as far as I dare) are much disadvantaged of arguments to save him, and yet, when I consider how penitent he is, and how merciful the Queen is, and never in thought or deed, but in this conspiracy he offended, as I cannot write in despaire, so I dare not flatter myself with hope."1 He helps to date this by saying, "three or four days since arrived the Earl of Mar, ambassador to the King of Scots." Writing to Winwood on March 7th, he says, "yesterday here arrived Earl of Mar."2 On the 1 3th of March Meyrick and Cuffe suffered at Tyburn, and two days afterwards Sir Christopher Blount and Sir Charles Danvers were beheaded in the Tower3. "Danvers had offered £10,000 to redeem his life, yet with a most quiet mind and coun tenance took his death most Christianly." It is quite possible that he was comforted by thinking that if he died for the Drury House conspiracy, it would give his friend Southampton a better chance of escaping (as it certainly did). On March the 22nd the Council indited a letter to Sir John Peyton, Lieutenant ofthe Tower: Whereas we do understand that the Earl of Southampton, by reason of the continuance of his quartern ague, hath a sweUing in his legges and other parts, you may admytt Doctor Paddy, who is acquainted with the state of his bodie, in your presence to have accesse unto him, and to conferre with him for those things that shaU be fitt for his health4. It seems probable that "the continuance" of Southampton's illness had finally crushed his pride, and led him to those effusive 1 Camden Series, 82. D.S.S.P. Cecil seems to forget the Queen's wrath about Southampton's marriage in 1598. 2 Winwood, Mem. 1. 299. 3 Camden's Elizabeth, bk. iv. p. 178 4 Reg. Privy Council. xv] CLEARING UP 225 petitions and confessions which are entered among the Salisbury Papers as "after Feb. 19th 1600-1." By them may have been spread among the Lords of the Council the opinion of his "penitence," expressed openly by Cecil in his correspondence, which encouraged them to grant him this degree of consideration — not much in itself, it is true, but it marks the beginning of the turn of the tide1. Though these effusions are printed in extenso already, they seem important enough to be repeated here, as his contribution to the story of the previous year of his life2. The fourth paper, which appears among the Salisbury Papers as his "Statement." I shall contract, as the facts are noted elsewhere. At an uncertain date, but entered in the Salisbury Papers, vol. xi. p. 72, as "after Feb. 19th 1600-1," occurs the following: Henry Earl of Southampton to the Council My Lordes, I beseech your Lordships bee pleased to receaue the petition of a poore condemned man, who doth, with a lowly and penitent hart, confess his fautes and acknokdge his offences to her Maiestie. Remember, I pray your Lordships, that the longest lyuer amongest men hath but a short time of continewance, and that there is none so iust vppon earth but hath a greater account to make to our creator for his sinnes then any offender can haue in this world. Beleeue that God is better pleased with those that are the instrumentes of mercy then with such as are the persuaders of severe iustice, and forgett not that hee hath promised mercy to the mercifuU. What my fawte hath been your Lordships know to the vttermost, wherein, howsoeuer I have offended in the letter of the law, your Lordships I thinke cannot but find, by the proceedings att my triaU, that my harte was free from any premeditate treason against my souerayne, though my reason was corrupted by affection to my friend (whom I thought honest) and I by that caried headlonge to my ruine, without power to preuent it, who otherwise could neuer haue been induced for any cawse of mine owne to haue hazarded her Maiesties displeasure but in a trifle: yet can I not dispayre of her fauor, nether wiU it enter into my thought that shee who hath been euer so re nowned for her uertues, and especially for clemency, wiU not extend it to mee, that doe with so humble and greeued a spirit prostrate my self att her royaU feete and craue her pardon. O lett her neuer sufer to bee spiled the bloud of him that desiers to Uve but to doe her seruice, nor loose the glory shee shaU gaine in the world by pardoninge one whose harte is without 1 Salisb. Papers, xi. 2 Camden Series, 73, app. 93-100. s. s. 15 226 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. spbtt, though his cursed destiny hath made his actes to bee condemned, and whose Ufe, if it please her to graunte it, shaUbe eternaUy redy to bee sacrifised to accompUsh her least comandement. My lords, there are diuers amongest you to whom I owe particular obU- gation for your fauors past, and to aU I haue euer performed that respect which was fitt, which makes me bould in this manner to importune you, and lett not my faultes now make me seem more vnworthy then I haue been, but rather lett the misery of my distressed estate moue you to bee a mean to her Maiestie, to turne away her heauy indignation from mee. O lett not her anger continew towardes an humble and sorrowfuU man, for that alone hath more power to dead my spirites then any iron hath to kiU my flesh. My sowle is heauy and trobled for my offences, and I shaU soon grow to detest my self if her Maiestie refuse to haue compassion of mee. The law hath hetherto had his proceedinge, wherby her iustice and my shame is sufficiently pubUshed; now is the time that mercy is to be shewed. O pray her then, I beseech your lordships, in my behalf to stay her hand, and stopp the rigorus course of the law, and remember, as I know shee wiU neuer forgett, that it is more honor to a prince to pardon one penitent offender, then with severity to punish mayny. To conclude, I doe humbly entreate your Lordships to sound mercy in her eares, that therby her harte, which I know is apt to receaue any impression of good, may be moued to pity mee, that I may Uue to loose my life (as I have been euer wiUing and forward to venture it) in her service, as your lordships herein shaU effect a worke of charity, which is pleasinge to God; preserue an honest-harted man (howsoeuer now his fautes haue made him seem otherwise) to his contry; winn honor to yourselues, by fauoringe the distressed; and saue the bloud of one who wiU Uue and dy her Maiesties faythfuU and loyaU subiect. Thus, recommendinge my self and my sute to your Lordships' honorable considerations; beseechinge God to moue you to deale effectuaUy for mee, and to inspire her Maiesties royaU harte with the spirite of mercy and compassion towardes mee, I end, remayninge, Your Lordships most humbly, of late Southampton, but now of aU men most vnhappy, H. Wriothesley. At an uncertain date, but entered in the Salisbury Papers, vol. xi. p. 72, as "after Feb. 19th 1600-1" occurs the "Confession of Henry, Earl of Southampton."1 Att my first comminge out of Ireland and vppon the committment of my Lord of Essex, my Lord Mountioy came to my lodginge to Essex howse, where he tould mee that hee had before his cominge foreseen his ruine, and 1 Correspondence of James VI of Scotland, ed. Bruce, p. 96. xv] CLEARING UP 227 desieringe to saue him if it mought bee, had sent a messenger to the King of Skottes to wish him to bethinke him self, and not suffer,. if hee could hinder it, the gouerment of this state to bee wholy in the handes of his ennimies; and if hee would resolue of any thinge that was fitt, he should find him forward to doe him right, as fan as he mought with a safe conscience and his duty reserued to her Maiestie; that hee expected, within a whue after, to receaue answer, which when he did I should know it. Not long after hee towld mee hee had heard from him, and shewed mee a lettre which hee sent him, wherin was nothinge but compUmentes, aUowinge of his reseruations, and referringe him for the matter to the bearer, who deUuered unto him that the King would think of it, and putt himself in a rediness to take any good occation; whereuppon hee sent him againe with this proiect, that hee should prepare an army att a conuenient time, declare his intent, that hee would bee redy to assist him with the army in Ireland, whether hee was goinge, and mought for the healfe of those doe that which was fitt in estabUshinge such a course as should bee best for our contry; houldinge euer his former reseruations. Att this time I lykewise wrote a lettre to the Kyng professinge my self to be wilUnge to doe him seruice, as farr as I mought with my aUeageance to her Majestie, and by the messengers sent him woord that in this course I would assist him with my endeauors and my person. To this dispach wee receaued no answer duringe the time of his aboade heare; but within a while after, the messenger returned, and brought for answer that he lyked the course weU, and would prepare him self for it; but the yeare growinge on, and it beeinge thought by Sir Charles Danvers that ihe army of Ireland would suffice alone, I made my Lord of Essex acquainted by lettres, hee beeinge then att Essex howse, what had been doon, and that opinion hee aUowed of, and it was resolued that I should breake the matter to my Lord Mountioy att my cominge into Ireland, which I did, and hee vtterly reiected it as a thinge which hee could no way thinke honest, and diswaded mee from thinkinge of any more such courses, which resolution I toke and wrote ouer to Sir Charles Danvers heere what I fownd, and that I had geeuen ouer thinkinge of such matters; wheruppon, wilUnge to spend my time in her Majesties seruice, to redeem the fault I had made in thinkinge that which mought bee offensiue to her, I was desierus to seat my self in Ireland, so that the Deputy makinge a motion to mee to stand for the gouerment of Conagh, I desiered that hee would moue it, meaninge, if I could obtayne it, to settle there; which beeinge denied mee, and I vnable to lyue att so great a charge as I could not chuse but bee att there, I resolued presently to go into [the] Low Countries, leauinge him, and parttinge my self without any imagination (as I protest before God) to thinke any more of any matters of that nature, but resoluinge to take my fortune as it should faU out, and as by my meritt hir Majestie should hould me worthy; or, if the woorst happined, that her Majestie should continew her 15—2 228 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. displeasure against mee, which I hoped would not [be], to retire my self into the contry, and Uue quietly and pray for her. I doe protest also before God, I left the Deputy, as I thought and so I assure my self, resolued to doe her Majestie the best seruice hee could, and repentinge that hee had euer thought that which mought offend her. I went into the Low Contries with that mind, and so continewed vntiU, a few dayes before my comminge thence, Mr Littleton came to mee, as he sayed from my Lord of Essex, and towld mee that hee was resolued on the course which is confessed for his coming to the courte; att the hearinge of which I protest before the Majestie of God I was much trobled in my harte, yet because hee protested in it aU sincerely and loyaUy to her Majestie, I sent him woord that I would att any time venture both my fortune and Ufe for him, with any thinge that was honest. Vppon my first seeingp him hee confirmed as much, and what passed afterward concerninge that I nead not speak of, it beeinge so weU knowen. Mr Littleton lykewise towld mee that Sir Charles Danvers was sent into Ireland by my Lord of Essex to perswade my Lord Mountjoy to write a lettre to him wherin hee should compkine of the iU gouerment of the state, and to wishe that some course mought be taken to remooue from about her Majesties person those which weare bad instrumentes, protesting that it should neuer bee knowen tiU hee had been with her Majestie and satisfied her of his intent, and then hee would shew it her, that shee mought see that not only him self, who perhappes shee would thinke desiered it by reason of his discontentmentes and priuate offences, but also those that weare in good estat and in her fauor, wished to. I then towld him that I did not thinke my Lord Deputy would doe it, for I lett him know how I left him, and that I did not thinke there was any spiritt in him to such a course. Within a wliile after I came into England, Sir Charles Danvers returned, and towld me that hee fownd my Lord Deputy much against any such course, and that hee had sett his hart only vppon foUowinge of the Queen's seruice, and thought not of any such matters ; but if he would neades runn that course (which hee did not lyke and gaue him [for] lost in) hee should send him woord, and hee would write to him; this hee towld mee hee yealded to very vnwiUingly, and withaU towld him, that if any there of his. foUowers would goe ouer, hee would not hinder them. For that which was proiected for my Lord of Essex eskape out of my Lord Kepers house, I protest before God I alwayes diswaded from it; and the same euehinge before, not three howers before it should have been attempted, I protested against it vnder my hand, and so brake it, incurringe much imputation amongest them for want of affection to my Lord, and slackness to doe him good. This haue I sett down aU trewly as I can remember it, without ether wronging any or fauoringe my self; and wiU only conclud with this, that I protest before the Almighty God I neuer sett any of these thinges on foote, xv] CLEARING UP 229 or beeinge proiected did instigate any to folow them, nor neuer bare disloyall or vnreuerent hart to her Majestie, but was drawen into them meerly by my affection to my Lord of Essex, whom I thought honest to her and to her state; and, had I not been inuited when I was in the Low Contries to this last woorke, for which I was directly sent by my Lord of Essex, the world should haue wittnessed with me the duty I had borne to her Majestie, and I did not then doute but with my honest endeuors in her seruice in few yeares to haue deserued forgiueness of my former offensiue thoughtes, which I am now by my accursed fortune cutt off from. I doe therfore now prostrate my self att her Majesties princely feete, with a trew penitent sowle for my fautes past, with horror in my conscience for my offences, and detestation of mine owne Ufe if it bee displeasinge vnto her. I doe with aU humiUty craue her pardon. The shedinge of my bloud can no way auayle her; my Ufe, if it please her to graunt, shaU euer bee redy to be lost in her seruice, and, lett my sowle haue no place in Heauen, if euer I harbour thought in my harte which I shaU thinke may bee any way offensiue vnto her, but remayne to the end of my dayes as honest and faythfuU a subiect vnto her as is in the world; and I doe on the knees of my hart beseech her Majestie not to imagen that these are the wordes of a condemned man, who, fearinge death, would promise any thinge, and afterward, beeinge free, would as soon forgett it. O, no ! The world wiU wittness with mee, that in her seruice I haue geuen sufficient testemony, more then once, that I feare nether death nor danger, but they are protestations that proceed from the honest harte of a penitent offender. O, the Kinge of Heauen hath promised forgiueness of their sinnes that with sorrow and fayth aske pardon, and i that doe know her Majestie to be gratius, and doe with soe greiued a mind begg forgiueness, cannot dispayre but hope that the God of Mercy, who doth neuer shutt his eares to the afflicted that cry unto him, howsoeuer they haue offended, nor is euer weary of beeinge compassionate to those which vnfaynedly repent and caU to him for grace, and hath promised forgiueness of sinnes to those that forgeeue in this world, wiU moue her Majestie to pyty mee, that I may lyve to make the world know her great merritt and serue her; for whom I wiU euer pray and lyue and dy her humble loyaU and faythfuU vassaU. [Unsigned] There bee two thinges which I haue forgotten to sett in thek right places, your Lordship must bee therfore pleased to take them in this post script. One is, that not longe before the day of our misfortune my Lord of Essex towld mee that Sir Henry NeuiU, that was to goe embassador into Fraunce, was a man wholy att his deuotion, and desiered to runn the same fortune with him, and therfore hee towld mee that hee would appoint him to come to my lodginge in Drury House, and I should make him acquainted with his porpose of goinge to the Courte, which I did ackordingly, after this manner; I towld him that I vnderstood by Cuff (who had lykewise made 230 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. mee know his disposition) that hee had deuoted him selfe to my Lord of Essex, and that hee desiered to engadge him self in any thinge wherby his fortune mought bee re-estabUshed. If it weare so, I had somewhat to say to him from my Lord of Essex, and therfore wished him to lett mee know his mind. Hee answered mee, that what Mr Cuff had sayed hee would performe, therfore desiered mee to say on. So I deUuered vnto him what my Lord of Essex intended, which hee aUowed of, and concluded that when hee should bee appointed, hee would bee att the Courte before, to gyue him fartherance with himself and his people. The other is : that not longe agoe my Lord of Essex wrote to the King of Skottes which hee shewed mee, of three sides of paper and more, the effect of which as I remember was, to discredite the faction (as he termed it) contrary vnto him, and to entreate him to send hether the Earle of Marr with commandement to folow those directions which hee should geeue, and with aU in what woordes hee should geeue him notice if hee would performe it, which he receaued, and that was it he ware in the blak purse about his necke. He drew also, as he towld mee, instructions for him against his cominge, but I neuer saw them. This haue you, I protest before God, aU that I remember, or doe know, wherin I once again beseech your Lordship to marke, that I haue neuer been mouer nor instigator of any of these thinges, but drawen into them by my best frendes. At an uncertain date, but entered in the Salisbury Papers, vol. xi, p. 72, as "after Feb. 19th 1600-1" occurs the following: Henry, Earl of Southampton to Sir Robert Cecil. Sir, because I receaued a charge from you and the rest of the Lords, when I last spake with you,' that I should conceale the matter which was in hand, I thought fitt to acquaynt you with what I fownd this morninge by the Lieuetenant, who, talkinge with mee, made me see that he knew as much as I could teU him. From whence hee had it I know not, but I protest before God I haue trewly obayed your commandement, and haue not opened my mouth of it to any, nor say this to bring blame vppon any, but only to free my self from imputation. But now, seeinge my cheef hope is in your desier to effect my good, next vnto the fauor of God and the mercy of her Majestie, I cannot but remember you of thease particulers, which before I had forgotten. First that the owld matter, as soon as I could acquaynt my Lord of Essex with it, I did, lettinge him know that it was only thought of in respect of him, and how that without his approbation it should bee desisted, in which he was so farr from diswadinge that he gaue mee the directions I haue made knowen. Then, the thought of that beeinge abandoned, hee sent directly for mee into the Low Countries, lettinge me know, before my opinion was asked, that hee had resolued it. Lastly, to make you see that I was neuer willing xv] CLEARING UP 231 to stirr in these thinges, thise same morninge the matter happned between my Lord Grey and mee, I telUng him that I thought, in respect the thinge was so notorius, the counseU would take notice of it, and send for mee aboute it, he answered me that it was lyke enough, but if they did without question it was but a coUor to lay handes of mee, and therfore wished me not to goe; to which I rephed, that he should not enter into any violent course for mee, for I knew I had made no fawte, and I would trust in the iustice of the state; so, beeinge sent for, I only tooke two with mee and went. Now, out of thease circumstances, I beseech you make your coniecture, whether I was likely to bee an instigator in these businesses. For this that I haue sett down, I protest before God is trew, and I doe rely so much vppon your fauor that I doute not but you wiU make vse of them for my aduantage, and I shaU continew bound vnto you, as I protest I doe account my self akedy, more then to any man lyuinge, which whether I Uue or dy I make the world know to your honor. I beseech you pardon the bad writinge of this, for I write in hast1. The statement, "according to commandment," tells the story of the incident in Dublin Castle2, when Essex took him to the room where Sir Christopher Blount, his stepfather, lay wounded. He there proposed to take a part of the army back with him, but both Blount and Southampton advised him against this, and he gave it up. But he was determined to come over, so both of them advised him "to go well attended to secure himself from private enemies... if his life were in danger he knew there was none of us but would adventure ours to save him." Southampton had been within sight, but not within hearing, of the conference with Tyrone; but Essex told him afterwards some of the points discussed. Tyrone had tempted him to leave the Queen's service, but Essex rejected the notion. Essex knew nothing of Tom Lea's going to Tyrone before. "Of some part of this Sir Christopher Blunt was a witness, who though the world knows he never loved me, yet do I beseech your honour and Mr H. [?] that he may be asked of it, and I doubt not but for the truth's sake he will confirm and make you see how much I did detest it. For the rest, I can produce no testimony, only God knows my heart that I lie not. I had resolved that whatsoever concerned her Majestie I would have revealed, and he [Blount] had only the start of me by reason 1 Correspondence of James VI of Scotland, ed. Bruce, Camd. Soc. p. 95. 2 Cecil Papers, lxxxiv. 10. 232 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. he spake first with you." He says that if he had only been allowed to live in her Majesty's presence this evil would never have come to him. His heart had never been cankered with a disloyal thought and he hopes she will forgive him. The allusion to Sir Christopher Blount shews that he was still alive; therefore the "statement" must have been made before the 15th of March — probably, indeed, after the 5th of March — when Blount was tried. It is evident that the most important part of his information concerned Lord Mountjoy. This was probably the secret part that he was told not to speak of. For the Councillors were in a difficulty. Here was a man definitely concerned with Essex's discontent, yet who was acting as his successor and was actually the representative of her Majesty in Ireland! They could not recal him without damaging English prestige; it was evident that he had repented when he was put in trust, and they wisely determined to ignore the past, being sure that he would be doubly dutiful, to save the risks of examination and recal. Hence the Earl of Nottingham was able to write to him encouragingly about the prospects of Southampton, as both he and Sir Robert Cecil were earnestly working in his favour — "we use all our power and wits for it."1 The arrest of Sir Henry Neville, as he was returning to France2, was a great distress to his assistant and coadjutor, Mr Ralph Win wood, who wrote to him on February 17 th that the French King had told him of the rising of Essex and Southampton, but he added that he would wait to believe it until Neville himself gave him information. Neville was silent. Cecil told Winwood the bare official truth, and on 17 th March Winwood again wrote to his chief a sympathetic and trustful letter, saying that he knew his loyalty to the Queen and country. There are many more letters of Winwood in a volume of Foreign Correspondence at the Record Office3. Sir Robert Cecil put all his strength forth to save his cousin Neville. It was not to be expected that the Privy Council would neglect to seize the available property of the chief conspirators. On 1 Spedding's Bacon, 1. 411. 2 State Papers, Foreign News Letters, France, ix. 3 Foreign Correspondence, 45. xv] CLEARING UP 233 February 13th they entered "The property to be seized Bever Castle of the Earl of Rutland, Chartley of the Earl of Essex, the houses of the Earl of Southampton, the one called The Vine, the other [?] "1. Some mistake lay here — "The Vine" never belonged to Southampton. A seizure was made of his horses, for some of which an innkeeper made a heavy charge for feeding2. His trustees were closely examined as to his financial affairs3; and an enquiry was made whether the Earls of Essex, Southampton, or Rutland had held any lands in the Cinque Ports, March 13th4. The Earl of Essex's family were left in destitution. As soon as the Privy Council felt safe by the apprehension of the chief offenders, they turned their attention towards possible mercy, in order to ingratiate themselves with the people. This rarely meant politic mercy, as in the case of Mountjoy, who was needed where he was; or even compassionate mercy, as in the case of the Earl of Southampton. It in general expressed itself as mercantile mercy, measured in proportion, not to the degree of the offender's guilt, but of his capacity to pay. As early as February 23rd Thomas Scriven, the family steward5, conveyed to Mr John Manners (the uncle of the Earl of Rutland) his hope for his master's life. He knew that a fine was certain, rated at that date at £30,000, but he hoped that amount might be reduced. On the 27th May, 1601, John Chamberlain wrote to Dudley Carleton : Sir Harry NeviUe is in the Tower, which at first made many men think he should come to his answer, but this whole term having past without any arraignment, makes me think there shaU be no more blood drawn in this cause. The rather for there is a commission to certain of the counsaile to ransome and fine the Lords and Gentlemen that were in the action, and have akeady rated Rutland at £30,000, Bedford at £20,000, Sands at £10,000, Mounteagle at £8000, and CromweU at £6000, Catesby at 4000 marks, Tresham at 3000 marks, Percies and Manners at £500 and 500 marks, the rest at other summes....Our two new Knights of the Garter, the Erie of Darbie and the Lord Burghley were instaUed yesterday at Windsor. Anthony 1 Reg. Privy Council. 2 Accounts Exchequer, K. R., Bdle 522, no. 11. 3 D.S.S.P. cclxxix. 91. 4 MSS. of the Corporation of Rye. Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. xiii. app. iv. p. 123. 6 Belvoir Papers, xiv. 366. 234 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch.xv Bacon has died so deep in debt that his brother Francis is Uttle the better by him1.By June ioth these fines were mitigated in some cases: Fynes imposed on the noblemen and other confederates in the late rebeUion. The Earl of Rutland £30,000 to £20,000, the Earl of Bedford £20,000 to £10,000, Baron Sandys £10,000 — £5000, Baron CromweU £5000 to £2000, Lord Mounteagle £8000 to £4000, Sir Charles Percy £500, Sir JosceUn Percy £500, Sir Henry Cary 400 marks — 200 marks, Sir Robert Vernon 500 marks — £100, Sir William Constable 300 m. £100, Robert Catesby 4000 marks, Francis Tresham 3000 m. Francis Manners 400 m. Sir George Manners 400 m. Sir Thomas West 1000 m. Gray Bridges 1000 m. Sir Edward Middleton 500 m. — £200, Thomas Crompton £400, Walter Walsh £4O02. On June 26th there is a note that the Earl of Bedford, being urged to make speedy payment, begs leave to be allowed to pay in instalments. He also entreats the Queen to aid him in his efforts to do so3- There also appears in the Salisbury Papers the following entry: "Persons living that are condemned, the Earl of Southampton, Sir John Davys, Sir Edward Baynham, John Littleton."4 None of these were executed — Sir John Davies probably from policy; John Littleton died of illness. It went hard with Southampton also. 1 D.S.S.P. cclxxix. 91. 2 Ibid. 106. 3 Ibid. 121. 4 Salisb. Papers, xi. 86, 214. Cecil Papers, lxxxiv. 5, and ibid. 23. CHAPTER XVI A LAMPOON OF THE DAY 1601 A remarkable metrical effusion without title or date is preserved in the special volume of State Papers which contains the records of the conspiracy and trial1. The only allusion to authorship lies in the words "our men lost the day," so that it must have been written by a sympathiser with Essex who had managed to escape capture. It is not of a nature to have been safely printed then, but it is probable that many MS. copies spread. There have been preserved two copies at least among the State Papers, and I have discovered another among the Harleian MSS.2 in a volume which the Calendar seems to have entered as collected by the third Randle Holmes as a book of "Songs and Sonnets." These were considered to be too inferior to be worth fuller description than "Epitaphs, Lampoons and Satires." This rescension contains some variant readings, so I shall distinguish the three copies by A, B, and C, and number the verses, to make clear my elucidation of their meanings. This 'lampoon' was copied many years ago for Dr Brandl, and it appeared in the volume ofthe Shakespeare Jahrbuch for 191 o. It is probably, in all three cases, incomplete, as certain names are omitted which would naturally have been included in one or other of the groups. I ChamberUn, ChamberUn hees of hk graces kinne foole hath he euer bin with his Joane sUverpin She makes his cockescombe thin and quakez in euerie limme quicksUver is in his head but his wit's duU as lead — Lord for thy pittie. 1 D.S.S.P. cclxxviii. 23. 2 Harl. MS. 2127, f. 34. 3 A shakes. 236 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. II partie beard was aferd when they rann at the heard the Raine deer was imbost the white doe shee was loste pembrooke strooke her downe and tooke her from the clowne Lord for thy pittie. Ill Utell CeciU tripps up and downe he rules boet court & croune with his brother Burlie clowne in his great fox-furred gowne with the long proclamation hee swore1 hee sav'd the towne is it not UkeUe ? IV2 Bedford hee ranne awaie when ower men lost the daie so 't is assigned except his fine dancing Dame do their hard hartes tame and swear it is a shame fooles should bee fined. UteU Graie, UteU Graie (made a souldier in the month of Maief hee made a Ladies fraie turned his heeles* and ranne awaie yet must hee be advanc't they saie5 for to bear some swaie Lord for thy pittie. 1 C saith. 2 This verse follows the next in C. 1 This line only in C copy. 4 C borne aboute. 6 C as men say. xvi] A LAMPOON OF THE DAY 237 VI foulke and John, foulke and John you two shaU rise anon when greater1 men bee gon you two can prie as farre where honors fined* are as any man of warre (yfnon your hands doe barr)3 Lord for thy pittie. VII Rawleigh doth time bestride he sits* twixt winde and tide yet uppe hiU hee cannot ride, for aU his bloodie pride. hee seeks taxes in the tinne hee powles5 the poor to the skinne yet hee sweares6 tis no sinne Lord for thy pittie. It would be impossible in notes to give even the little I know of the inner meanings of these lines, so I must arrange some facts under reference to each verse. The thin veil of mystery must have been transparent to contemporaries. In some cases I can pierce this to some extent, in others I can only suggest a possible explanation. No. I refers to "Chamberlain." This, of course, means George Carey, who had succeeded his father as second Lord Hunsdon on 22nd-23rd July, 1596, and as Lord Chamberlain in March, 1596-7. His family was related to Elizabeth; hence there is some disrespect to the Queen herself implied in the words, of hir graces kinne' foole hath he euer bin. His health had always been uncertain, and in later years he suffered from palsy. The uncomplimentary suggestion that his wife was shrewish I cannot corroborate. He had married Elizabeth, daughter of Sir John Spencer of Althorpe, a patron of the poet Spenser, who claimed kinship with her. 1 B wiser. 2 C riffeled. 3 Extra line C. 4 C lyeth. 6 C strips. 6 C saith. 238 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. There is no allusion here to Lord Hunsdon's company of players, of which Shakespeare was a member . No. II has had an undue prominence given to it of late years through having been confusedly seized by the advocates of the Herbert-Fitton theory of the Sonnets. Though not nearly so clear in its subject as No. I, I have no doubt that "partie beard" meant Sir William Knollys, who, having .been born in 1547, may be supposed to have had a beard streaked with grey. He was the uncle of the Earl of Essex, and was supposed not to have done all he could for his unfortunate nephew. He had reason to be "aferd," on some unspecified occasion, "when they rann at the heard," which evidently means the Queen's maids of honour, and refers to the great scandal case of the day. These ladies on June 14th, 1600, at the marriage ofthe other Lord Herbert"1 to Mrs Anne Russell, had performed a masque ofthe eight muses seeking theninth. Their names were " My Ladie Dorothy, Mrs Fitton, Mrs Carey, Mrs Onslow, Mrs Southwell, Mrs Bess Russell, Mrs Darcy and my Lady Blanche Somerset." Mrs Fitton, as being the best dancer, led; and she came to the Queen and asked her to join them. The Queen asked her what was her name. She answered "Affection!" "Affection is false," said the Queen; yet she rose and danced. (She should have said "Terpsichore," the muse of dancing.) Lord William Herbert was present at that masque, and on 19th January, 1600-1, he became Earl of Pembroke on the death of his father. Sir William Knollys was connected with Mary Fitton in a very remarkable way, which we may learn from his own letters preserved at Arbury. Sir Edward Fitton's elder daughter, Anne, had been maid of honour to the Queen until she married John Newdigate of Arbury. Then she resigned, and her younger sister Mary, at 17, took her place in 1595. Sir Edward Fitton wrote to Sir William Knollys, his old friend (also a relative of the Queen), to ask him to look after his young daughter. Sir William replied, " I will not fail to fulfil your desire in playing the Good Shepherd, and will to my power defend the innocent lamb from the wolfish cruelty and fox-like subtlety ofthe tame beasts of this place I will with my counsel advise your faire daughter, with my true affection love her, and with my sword 1 Sidney Papers, n. 201. xvi] A LAMPOON OF THE DAY 239 defend her if need be. ... I will be as careful of her well-doing as if I were her true father." Sir William had married Dorothy, daughter of Lord Bray and widow of Edward Bridges, Lord Chandos. She was older than he was, and was a confirmed invalid. So it happened that the attractions of his fair young ward soon proved too much for Sir William's judgment and discretion. He began to offer her attentions so conspicuous that the Court knew that he sought to engage her affections — honourably, he thought. He offered the reversion of his hand and heart not only to the girl, but, on his own behalf, to her relatives for her, as his second wife before the first had gone. Abundant proof of this is to be found in his letters, printed by Lady Newdigate in her Gossip from an old Muniment Room. Mary Fitton had evidently flirted with and hoodwinked her guardian lover, while she trod the flowery paths of dalliance, as secretly as she could, with Lord William Herbert, who had just become Earl of Pembroke. By January 26th Sir John Stanhope had written to Sir G. Carew about "Mary Fitton's afflictions." But it seems to have been the 4th of February before the Court knew that "Pembrooke strooke her downe," and "the Raine deer" (the Queen) was "imbost" (or raging). Cecil himself wrote on the 5th of February to Carew: "We have no news but that there is a misfortune befallen Mistress Fitton... and the Earl of Pembroke being examined confesseth a fact, but utterly renounceth all marriage. I feare they will both dwell in the Tower awhile, for the Queen hath vowed to send them thither." By the 8th, however, the Tower was filled with more important offenders; the Queen partially relented to these, Pembroke was committed to the Fleet, where he stayed some time (as Tobie Matthew told Carleton on March 25th), and Mary Fitton was entrusted to the care of Lady Hawkins. The last phrase, "and tooke her from the clowne," is held by the Herbert-Fittonites to mean Shakespeare and to prove that this was his "dark Lady."1 The case is too long to be argued here, but the construction of the sentence and the parallel of other verses make it seem clear to me that "the clowne" means the subject of the sentence, "partie 1 See the article "Shakespeare's friends of the Sonnets, " in Shakespeare's Environment, etc. 240 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. beard," Sir William Knollys. The courtiers evidently thought this piece of scandal highly entertaining, and the satirist used the most mortifying and scathing incident known to him to gall the man who had been forced to range himself with the Earl of Essex's enemies, though he was his uncle. III. There is no disguise about "litell Cecill." Sir Robert, the second son of the great Lord Burleigh, was said to have had a curvature of the spine and a peculiar gait in walking; his enemies frequently referred to his personal peculiarities, doubtless even his friends occasionally made him wince. He was really little — Elizabeth sometimes called him her "little Elf," King James described him as his "little Beagle." But he had the brains of the family; his elder brother Thomas, who succeeded to the title, had only "average ability" — the satirist here calls him also a "clowne." The "great fox-furred gowne" is mentioned in Burleigh's will. The "long proclamation" was certainly written by Sir Robert, and his brother, Lord Burleigh, with about io horse carried it to the city and supported the herald. It was printed, published, and dated two days later. A copy is preserved in the same volume of the State Papers1 as the records of the examinations and trial. One might almost think the writer of the lampoon a citizen of London, by the compressed scorn of the phrase "sav'd the towne is it not likelie?" IV. Through this verse we can glean the approximate date ofthe lampoon. The Calendar queries it as "January? 1600-1." That date is impossible. It refers to the Earl of Bedford's "fine," which was not announced until nth May2- We may take it therefore to have been written in May or June 1 601 . The chief offenders were already executed, the term was over, no more trials were expected, the sympathisers were able to breathe and to vent their scorn on those who had done to death so many gallant gentlemen. The Earl of Bedford is the only one mentioned here who started with the Earl of Essex, but, changing sides in the middle of the action, is held up with the others to the scorn of any readers. In his own examination3 he stated that he knew nothing of the designs before hand; that Lady Rich had come in her coach, while he was hearing 1 D.S.S.P. cclxxviii. 36. 2 Ibid, cclxxviii-ix. 3 Ibid, cclxxviii. 49, 50. xvi] A LAMPOON OF THE DAY 241 a sermon in his own house, and had carried him away to her brother in Essex House, who had need of him. He had gone out with the Earls, but left them soon. Henry Woodrington on 13th February1 confessed that he and his uncle had gone to see the Earl of Rutland in Essex House and there, being carried along by the throng, on the 8th of February followed the company with purpose to withdraw the Earl of Bedford from them, he being a near kinsman and his uncle Ephraim Woodrington a servant to the Earl of Bedford. As soon as they could get a fit opportunity without danger to the Earl or to them selves, they got him from that company and carried him away by water. Bedford immediately got some horsemen together and galloped to the Court, but, being suspected, was seized there and committed first to the care of Alderman Holliday, and then to the house of Sir John Stanhope. Among the chronological notes regarding the Essex "rebellion" 2 it is stated that Lord Bedford was fined £20,000 (an enormous sum for those days), afterwards reduced to £10,000. We may imagine, therefore, the writer to be chuckling at the fact that he had to pay as much as if he had gone on with his friends to the end of their enterprise. What the little fling at his wife means I cannot be quite sure. She was a daughter of Sir John Harington, and the chief patron of Drayton, though his tone of praise changed somewhat in his publications of~T6©3^. / 6 <-' V. All of the Essex and Southampton party must have special reason to dislike "litell Graie," because his choleric and jealous temperament had been one of the chief means of fanning the wrath kindled against them at Court. His story is given in a special chapter above3- I do not know why he should here be called "little," nor why he should be charged with "turning his heels to run away," except what may be gleaned from the previous chapter on the Conspiracy. He was protected from behind. But the writer must have had some little ground for whetting on him the arrows of his scorn. None expected then that Nemesis should come to him in a suffering similar to that of Southampton, through a trumpery charge, unglorified by sentiment, during long years spent in the doleful Tower, and a lonely death there, the last of his family. 1 D.S.S.P. cclxxviii. 56. 2 Ibid, cclxxxi. 67. 3 Chap. xi. p 163. s. s. 16 242 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch.xvi VI. The two persons aimed at here are not so surely to be identified. I think that "foulke" must mean Fulke Greville, afterwards Lord Brooke, the friend of Sir Philip Sidney. He had been friendly with both Earls, especially with Southampton, but was strictly obedient and loyal to the Queen. Only an enemy could charge him with venality, as he kept his hands singularly clean1- Neither is "John" quite clear. I am inclined to believe that it means Sir John Stanhope, who had been very friendly with the Southampton family, but had kept clear of any complicity with the doings of Essex. He had been appointed Treasurer ofthe Chamber in 1596. The Earl of Bedford was committed to his custody on February 1 oth. He married, first, Joan, daughter of Sir William Knollys, and, second, Margaret, daughter of Mr Henry Williams. He was created Baron Stanhope of Harrington in 1605. VII. Raleigh's hatred and jealousy of Essex had been publicly known ever since the Spanish voyage of 1596. Elizabeth often made use of him to punish her favourite when he offended her, and it must have been bitter indeed to Essex to feel his merciless rival triumph over him at last. Raleigh was Warden of the Stan- neries and Lord Lieutenant of Cornwall 2. In the Parliament of 1 60 1 he defended monopolies in general, and his own monopoly of tin in particular. Him, like Grey, Nemesis awaited. He may have been innocent ofthe charge which led directly to his execution, but against him the blood of Essex called out in judgment. Perhaps it was something akin to this satire that the Lords of the Council aimed at on ioth May, 1601, when they noted: "Certain players at the Curtaine in Moorfields do represent in their interlude the persons of some gentlemen of good desert and quality that are yet alive, under obscure manner but yet in such sorte that all the hearers may take notice both of the matter and the persons that are meant thereby. All are to be examined " 1 See my Shakespeare' s Warwickshire Contemporaries, p. 170. 2 journal of the House of Commons. CHAPTER XVII THE PASSING OF THE TUDORS The fall of Essex may be said to date the end of the reign of Elizabeth in regard to her activities and glories. After that she was Queen only in name. She listened to her councillors, signed her papers, and tried to retrench in expenditure; but her policy was dependent on the decisions of Sir Robert Cecil. He had secured the only form of sovereignty that Essex had desired. Her last Parlia ment1 was summoned for 27th October, 1601, and she staggered under the weight of the Royal robes and would have fallen, but that eager hands were held out to support her. Francis Osborne speaks of Essex's death as cruel and disastrous. "The Queen had no comfort after The people were wrathful at the death of their favourite, and she lost their honour and glory The death of Essex, like a melancholy cloud, did shade the prospect of her people's affection I have heard it, though looked upon by me as a paradox, that Essex would have vindicated English freedom by reviving such ancient privileges as had been preter mitted during the tyrannical reigns of the two last Henrys." 2 Even Speed says: "As the death of this nobleman was much lamented by the subjects whose love towards him was so ingrafted (as I think I may well say never subject had more), so her Majestie likewise having such a starre falne from her firmament, was inwardly moved and outwardly oftentimes would shew passions of her griefe, even till the time of her approaching end, when two yeares after she laid her heade in the Grave, as the most resplendent sunne setteth at last in a western cloud."3 She seemed to recover in 1 602, and went a-maying to Lewisham on May day. She let Sir Roger Aston, James's ambassador, see her dancing, to prevent his master being too eager for any speedy personal advantage. She is said to have danced with the Due de Nevers when he was here. Yet at the beginning of June she had 1 Lingard, Pari. Hist. D'Ewes. 2 Essays, Elizabeth, p. 353. 3 3rd edition, p. 1214. I6—2 244 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. told the French ambassador "she was aweary of Life, and alluded touchingly to the death of Essex." She was very gay in her festivities in July; but it was noticed that she did not go far from home. Chamberlain was puzzled on October 2nd why Cecil should dismiss his invaluable secretary, Willes. It was afterwards found that he feared his servant would discover his correspondence with the Scottish King1. Cecil gave a great entertainment to the Queen on December 23rd, and as a special favour allowed Walter Cope to share in it. The Lord Admiral feasted the Queen, but neither his preparations nor his gifts were as good as were expected. Christmas seemed flat and dull. And into the Court came a sense of mystery and secrecy. Few dared speak out their minds. Who was to succeed this failing life ? Whither was England drifting? Meanwhile, the Earl of Southampton lay in the Tower, and there seem to be only two sources whence we may glean some facts about him. The letter indited by the Council to Sir John Peyton on March 22nd, 1 600- 1, has already been quoted2. Probably Southampton's illness necessitated extra care from his attendants and induced E. Harte, his keeper, to write on May 24th to Sir Robert Cecil to beg a change: As to your good Uking, I was put in trust to be keeper unto the Lord of Southampton, I desire you so to continue your good opinion of me, as by your good means to her Majestie, my Ubertie may be returned to her presence, that I may enjoy the countenance of such favours as she has. bestowed on others her servants which did her service in the suppressing of the rebels. My long continuance in this manner is Uttle better than a prisoner, and without your good remembrances may be so forgotten as both my time and my services here spent wiU Uttle avail my preferment3. His application was answered as he wished on 14th June through. the Lieutenant: Whereas Captain Hart hath been appointed to attend on the Earl of Southampton ever since his first commitment to the Tower, her Majestie is pleased that the said Captain Hart may now have Ubertie to foUow his businesse, and therefore you may signifie so much to him and appoint some 1 D.S.S.P. Eliz. 285, 23. 2 Reg. Privy Council, xxxi. 237. (See p. 224.) 3 Cecil Papers, lxxxvi. 58. Salisfi. Papers, xn. 205. xvn] THE PASSING OF THE TUDORS 245 such person as you shaU make choice of for that purpose to attend upon the Earl1. We do not know whom the Lieutenant chose, but it was probably some satisfactory person, as Sir John Peyton had become interested in his prisoner. On August 18th he wrote to the Council : My Lord of Southampton, by reason of his close imprisonment and want of aU manner of exercise being grown weak and very sickly, has desired me to send you his letters of petition, here inclosed, upon which occasion I have prepared for him another lodging. But without some exercise, and more air than is convenient for me to aUow without knowledge from your honours of her Majesties pleasure, I do much doubt of his recovery. Southampton's letter has not been preserved, but there is appa rently the answer to it on the 1 9th of the same month. The Council wrote to the Lieutenant ofthe Tower: Forasmuch as her Majesty hath understood by a letter from yourself and another enclosed from the late Earle of Southampton that he, suspecting himself to be in some danger by the growing on of a long sicknesse (which he hath had before his trouble), is now an humble suyter (for the ease and .comforte of his minde) to have the favour to see his mother, and to conferre with her and some others that were putt in trust with his estate, his hope beinge thereby to obtaine at her hands some favour towards his child, from whom his great offences hath taken aU which otherwise should descend unto her: Wee do hereby give you to understand, that her Majesty is pleased, and the rather at the humble and importunate suit of the Countesse his mother, to give you warrante to admit her Ladyshippe, and any two of those persons whom he shaU desier, that have been dealers in his estate, to Tepaire unto him in this time of his indisposition to conferre with him, so provided that it be done at due time in private manner, in your presence and hearing, and this shaU be your warrant2. It is most probable that Edmund Gage and William Cham berlain would be chosen to perform this doleful duty. Incidentally this shews that Lady Rich in 1599 had lost her wager, and that he had no son living at the time 3- I am inclined to believe that the following list of expenses refers to this date. "Last paste 1602," could not have been so written in 1603, but "last paste," meaning 1601, account rendered in 1 Reg. Privy Council, xxxi. 430. 2 Ibid. 175. 3 See p. 158. 246 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. 1602, would fit times, seasons, and other records. The MS., four leaves stitched together and written on both sides by the Deputy Surveyor of her Majesty's Works, is a request for payment: Maye it please your Honours to understand ye extraordinaire charges that have grown on soundry her Majesties howses in ye monethes of Auguste and September last paste 1602. The Tower of London the howse in mending and repairinge a lodging neare unto ye Queenes GaUerye, wher ye Earle of Southampton is lodged, and making a partition of fir poles and slitte deales at ye east ende of ye gaUerye for a withdrawing chamber; ye mending with lyme and haire some faultes in ye frette and ceiling in ye Earles Bedchamber and whitewashing aU ye waUes and ceilinges, ye mending soundry faultes and decayed places in Mr Lieutenant's Lodging etc. £22. 2. 41. This bill has come into the possession of Dr Smedley, who kindly allowed me to copy and make use of it. On October nth came an order of happier omen: "the Countess his wife was to be admitted for his comfort."2 The news was contained in a letter to " Mr George Harvie, Esq., having charge ofthe prisoners in the Tower in the absence of Mr Lieutenant": Whereas her Majestie is informed that the Earle of Southampton is of late growne very sickly, in the which respect her Highness is pleased that for his comforte the Countess his wife shalbe permitted to have accesse unto him, these are therefore accordingly to wiU and requyer you to suffer her at conveniyent tymes to repayre unto him, for the which these shalbe your warrant. One likes to believe that it was her happy thought to take his favourite cat with her to help to comfort, and to help to calm the excitement of meeting again after such a long and anxious separation. No memorial is left us of the Countess's visit; but there is a portrait painted of him, with the cat in attendance; and it probably stayed with him during the rest of his captivity. By a strange coincidence, Henry IV sent Biron as an envoy to Elizabeth about this time. He was imprudent enough to mention Essex. Elizabeth at first was wrathful, then told him that, in spite of his faults, if Essex had only taken the advice of his friends and fully submitted and entreated pardon, she would have forgiven him. This seems to point to some keeping back of his communications. Cecil, on July 18th, 1602, writing to Carew about Biron, said, "It 1 Original MS. Deputy Surveyor of Works. 2 Reg. Privy Council, xxxi. 256. 3 Ibid. xvn] THE PASSING OF THE TUDORS 247 pleased me not a little (seeing God had appointed our Earl to dye) that we had other manner of proof of his conspiracy, that we beheld him in open rebellion and heard him before his death confirm all with open confession, for otherwise, who doth not know how partial this kingdom was to condemne his opposites oi malice and practice." There is no other allusion to Southampton's doings during the two years he spent in the Tower, except in private letters, especially those of the secret correspondence with the Scottish King, now published. Essex had begged James to send ambassadors speedily and had suggested a line of action for them. James was willing, but they were delayed, and the crisis came before their arrival. Had they come at the time Essex proposed, things might have worked out differently. James had given them a paper of instructions, which could not be followed after Essex's death. When the Scottish King sent his second paper of instructions on the 1 8th of April, 1601, from Linlithgow to the ambassadors1, he acknowledged that "at the time of your despatch things were so miscarried by that unfortunate accident." He therefore gave them new instructions "how to walk surely between these two precipices of King and people, who now appear to be in so contrary terms," how to deal with the ministers "especially Mr Secretary, who is King there in effect," "to renew and confirm your acquaintance with Lieutenant of the Tower." Shortly after their arrival, the ambassadors held a conference with Cecil. He insisted that, while the Queen lived, there must be absolute respect paid to her wishes, and also that (though he was quite in favour of the King's claims) any correspondence between them must be kept absolutely secret. The Earl of Mar and Mr Edward Bruce sent a report to the King, and shortly after receiving this, James wrote his first personal letter to Cecil, dated June 3, 1602, in the Calendar, under the cipher numbers of " 30 " and "10" This shews that there had been dealings between them before2. "That Cecil (10) mistrusted the 1 The first instructions have not been preserved. The originals are in the Advocates' Library, Edinburgh. Secret Correspondence James I and Cecil, ed. by Lord Hailes, Letter i. 2 Camden Series, lxxiii. pp. 15, 16. Cecil Papers, cxxxv, 63, 4. 248 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch, aspiring mind of Essex, James (30) could not but commend, taking it as a sure signe that Cecil (10) would never allow a subject to climb to so high a roome." It is endorsed by Cecil " 1600. 30 first letter to 10." "The King" and "Secretary" are written after. This was a form of communication which it was not safe to use frequently. James recommended Lord Henry Howard as an intermediary, and hence arose the series of letters by that effusive nobleman, formerly so devoted to Essex and now hand in hand with Cecil. But he retained his affection for the Earl of Southampton. It is chiefly in relation to the latter that I have noted some points in these two series, and compared them with Cecil's letters to Sir George Carew. On August 13th Cecil asked Sir George Carew to back his influence with Mountjoy; whereby he shews the delicate position in which the new Lord Deputy stood. It is evident from Cecil's next letter that it was known that he had made a compact with Cobham, Raleigh, Grey, and others to crush Essex; that done, there came a slack time with them all. On September 5th, 1601, Cecil writes, "I keep all things quiet amongst our trowpe, but if you remember what Meg Ratlyff prophesyed, she said the pack would break, but I heare all and find nothing."1 Lord Henry Howard, writing to the Earl of Mar on November 22nd, 1 60 1 , speaks of the nearly contemporary events of the fall of the Scottish King, of the French King, and of the stumbling of the English Queen under the weight of her robes on the first day of her Parliament. None of these seemed to have any serious effects, but Queen Elizabeth never actually sat on her throne again 2. In his following letter, this time to Mr Edward Bruce, Lord Henry said, " I gave you notice of the diabolical triplicity," 3 that is Cobham, Raleigh, and the Earl of Northumberland (the latter of whom had married the sister of Essex, whom he did not use well). He tried to keep up a correspondence with the Scottish King on his own account. James listened to him, but did not commit himself. Lord Henry now tells some of his tricks. "In conclusion he assured them out of such scraps as he had raked out of the alms- 1 Camden Series, Cecil to Carew. 2 Secret Corr. Hailes, Letter 11. 3 Ibid. Letter III. xvn] THE PASSING OF THE TUDORS 249 basket, that all the partisans of the last tragedy resorted to South ampton without impeachment, by the Lieutenant's sufferance, that new practises were set on broach; that his own brother Sir Joseline Percy did ordinarily lie with him in the Tower, and that in his conscience he would, ere it were long, make an escape, or attempt a worse enterprise. These two wicked villains Cobham and Raleigh, handled the fool so cunningly." Northumberland was to tell the Queen himself, but shrank from doing so. Cobham told part of the story to Cecil, who, "finding that the practice meant against Southampton formally did pierce himself through the other side," dissuaded Northumberland from informing, and advised him "rather to merit Southampton's thankfulness by warning him of the danger imminent both to him and to the Lieutenant, with the commendation of all, than to incur the censures of the world by raking in the bowels of a man half dead, and informing upon a poor forlorn hope in extremity... Cecil sware unto me this day that he and they (Cobham and Raleigh) could never live under one apple-tree." He dwells on the miserable state of Cobham and Raleigh, "who are fain to put their heads under the girdle of him they envy most." In his letter to the King of December 4th, Lord Henry writes evil words of Cobham and Raleigh's hypocrisy, and advises extreme caution with them 1. They seek to scant the scope of Southampton's liberty. Lord Henry's next letter was to Mr Edward Bruce2, in which he said, " Cobham hath once again incensed the Queen against the lease which Southampton made years before this mishap for pay ment of his debts, and therefore out of compass of forfeiting. She hath pressed for it with all importunity, but it will prove good in law. These are the fruits of Cobham's overburning charity." This letter is undated, but as it refers to Northumberland's challenging Sir Francis Vere, it must have been written about the end of April 1602. Lord Henry's long-winded and obscure perorations are not always dated and may therefore be sometimes out of order — Letter vi makes little contribution to the great subjects. Letter vn, however, is dated 27th April, and refers to some whose suspicions had been aroused and were making efforts to intercept the King's 1 Letter iv. 2 Letter v. 250 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. packet. The following letter, dated May ist, 1602, is chiefly about Northumberland: The man is beloved of none, foUowed by none, trusted by no one save his faction.... The Queen repeated one month since when she was moved in his favour for a regiment, that Raleigh had made him as odious as himself, because he would not be singular. There is no secret that he revealeth not to aU his own men. He came to King James upon anger and vexation at the Queen's deep hatred and invectives.... He seeks to bind himself upon the future, finding Mountjoy and Southampton planted there, against whom his practices work everlastingly1. Letter ix from James discusses with Lord Henry Howard the report of Arabella's Stuart's change of religion to Catholic2. Letter x is an important one in many ways. Lord Henry Howard writes to the Earl of Mar on June 4th, 1602: Raleigh and Cobham boast to have agreed with the Duke of Lennox to further aU plots against you and Mr Bruce.. . .Your Lordship may beUeve that HeU did never spew up such a couple when it cast up Cerberus and Phle- gethon. They are now set on the pin of making tragedies by meddUng in your affairs... since among us, longer than they foUow the Queen's humour in disclaiming and disgracing honest men, their credit serves them not.... My Lord Admiral 3 the other day wished from his soul that he had but the same commission to carry the cannon to Durham House 4 that he had this time twelvemonth to Essex House to prove what sport he could make in that feUowship....I must teU your Lordship in secret betwkt you and me, in the wonted manner, without commission to advertise that Cecil's fear lest the Duke (of Lennox) or Beltrees5 had expressed fables in strange figures could not guess at any other ground than some chimeras tendered from Cobham Raleigh and Northumberland upon their offer to comply, p. 123. Now as all these letters are written for the inspection of King James, one has not far to seek for the cause of his arriving in England with a distrust of Cobham and Raleigh already implanted in his soul. Lord Grey does not appear in this correspondence — he was not at Court. Chamberlain writes on May 8th, 1602: "The Lord Gray prepares to go into the Low Countries and to have the 1 Letter vm. 2 He "thinks she has been very evil attended." 3 Earl of Nottingham, 4 Durham House, where Cobham and Raleigh met. 5 Lord Semple of Beltrees, ambassador to Elizabeth in 1599. xvn] THE PASSING OF THE TUDORS 251 command of 3 or 4 hundred horse, though whether he provide them there or here I know not." On the 17th he corrects himself: "The Lord Gray carries over neither men nor horse, but relies entirely on the States for his entertaynement." On June the 27th, "The Lord Gray hath not that command nor entertainment in the Low Countries that he propounded to himself." By the 15th of October, "The Lord Gray is newly come out ofthe Low Countries and rails freely on Sir Francis Vere." On 28th February, 1602-3, he says, "One Griffith a Welsh pirate his lands geven to the Lord Gray, to hold him up a little longer." Now about this period Cecil confided to his friend Carew on 2nd September, 1602: "Two old friends use me unkindly, but I have -covenanted with my heart not to know it, for in shewe we are great, and all my revenge shall be to heap coals on their heade." Going back to Lord Henry Howard's epistles, we find him writing to the King on 24th August, 1 602 1 : " Cecil is infinitely glad that Mountjoy and Southampton are so strange to the mystery, and that all was not true which was advertised For Mountjoy hath begun to sound. . . Cecil hath saved the life of the one out of respect to his affection to King James, though it was neither ancient nor very meritorious. He hath preserved the reputation and credit of the other for the same respect, though his adventure therein was not small; the rest must be wrought out with opportunity and time." Letter xi is only flattery of the King, and Letter xii is chiefly about the relations of the King and the Queen. Letter xm is about the dangers of the carriage of the letters, and Letter xiv about the disagreements between King James and his wife in some respects, especially in matters of religion. In Letter xv Howard tells the Earl of Mar, "In this place all is quietness, and hath been without disturbance, since Cobham by sickness, and Raleigh by direction were absent from Court. The Queen our sovereign was never so gallant these many years, nor so set on jollity." This must have been at the beginning of Sep tember, 1602, as the letter mentions the wound received by Sir Francis Vere. A letter of Mr Edward Bruce to Lord Henry Howard tells us "The Earle of Southampton hath written to 30 ane earnest letter 1 Letter xn. 252 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. for a warrant of his libertie immediatelie upon 24 (Elizabeth's) dethe, which 30 refuseth to grant without consent and authoritie ofthe Council, and is to write to him to deale by way of supplication to the Council, and what they advise him to do shall be performed with diligence; it is enjoyned to you by 30 to speak with 10, and if he find it expedient to enlarge hirh, and that his present service may be of any use in the State, he shall be content, and assents he be presentlie relieved otherways to let him stay till further resolution be taken for the best course in the business." The letter is undated, but, as it alludes to the Queen's imminent danger, it can be placed. On January 12th, 1602-3, Cecil wrote to Raleigh a friendly letter about the ship Fortune under Captain Richard Gifford, which, having acted as a pirate, is to be confiscated to the Admiral. He asks Raleigh to inspect her, to fit her out again, and says that he would be willing to take the third share of the adventure in her with Cobham and Raleigh. " I pray you as much as may be conceal our adventure, at least my name above any other."1 On February 12th, 1 602-3, Father Rivers notes that "The Earl of Southampton in the Tower is newly recovered of a dangerous disease, but in no hope of Liberty."2 Two years and more had passed since he entered the Traitor's Gate. The Queen remembered still that disastrous day. She had four special causes of trouble at the time. Rumours of what Arabella Stuart had done, or was about to do, made her fretfully impatient; knowledge that the love of her people had gone from her grieved her; information that the Earl of Tyrone was willing to submit on the same terms that Essex had offered him (and these alone) put her in a state of Royal wrath. Was it for this she had degraded and destroyed her old favourite, to have but two years more of loss of men and money, of energy and thought, and to have no more than he could have secured so long ago ? She absolutely refused to consider it. Then she was forced to consider. Her Lord Treasurer Sackville and Sir John Fortescue wrote to her3 that her Treasury was empty, and money was needed for the Irish wars. She raged at them and their announce ment so violently that they were afraid to appear in Court. What was to be done? She could not afford to fight any longer, and she 1 Sahsb. Papers, xn. 599, 625. 2 Foley's Eng. Jes. vol. 1. 3 D.S.S.P. Eliz. cclxxxvii. 52. PLATE V THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON, WHILE A PRISONER IN THE TOWER (At Welbeck Abbey) xvn] THE PASSING OF THE TUDORS 253 had perforce grudgingly to pardon Tyrone. The dimming of her eyesight seemed to open her inward eyes. It dawned upon her that her judgment had been wrong, that others had deceived her, that it would have been better for the country as well as for herself if she had saved her hero's life. "Our Queen doth love to sit alone in the darkness, and bewail with tears, the death of Essex," said a servant1. Then something mysterious happened. The Countess of Nottingham, wife of the Lord Admiral, was very ill, and begged the Queen to come and see her. The Queen came, and was much affected. She had loved her faithful subject well. But she went home and mourned, with a new passion, for Essex, and she felt at last that she too, Queen though she might be, was but a mortal. Was there some foundation for the story of the ring the Queen had given Essex2? Early in March, 1 602-3, Sir Robert Cecil wrote to Sir John Cary of the death of the Countess of Nottingham, and of the beginning of Elizabeth's last illness. By the 9th of March the ambassadors and gossip-mongers of the country were spreading the great news, and all Europe listened. The Queen was ill — seriously ill — a disease without a name, or rather a combination of diseases. " I am not ill, and yet I cannot eat!" she said, bewildered. Then, she could not sleep. Her phy sicians might have said, as Lady Macbeth's did, Not so sick... As she is troubled with thick-coming fancies That keep her from her rest. She refused to go to bed, for she thought that it was there "she saw things." She had cushions laid on the floor, and tried to rest She refused physic. The Lord Admiral mourned bitterly for his wife and kept his chamber; but he had to leave it, for the Queen missed him and trusted him more than the others. He coaxed her to try to take a little broth; he urged her to go to bed, to take more rest. At last she yielded and went. She listened patiently and hopefully to the ministrations of the clergy, and then she slept. 1 Strickland's Elizabeth, p. 765. 2 Ibid. p. 772 and Lady Elizabeth Spelman's narrative, Francis Osborne's Memoirs. 254 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. xvii The Lord Admiral had the courage to ask her whom she would have as her successor. She said "her throne had always been the seat of Kings, none but a King should sit in it." Already she had said to the Duke of Sully, when ambassador of Henry IV of France, "that it was well she had not married, for now her successor would govern the whole of Great Britain."1 She lingered more than three weeks. During all that time she made no sign that she ever troubled her head about the fate of Southampton, who had so greatly loved her Essex. During ten years she had left un rewarded and unappreciated his deeds of valour; she had over- severely punished his faults; she had left his youth to be drained from him in the Tower. Never more would men call him "the young Earl of Southampton." Even then, she did not pardon him, together with Tyrone, for the sake of her lamented Essex, his friend. There was a time of tension in the Court and in the country, even more so in the Tower, where languishing prisoners waited feverishly for a general amnesty from a new sovereign. Cecil had taken every step necessary to keep the peace; he had in his pocket the proclamation, which James had already seen and approved; and he, like all others, waited. A ring of courtiers stood around the room; a group of weeping women knelt around the bed, in which the Queen peacefully slept through the night of the 23rd of March till the early morning of the 24th. Then, between 2 and 3 o'clock, the Angel of Death slipped through their ranks, and bore her away unconsciously from the care of the Angel of Sleep. At once everything awoke into ordered activity, while Sir Robert Carey stole out through the gates to bear secretly a blue ring from Lady Scrope to the King of Scotland, on fleet dark horses through the long north miles. Speed says: "Queen Elizabeth's celebrations were such that future ages will somewhat stagger and doubt as to whether they were rather affectionately poetical than faithfully historical." We need not attempt even to give examples of the lamentations here. 1 Sully's Memoirs, 2nd volume, 12th book, p. 80, edition 1747. CHAPTER XVIII THE COMING OF THE KING The almost universal sorrow felt for the loss of the English Queen was intensified by the fact that the inheritance did not follow on its usual lines. The people had not been given the opportunity of seeing the heir and of preparing him for the duties of their throne. James had been brought up as an alien, in an alien country, with alien customs and laws. He had nominally reigned since his infancy, in all 36 years, as heir to the Stuart Kings, before he travelled south to become heir of the Tudor sovereigns. The people he came to govern, though glad of a peaceable succession, were not, even at first, quite satisfied with him, and they became less so as he lived. Yet on the whole they looked on him more unfavourably than he deserved. If he was inclined to despotism, he was only following his Tudor pre decessors. He was unwise enough to express his views of the Divine Right of Kings in print, so that all might read in cool blood claims which they would never have resisted under Henry and Elizabeth. If he did not understand English political theories, it was greatly the fault of Cecil, who, accustomed for so many years to pull the strings of government, did not attempt to teach him, but encouraged his sovereign to go and enjoy himself at the chase, that he might himself be free to continue in his old methods. If James was blamed as extravagant, he had a wife and family to keep as well as himself, and that wife was generally extravagant, and especially in her costly amusement of masques. The value of money had depreciated. He had come into England with a belief in its inex haustible wealth, a belief increased by the enthusiastic welcome he received from his subjects in thenorth. His gratitude expressed itself in disproportionate liberality; his very "making of Knights," at first, was but an attempt to please those who pleased him. But he soon found, as we have seen, that the Treasury was empty, and he did not stop his extravagance. The Royal income did not 256 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. come in freely or regularly. Some scorned him for his cowardice. In that he did not resemble his Stuart ancestors, who were brave to the last. But the second strain of Tudor blood in him came to him vitiated by the feeble health and loose life of young Darnley, and the pre-natal effects of his mother's experiences hardened his whole life. There must have been some of the heroic strain left in him when he took ship and dared "the devil and the deep sea" to go and bring home his Danish bride amid the winter storms, and heroically endured the difficulties of his return. He was a patient and faithful husband to her all her life. One really feels that his English subjects must have been repelled by his speech. The southern Scots had built up their language from the Anglian dialect; the English had built up theirs from the Saxon dialect. English people are proverbially impatient with languages they do not understand. When the Anglian dialect came to them with the rough northern accent, they must have found it as unpleasant, and as difficult to be understood at times as Dutch Even the English pronunciation of Latin was different from that of other nations. Yet there were certain advantages in James which have not perhaps been duly appreciated, because of dwelling so much on his deficiencies. He did not come empty-handed, he came with a kingdom in his pocket, to bring union instead of wars, to add a fourth foot to a throne that had hitherto stood on three (and one of them very shaky). The unity necessarily made of the country a new thing, a Great Britain (a phrase, as noted by Miss Strickland, first used by Queen Elizabeth). His objection to war was partly an economic one; he had to pay Elizabeth's debts for her wars. He was learned above the average, and encouraged learning, not only of classics, but of science, to which he added an entirely new interest in natural history; his delight was to collect new animals from foreign countries. He had new ideas regarding commerce and national improvement. He eagerly desired to introduce silk-growing and weaving into this country; he superintended his silkworms him self, and had a groom of the chamber (called Lecavell) to carry some about with him to study. For their sakes he imported a shipload of young mulberry trees in 1609, and we know, from xviii] THE COMING OF THE KING 257 the survivors of that cargo, that Shakespeare's mulberry tree could have lived on till to-day if it had been let alone. He had wider ideas of art and literature. One ancestor was a poet, but James I is probably the only King who has tried to lead his subjects to exercise their poetic powers, as he did in his Essaie of a Prentice in the Divine art of Poesie. He recognised dramatists as poets, actors as artists, and both as gentlemen. He honoured Shakespeare more than Elizabeth had ever done, or ever would have done; he honoured Bacon more as a man of science than as an official; he was interested in Southampton as the survivor of a romantic and tragic "rising" (which he supposed to have been in his own favour). Hence, he advanced the young Earl and favoured him at first as much as he himself desired, and afterwards as much as Salisbury allowed. Later what good qualities he had gradually deteriorated through submitting his will to that of self- seeking favourites. The noble Catholic subject, whom the King had fondly believed he had converted, had in turn to try to teach his King, with all due deference and loyalty, that the meaning of Protestantism is religious freedom and political liberty for each individual subject, whether under King or under Pontiff. We are only concerned here with King James and his life as a back ground to Southampton's life. That conglomeration of incon gruous elements which has been called the King's character remains yet to be sufficiently studied and duly estimated. Sir Robert Carey had galloped to the north at dawn on the 24th of March in hot haste, proclaiming James twice by the way, and giving all news to his brother, Sir John Carey, Governor of Berwick. He reached Holyrood late on Saturday the 26th1. The King had gone to bed, but he saw the overspent courier, who brought the sign of the blue ring2. Next day, the 27th, the news was announced in the churches. Cecil had prepared a more dignified and suitable form of announcement by sending Sir Charles Percy and Mr Somerset to Scotland, and Sir Henry Danvers to Ireland. A busy week followed, both in London and in Edinburgh. The. earliest mention of Southampton's name occurs in a deposition 1 D.S.S.P. James, I. 2. 2 Dec. Ace. Treas. Ch., Aud. Off. 387, 40. s. s. 17 258 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. of the time, a striking example of how false news may be coined 1. The information of John ArkinstaU, trumpeter, taken before the Con stables of the Town of Lewes: Upon Sunday being the 27th of March being with Richard Archer, Barker, and Anthony Word, his fellows (being aU four Common Players of Interludes, shewing a Licence to authorke them) were lodging at an Inn in Hastings in Sussex, and one HoUand a Schoolmaster at Rye, who served a cure under Dr Joy, at BrightUng, came into their com pany and said that the King of Scotland had been proclaymed King at London, and after the King was proclaymed, then my Lord Beauchamp was proclaymed by one who was then at Uberty, and being asked who that was, said, "by the Earl of Southampton and that he, the said HoUand had a great Horse, and would have a Saddle, and spend his blood in the Lord Beauchamp's behalf." 2 Nothing further is heard of the matter, but we know that the "Earl of Southampton" was out of that trouble. Manningham, who, in his Diary, had, on February 2nd, recorded At our Feast we had a play Twelfth Night or What you WiU, much Uke the Comedy of Errors, Uke Menoechmi, but most like to that in ItaUan called Inganni — noted in March 1602, after the Queen's death, that on the occasion of the demise of a Sovereign, the Lord Mayor remains the Chief Subject in the Country; for aU other officers had their appointments only during their Sovereign's Ufetime3. He also adds: One wishes that the Earl of Southampton and some others were pardoned and at Uberty; others could be content some men of great place might pay the Queen's debts, because they gathered enough under her. The State Papers contain relatively few notices of the events which immediately followed this great crisis. A sort of inter- 1 MSS. of Rye Corporation. Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. xm. app. iv. p. 26. March 30th, 1603. 2 The Statutes which remained in force till nearly a twelvemonth after the accession of James I vested the legal right in Edward Seymour, Lord Beauchamp, the eldest son of the Earl of Hertford by Lady Catharine Grey, from whom her son inherited the Suffolk claim. See Sir Harris Nicolas, The Chronology of History (Cabinet Cyclopaedia, 1833), p. 320. 3 Page 18. xviii] THE COMING OF THE KING 259 regnum took place in the Privy Council Registers, but we know that Cobham and Grey, and also Raleigh, signed the common letter of the Council to the King on the 26th 1. Manningham would be pleased to know how near Southampton was to liberty. The tenth day after King James learnt of his new power, having settled a special government for Scotland in his absence and prepared the order of his going, he had written the letter which carried release2. And it may be noted that it was the last thing he did in his Scottish Palace; for he left that day, the 5th of April. He was at Berwick by the 6th. The King's letter to the Nobility, Peers and Councillors was practically an order for release: Although we are now resolved, as weU in regard of the great and honest affection borne unto us by the Erie of Southampton as in respect of his good parts enabUng him for ye service of us, and ye state, to extend our grace and favour towards him, whom we perceive also ye late Queene our sister, not withstanding his fault towards her, was moved to exempt from the stroke of justice, nevertheless because we would be loathe in such a case as this wherein the peeres of our Realme have proceeded in the honorable formes used in lyke cases, to take any such course as maie not stand with our greatnes and the gravity fitt to be observed in such matters, we have thoughte meet to give you notice of our pleasure (though ye same be to be executed by our owne regal power) which is only this : Because the place is unwholesome and dolorous to hym to whose bodye and mynde we would give present comforte, intending unto him much further grace and favour, we have written to ye Lieutenant of ye Tower to deUver him out of prison presently to goe to any such place as he shaU choose in or neare our cytye of London, there to carry himself in such quiet and honest forme as we knowe he wiU think meete in his owne discrecion, until the body of our state, now assembled, shaU come unto us, att which tyme we are pleased he shall also come to our presence, for that as yt is on us that his onlie hope dependeth, soe we wUl reserve those workes of further favours untiU the tyme hee be- holdeth our owne eies, whereof as wee knowe the comforte wiU be great unto hym soe yt wiU bee contentment to us to have opportunitye to declare our estymacion of hym in anye thereto belonging wherein ye shaU be doubt- fuU, wee have now by our letters directed our servant the Lord of Kinlosse to give you satysfaccion, whoe bothe before his coming in parte, and nowe by these our letters sent after him, is best instructed therein. We have alsoe written to our aforesaid Leiftenant for the present deUvery of Sir Henry 1 D.S.S.P. James, I. I. Cecil Papers, II. 14. 2 Nichols' Prog. 1. 60. 17 — 2 260 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. NeviUe Knight, whom we are pleased you of your counseU shaU bring with you, when you shaU wayte upon us. From our Palace at Holyrood House the 5th of April 1603, James Rex To our trustie and right weU-beloved ye nobihtie and peeres of our Realme of England, and to our right trustie, and welbeloved our Coun cilors of State now assembled at White HaU1. Edward Bruce, afterwards Lord Kinloss, soon joined the Council. He and Cecil together wrote on the 9th of April that they had stayed the journey of Sir Walter Raleigh, who was conducting a great many suitors to meet the King 2. Manningham, continuing his journal, notes: ioth April 1603, I heard that the Earl of Southampton and Sir Henry NeviUe were set at large yesterday from the Tower3. The ioth is the date always given, but Manningham must be correct. The King's letter probably reached the Lieutenant at night, and he set the two prisoners free at once, con amore. The letter to the Council would reach the Court the following morning, and the news would be formally announced. I take it that this was the occasion on which the Countess Dowager of Southampton sent her undated letter to Cecil: Sir I colde now hate myselfe and sexe that barres me from shewing my love to you as most I wolde, yet as I can, I dessyr to assure you that no alteracion of tyme or fortune (that is far from you) can make me forget my bond to you for me and myne, who under God breathe by your menes. God give him menes, as I beUeve he hath mynd, to be trewely thankful to Him and you. Greve not yourselfe to hurt, for that cann not be recaUed, let it be your comfort, your own trew worthyness has made you more hapy (thoughe for the present less greate). AU wysse and honest give you dew commendacion for your exceeding wysdome and temper in the carage of this great cause. God I doubt not wyU blyss you and your services for that endevore and I wyU remaine whyU I have breth your trewe thankful frynd. M. Southampton4. But, before the ioth, Southampton's conditions were improved. The death of the Queen thawed the ice in the Tower. The 1 Add. MS. 33,051, f. 53, also 34,395, f. 46. Also Tanner MS. 75, f. 63. Stowe MS. 156, f. 45. 2 D.S.S.P. James I, 1. 10. 3 Diary, p. 168. * Cecil Papers, xcvn. 115. Salisb. Papers, xn. 562. xviii] THE COMING OF THE KING 261 prisoner's friends flocked to him, and the Lieutenant made no difficulty. Beyond his mother and wife and little daughter Penelope, we can almost surely name some of them; Lady Rich would be there, with a choke in her voice as she thought of the last day she had met him, with her brother; Sir William Harvey, his step father; John Florio, the resolute, who had seen his former master through his troubles with the Danvers; Sir Henry Danvers himself, still mourning his brother's loss; the Arundels, Sir Thomas and his wife (Southampton's sister Mary); his cousin Anthony, Viscount Montague; Sir Henry Howard would have been there too, but he was off to meet the King; Rutland and his brothers, and Joscelyn Percy. And it is possible his poet Shakespeare would peep in to see, rather than to address, him in the crowd. One person whom we know to have eagerly presented himself, and who was not at first welcomed, was Sir John Davies, formerly Master of the Ordnance in the Tower. It may be remembered that he was one of the most trusted of Essex's followers; that, when Essex went into the city, he left the charge of the Queen's mes sengers to him and Sir Gelly Meyrick. They were both obedient to their leader and would not have let the Lords leave, in spite of the long delay, had not Sir Ferdinando Gorges come back, as if from Essex, and ordered their keepers to release the Lords, going back with them to the Court. Both Meyrick and Davies were condemned, and the first was executed. Davies escaped, no one knew how, but the rumour went abroad that he had purchased his own life by informing on others. As they concern Lord Southampton so closely at this time, I think it is wise to include two letters here (though written a little later) and let them speak for themselves — the one an impromptu letter, and the other written according to order. In what is apparently the earlier, Davies tells Sir Robert Cecil that he could not understand by what means a strange imputation had been laid upon him concerning the Earl of Essex's trouble1. He had given his friends atrue account; to those prejudiced against him he desires to be silent (his innocence would appear later), rather than to revive those matters which he knew would not be pleasing to the State. 1 Add. MS. 6177/181. 262 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Since the Queen's death, out of the exceeding desire I had to give a true and fuU satisfaction unto my Lord of Southampton, whose noble favour I have so highly prized and as much sought to obtayne as it is possible within the compass of my witt and means, I made a fuU relation of aU the(se passages before his coming out of the Tower. His Lordship was then content honor ably to free me from aU falsehood and maUce towards my Lord of Essex and himself; yet intimated error and weakness in being over-credulous to Sir Walter Rawley's othes, who, the better to gaine my confession had sworn unto me that Sir Ferd. Gorges had confessed aU, and aUeged some parti culars of our projects at Drury House, as the possessing of the Courte and the calling of a ParUament, which, as his Lordship said, Sir Ferd: Gorges denied to be his confession, but it was thrust into the book among other untruths. Since that time, upon the continuance of his Lordship's disfavour (as I tooke it) because his foUowers continued much to wrong me, at my coming to the Court in Mr CromweU's house, in the Presence Chamber before my Lord Harry Howard, I besought his Lordship's favour again, made repetition of my carriage in that business and brought it to the same pass again, that his Lordship in his honor and conscience, did clear me as before from maUce or falsehood, but could not take off the tax of error or weakness, which I tolde his Lordship was as heavy to me as viUainy or treachery. I could with as much willingness undergo the one as the other and therefore humbly besought him better to esteem my judgment and discretion, than to think I could be so overtaken, for, it appeared to be his true confession by the testimony of my Lord Keeper, my Lord Treasurer, my Lord AdmiraU and your Honour. His Lordship, upon the naming of my Lord AdmiraU and yourself, was pleased to come unto this honorable conclusion, that if the confession which is pubUshed to be taken on the 16th February, be testified by your Honors to be Sir Ferd. Gorges' true confession, that then his Lord ship would acquit me of aU and be content no less worthUy to esteeme me than he had formerly donne, which condition I also accepted, and therefore humbly beseech you (by the same honor whereby you nobly saved my Ufe) justly to determine this controversie, the matter being absolutely referred to my Lord AdmiraU and yourself. So I ever reste your Honors most faithful servant, J. Davis. [Undated.] The other, from Sir John Davies to Lord Cecil, runs : According unto your Lordship's direction, I wrote unto you, signifying what had passed from my Lord of Southampton, how farre his Lordship has charged me, yet was honorably pleased to remove that tax likewise, if so be my Lord AdmiraU and your Lordship advertised him that that was Sir Ferd. Gorges' true confession. How much I have thought to obtayne xviii] THE COMING OF THE KING 263 his most noble favour, his Lordship can best witness, having used aU the meanes that I could possibly devise. Since it is intimated unto me, that his Lordship should be informed, that I should appUe myself to some, between whom and his Lordship there is not so much kindness as were to be wished — to lose the favour or friend ship of any noble and worthy gentleman were but smaU discretion in me, considering the strange practises for my disgrace that have binne of late against me, but to make any particular donation of my service to any man Uving, I must caU God to witness I never have done, but only to your Lordship, knowing that the obUgation whereby your Lordship hath bounde me is no less than my Ufe, which is more than I hope ever to receive from any man againe, so that if my Lord of Southampton be assured to your Lordship he cannot make any doute but that I must ever be faithful to him. Therefore I humbly beseeche your Lordship to be the Mediator for his noble favour, which I wiU never faiU honestly to deserve by so worthy servyce as shaU be in my power to performe. So with my prayers for your Lordship's continual increase in honor and happinesse I ever rest your Lordship's faithful servant , -p. x Another letter was addressed directly to Southampton by a man whom no one would expect to have done so — the writer of The Declaration of the practises and treasons attempted and committed by Robert, late Earl of Essex and his complices. This letter runs: It may please your Lordship I would have been very gladd to have pre sented my humble service to your Lordship by my attendance, if I could have foreseene that it should not have been unpleasing to you. And there fore because I would commit noe errour, I choose to write, assuring your Lordship (how credible soever it may seeme to you at first) yet it is as true a thinge that God Knoweth, that this great change hath wrought in me noe other change towards your Lordship than this, that I may safely bee nowe that which I was truly before. And soe craving noe other pardon than for troubUng you with this letter, I doe not now begin, but continue to be your Lordship's humble and much devoted Francis Bacon2. On the 1 2th of April Chamberlain said that "John Davis was sworn the King's man, and Neville restored to title and fortune." On the 13th Manningham wrote: The Earl of Southampton must present himself with the nobles, and Sir Henry NeviUe with the Councilors, Uke either shaU be one of their ranks3. 1 Cecil Papers, ca. 171. 2 Add. MS. 5505, f. 23b. 3 Diary, p. 171. 264 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch Many others noticed this arrangement. A letter preserved at Hatfield was written by Southampton to Sir Robert Cecil. It is sealed with his own seal, bearing the four falcons but has neither date nor address. It must have been before Cecil was ennobled. Sk I am very sorry you should have any occasion to think unkindly of Mr Crofts, but being assured that what passed from him to discontent you proceeded rather from his present grief than out of any want of respect, I beseeche you, lett me entreat you to banish the memory of it, and for my sake to procure him by your meanes the order of Knighthood, for which I shaU account myself exceecUngly behouldyng to you to whom I wiU ever remayne most assured. H. Southampton1. Metcalfe's Book of Knights enters Sir Herbert Croft on 7th May, 1603, Sir James Croft on 23rd July, 1603, Sir Henry Croftes on 22nd January, 1610. I do not know which of these might be the "Mr Crofts" whom Southampton so earnestly supported. A Privy Seal granted on May 31st was probably the outcome of the King's interest in Southampton2. Sir Thomas Heneage, the second husband of the Countess Dowager of Southampton, had left her sole executrix, but had left his books in disorder and his payments in arrears. Queen Elizabeth had been severe upon her, and "the injurious son-in-law" did not mend matters. Hence the King to Sir Thomas Egerton : Whereas Sir Thomas Henneage Knight, late Treasurer of the Chamber, stood indebted to our late dear sister in divers somes of money amountyng in the whole to the some of thirteen thousand and three hundred pounds, and had made an arrangement with Sir Moyle Finch who had married his sole daughter and heir that if he survived and should pay sk hundred pounds a year for thirteen years, he should have aU his farms houses and lands, so as to pay the Queen's debt first, and if any were over Sir Thomas's own debts. Since which time Sir Thomas is dead and by his last wiU con stituted the Lady Mary, Countess of Southampton, his sole and only execu trix. And as our late sister considering her need of money would not accept the payment of her debt by sk hundred pounds yearely commanded the said Lady Mary to make payment of the said debt owing by Sir Thomas with aU convenient expedition, which the said Lady Mary dutifuUy did take order for the speedy payment of the said debt of thirteen thousand 1 Cecil Papers, c. 17. 2 Privy Seal 1, James I, 27th May, 1603. xviii] THE COMING OF THE KING 265 three hundred pounds, and thereupon hath payd the same so as there was not anything remayning due unto our said sister, she willed that the sayd Lady Mary should receyve £600 paid by the sayd Moyle Finch into the receipt for so long time as the said is payable, to be employed by her either in the payment of Sir Thomas' debts or at his wiU and pleasure by her letters Privy Seal dated at Nonesuch 27th day of August 41 EUz., that she should always pay this sum to Lady Mary or her assigns, and if Sir Moyle Finch did not pay the treasurer to take means to compel him. Wee therefore give you warrant this is to be continued. Humble suit hath been made by the said Lady Mary for warrant and command that the said payments from tyme to tyme be paid over to her or her assigns. Given under our hand 27th May in the first year of our reign. Greenwich. Among the New Year "Free Giftes out of the Exchequer" the first is "to Mary the Countess of Southampton £600." 1 It has not been recorded where, after his release, Southampton went first, as he had no home. He might have stayed with his mother at the Savoy, or with his sister at Arundel House, or he might have gone, with sad memories, to Drury House, where Sir Charles Danvers used to live. It is not likely that his wife would have kept up a separate establishment during his imprisonment. It must have taken a considerable time to get his affairs into practical order, to supply suitable clothing, and to regain health sufficient to allow him to undertake a long and exciting journey. But, as John Barbour begins, O Fredome is a noble thing, It maketh man to have likyng. The King was at Newcastle on the day Southampton was liberated 2. He passed through York, Worksop, Beauvoir Castle, etc. On Monday the 25th the King fell and hurt his arm, and had to ride back to Sir John Harington's for treatment. On Wednesday the 27th he reached Huntingdon, where the Bailiff gave him the sword of State. Southampton had come to meet him there, and James gave him the sword to bear before him. The King was the guest of Sir Oliver Cromwell, who gave him the greatest enter tainment he had received during his journey. Had these three men but been able to look into the gkss of Time and to see the relations their sons would bear to each other, they would have been astonished x Nichols' Prog. James I. 2 Ibid. p. 52 266 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. and incredulous. The royal party thence went to Sir Robert Cecil's at Theobalds, where they stayed four days. The great officers of State, the Lord Keeper, the Lord Admiral, the Lord Treasurer, and the old servants of Queen Elizabeth, having buried their former mistress, came thither to meet their new master. He went on the 7 th of May to London, was the guest of Lord Thomas Howard at the Charter House, and thence went to the Tower on the nth. The King had been making knights all the way, and be began to make lords on the 1 3th. Cecil was the first of this rank, as Baron of Essenden. On the 1 6th James granted Southampton a special pardon1, with restitution in blood to him and his heirs, and resti tution of titles, lands and property of all kinds. The Venetian ambassador's reports of this period are worth study (checking the dates into Old Style). He says: On his journey the King has destined to great rewards the Earl of South ampton, Sir Henry NeviUe, and others. He has received the 12-year-old son of the Earl of Essex in his arms and kissed him, openly and loudly de claring he was the son of the most noble Knight England had ever produced. The Coronation has been put off tiU the King's name day; tiU then the King wiU not make his entry into London, only taking possession of the Tower, and awaits the Queen to save the expense of a double coronation 2. Dudley Carleton wrote to Chamberlain that the plague spread rapidly in London.... Sonday last at Windsor the King gave the order of the Garter to Prince Henry, the Duke of Lennox, the Earl of Mar, the Earls of Southampton and Pembroke3. The Venetian added that the King had invested Southampton with his own hand with great pomp, and had added a post worth 6000 crowns a year. He no doubt refers to the Captaincy of the Isle of Wight and the Stewardship of the Royal Demesnes on the Island, in reversion after Lord Hunsdon4. He was also made Custos Rotulorum of Hampshire. Cecil had advised the King that he should, in the first instance, enter the Kingdom alone, as the great ladies and the Queen's servants could not come to greet his Queen until after the funeral of Elizabeth. That performed on the 28th of April, amid universal 1 D.S.S.P. James, 1. 84. Patent Rolls, 1 James, pt. 2. Ind. Wt. Bk. p. 3. 2 Venetian Papers, 1603, May 15th, vol. x. (40-66), p. 81. 3 D S.S.P. James, 11. 40. * Ibid. Patent Rolls, 14, d. xviii] THE COMING OF THE KING 267 mourning, the ladies were free. The Queen of Scotland was somewhat delayed by arrangements concerning her younger children ; but the King went out to meet her at Sir George Fermor's at Easton Neston on June 27th. Among the great ladies who there kissed Queen Anne's hand was "My Lady of Southampton."1 The Court returned to Windsor on Thursday the 30th of June. Carleton wrote thence on the 3rd of July: The Lords of Southampton and Grey, the first night the Queen came hither, renewed old quarrels, and feU flatly out in her presence. She was in discourse with my Lord of Southampton, touching the Lord of Essex's action, and wondered, as she said, that so many great men did so Uttle for themselves; to which Lord Southampton answered, that the Queen being made a party against them, they were forced to yield; but if that course had not been taken, there was none of their private enemies, with whom only their quarrel was, that durst have opposed themselves. This being over heard by Lord Grey, he would maintain the contrary party durst have done much more than they, upon which he had the Ue at him. The Queen bade them remember where they were, and soon after sent them to their lodgings, to which they were committed with guards upon them. The next day they were brought out and heard before the Council, and condemned to the Tower. But soon after the King sent for them, and taking the quarrel upon him, and the wrong and disgrace done to her Majesty, and not exchanged between them, so forgave it to make them friends, which was accordingly effected and they set at Uberty2. The date of this incident is significant. Arthur Wilson's History of Great Britain begins with the reign of James. He says3: The Earl of Southampton, covered long with the ashes of great Essex his ruins, was sent for from the Tower and the King looked on him with a smiUng countenance; though displeasing haply to the new Baron of Essendon Robert CecU, yet it was much more so to the Lords of Cobham and Grey, and Sir Walter Raleigh, who were forbidden their attendance. This damp upon them, being spirits fuU of acrimony, made them break into murmurs, then into conspiracy with two Romish Priests. Wilson describes their conspiracy, arrest, and trial as "strong proofs, and weak denials... much muddy water." Raleigh's chief accuser was Lord Cobham, who afterwards withdrew his charge and then reaffirmed it. 1 Lady Anne Clifford's Diary, Knole MS. Nichols' Prog. James I, p. 173. 2 Also Nichols' Prog. p. 187. 3 History, p. 4. 268 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Lodge says in his Life of Cecil: Raleigh is known to have presented a memorial to James on his arrival in England charging Cecil with the ruin of Essex, and his father with the murder of Queen Mary of Scots1. If this be true, it was a very unwise step, for of course Cecil would see that memorial and be moved thereby. Raleigh also was known to have used very imprudent words about the King. "The Pack" was at last and definitively "broken up." The first of James's personal proclamations was for the appre hension of William and Patrick Ruthven, brothers of the Earl of Gowry. The second was for the capture of Anthony Copley, "younger brother of one Copley, that is lately returned from foreign parts into this country, and hath dealt with some to be of a conspiracie to use some violence upon our person, etc." Anthony Copley was the recusant, minor poet, and essayist, who approved of toleration in religion, but wanted no papal rule in England. The Court was shortly afterwards startled by the news of the arrest of Lord Grey on the 1 2th of July. Sir Walter Raleigh, examined on the 14th, was sent to the Tower on the 17th; Lord Cobham, George Brooke his brother, and Anthony Copley joined him; Griffin, Griffith, or Gervase Markham was looked for. The Venetian ambassador says: When Anthony Copley was arrested he betrayed a plot of twelve gentle men to kiU the King and some of the Council; among these were Lords Grey and Cobham, Sk Walter Raleigh, George Brooke, Griffen Markham, and the two priests Watson and Clarke 2. The behaviour of Raleigh was very unexpected3. The Lieutenant of the Tower told Cecil he had never seen any prisoner so distracted as he. He protested his innocence loudly, and yet in despair at his disgrace, he tried to commit suicide by stabbing himself to the heart. He did not go deep enough, so survived to endure the humiliations he strove to escape. On the 2nd of July the King had kept the feast of the Garter at Windsor for the installation of the new knights, Prince Henry, 1 Illustrations of History, 11. 4. 2 Venetian Papers, x. 95, 101. Harl. MS. 293. 3 Cecil Papers, ci. 85, etc. Winwood Papers, 11. 8 and 11. 10. Edward's Life of Raleigh, 1. 375. , xviii] THE COMING OF THE KING 269 the Duke of Lennox, and the Earls of Southampton, Mar, and Pembroke1. On the 2 1 st of July, in the Great Hall at Hampton Court, there was a creation of peers, and Henry Wriothesley was created anew Earl of Southampton and Baron of Titchfield; Charles Blount, Lord Mountjoy, was created Earl of Devonshire; Sir Henry Danvers, Lord Danvers of Dauntsey. On the 23rd Francis Bacon was knighted, after eager efforts to win the honour; on the 24th was issued a general pardon, with certain exclusions; on the 25th, the usual procession through the city being omitted because of the plague, the King and Queen were crowned at Westminster on the Stone of Destiny from Scone. The Earl of Tyrone, now willing to suhmit, had been brought over by Lord Mountjoy, who had followed out successfully the thwarted plans of his friend Essex. Probably it was in part through his connection with the Earl of Southampton that Sir William Harvey was remembered in July 1603. Among the Privy Signet Bills for that month is found: The Office of Remembrancer of the First Fruits and Tenths in His Majesties Exchequer with the usual fees and aUowances thereunto belonging to Sir William Harvey Knight, one of his Highness' gentlemen Pensioners during his Life, after the decease of Sir Edward Stafford Knight. (Pro cured by Sir Thomas Lake at the suit of Mr Murray, Laird of TuUibardine. Fee" 6/8.) One little note on Southampton's affairs has been preserved by Mr Halliwell Phillipps: A conveyance of Land by the Earl of Southampton of property at Romsey, near Southampton2. He probably needed ready money so sorely that he had to realise what he could ky his hands upon. Later the King seems to have refunded that3. One letter of the Venetian ambassador should have been mentioned, as it throws some light upon Southampton's religious feelings. He says: Queen Anne has secretly become a CathoUc, though she goes to the heretical church with her husband. She insists on educating her daughter as a CathoUc, and the King keeps the Prince from her, as much as he can. The King has made himself the Head of the AngUcan Church, and exacts 1 Ashmole, List of Garters, p. 53. 2 Hall. Phill. Short List, etc., p. 10, no. 6. 3 D.S.S.P. James, ix. Docquet Oct. 28th, 1604, and x. 63. 270 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. the oath. Old Howard, who has lately been appointed to the CouncU, and Southampton, who were both CathoUcs, declare that God has touched their hearts, and that the example of the King has more weight with them than the disputes of Theologians. They have become Protestants, and go to Church in the train of the King. The Plague is increasing, it is unusuaUy hot1. The Royal Progress began on the ioth of August from Hampton Court by Loseley, Farnham, and Basing to Hurstbourne, on the 20th and 2 ist to Salisbury, and on the 29th and 30th to Wilton, with some days at Woodstock (nth to 15th September), then back to Basing2. On August 20th the King wrote to Lord Treasurer Buckhurst3: Having directed you to consider a suit moved unto me by the Earl of Southampton, for the farming of the Import on Sweet Wines coming into this country, at the rent of £6000, and received answer that you knew of no inconvenience likely to arise to us by such a grant : We require you to order the demise of the said impost for a terme of years, with such clauses and covenants as in the demise to the late Earls of Leicester and Essex, or with such other as you think meet4. [Draft.] On the 22nd this grant was duly made out to him in the usual form. Strange that what the Queen would not renew to Essex in 1600, but kept in her own hands, should be given by her successor to Essex's friend ! On the 6th of October the King and Queen were back at Wilton, and seem to have spent their time between Wilton, Basing, and Winchester until the beginning of December5. On the ioth of October Southampton was made Master of the Queen's Game and Keeper of her Forests, and on December ioth Master of the King's Game in Hampshire6. Meanwhile Raleigh was examined again, before Lord Henry Howard, Lord Wotton and the virulent Sir Edward Coke, on the 14th August. The charges against him were urged to the point of treason. Thereupon he wrote a pitiful letter to the Earls of South ampton, Suffolk, and Devonshire 7, declaring his innocence of the 1 Venetian Papers, x. par. 66. 2 Nichols' Prog. p. 250. 3 D.S.S.P. Addenda James, xxxv. 35. i D.S.S.P. James, m. Docquet. 6 Ibid. James, iv. 13. 6 Ibid. James, v. Docquet. 7 Raleigh's Works, ed. Birch, n. 379. xviii] THE COMING OF THE KING 271 two main points, "that he had been offered money as a bribe, and that he was privy to Lord Cobham's Spanish Journey." He implored their Lordships not to leave me to the cruelty of the Laws of England.... There is no glory in shedding innocent blood.... I know your Lordships have a reputation of conscience, as weU as of Industry.... I know the King is too merciful &c. Your Lordships' humble and miserable suitor, Walter Raleigh. I have not found any allusion to their reply. Grey did not write to Southampton, but did so repeatedly to Cecil, and sometimes directly to the King himself. It was decided they should be tried at Win chester. In preparation for that there was a warrant signed for "green cloth to be used for the Arraynement of Lord Graie, Lord Cobham, George Brooke, and Sir Walter Raleigh, apud Civitat. Winton, Baize and hangings."1 The confessions of Brooke and Raleigh were taken at Winchester on November 25th, 1603. Raleigh unnecessarily gave informa tion against Cobham which so enraged his fellow-prisoner that he charged Raleigh with a number of misdeeds. He afterwards confessed that he had not spoken the truth in his statement, but again confirmed what he had said. There were two branches of the plot, which had been planned to be carried out on June 24th 2 (curiously near the last quarrel between Grey and Southampton). Sir G. Markham had advised them to work it by night, and to remember that the King was not King till he was crowned. Lord Grey meant to have secured a body of men, ostensibly to lead to the Low Countries; but he really meant to use them for this design. He expressed his desire to his companions that afterwards he should be made Earl Marshal of England and Master of the Horse. Watson and the priests devised a scheme which was called the Bye Plot. Raleigh's was called the Main Plot "to kill the King and all his Cubs." Whether Raleigh had been in earnest or not, he had been extremely imprudent, and he now learned how charges can multiply against a man at the bar. The Earl of South ampton and his cousin Lord Montague were both on the jury for trying Cobham and Grey. All the conspirators were found guilty 1 Wardrobe Accounts Audit Office 2345/32. 2 Add. MS. 34,218, f. 226. 272 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. on 7th of December. The priests were executed, with George Brooke, who died accusing his brother and Raleigh. He seems also to have accused his brother-in-law Cecil, since the latter wrote to Shrewsbury1 on the 23rd December "of the base and viperous accusation before he died"; but this, of course, was not believed. Sir John Harington did what he could to help his cousin, G. Markham. Harington wrote, "It is almost incredible with what bitter speeches and execrations Raleigh was exclaimed upon, all the way he went through London and the towns, which general hatred ofthe people would be to me more bitter than death."2 The other three stood on the scaffold expecting death, when the King's clemency prevailed, and, with a dramatic surprise, their prayers in preparation for death were changed into thanks for a prolongation of life. They were not pardoned, however, and were all taken back to the Tower. During the course of these proceedings Southampton had written on November nth from Wilton to Julius Caesar, to hasten the pardon of Captain Edward Thynne 3. We may turn now to a pleasanter record. Very shortly after the King arrived in the metropolis, while he was yet in the Tower, he planned a reformation in the theatre. He had large views of the prerogatives of Kings and a liberal interest in the players' art; so he took away from noblemen their power of licensing their servants as players, reserving all such power for himself and the members of the Royal Family. In choosing his own royal company he was apparently tied by some old promise made to Laurence Fletcher, chief of the English comedians who used to come to Scotland, for whose sake he had fought the ministers of Edinburgh, coerced the burghers of Aberdeen, and threatened Elizabeth's agent, that if the rumour was true that Fletcher had been hanged in England, he, the King, would hang the English agent in Edinburgh4. The rumour was not true. This promise performed, he chose the Lord Chamberlain's company for his own, partly to please Southampton, no doubt, who knew them, and partly to please himself. For were they not the company who included a real poet, who could satisfy all the 1 Nich. Prog. p. 300. 2 Harington's Brief Notes and Remembrances. 3 Add. MS. 12,506, ff. 107, 121. 4 See my Burbage, and Shakespeare's Stage, pp. 99 and 253. xviii] THE COMING OF THE KING 273 canons of his poetic criticism? It may not have been noted that James put Shakespeare's name above that of Burbage, or the other members of the company. Was he not a protigS of the Earl of Southampton? So there was here something of the nature of a compliment to the patron who, on the 16th of May, had been restored in blood and in title. On the 17th of May James signed the Privy Seal for the patent of "the King's Players" (the patent itself was drawn up on the 19th). Anyone may read it clearly, in the revolving frame in the Museum of the Record Office — "Pro Laurentio Fletcher, Willielmo Shakespeare, et aliis," to give them authority to play comedies and tragedies, etc., as weU for our Solace and Pleasure as pubUcly to their best commoditie, within any convenient place in any University, Town, or Borough, commanding all officers not only to permit them, but to aid and assist them, also what further favour you shaU shewe to these our servants for our sake, we shaU take it kindly at your hands. As his Majesty's Servants, they took rank with the Grooms of the Chamber without fee. They were paid when they performed at Court, or elsewhere, for the King. The Cecil Papers copy, with the Great Seal, dated the 19th, contains the names Laurence Fletcher, William Shakespeare, Richard Burbage, Augustine Phillipps, John Hemings, Henry Condell, and the others; and Augustine Phillipps had the last vestige of the discredit he had suffered, by being called in question over the Percy performance, washed away. The other companies were licensed by the Queen and Prince. This altered the whole status of "the quality," made playing a profession, and gave its members new opportunities of development. Unfortunately the plague somewhat spoiled the prospects of their first year, though they probably toured through the country. The King was in Wilton by December. John Hemings, one of his Majesty's Players, received "a warrant on the 3rd December 1603, for the payment of the expenses of himself and the rest of his company coming from Mortlake and presenting one play before the King on the 2nd December at the Court at Wilton £30. 'n So we know 1 See my Burbage, and Shakespeare's Stage, pp. 99 and 253. s. s. 18 274 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. where the King, the Earl of Southampton, and his poet Shake speare were at that date. The King allowed them the payment of three plays for one, reckoning the distance. They also played at Hampton Court after their return, on St Stephen's day at night, St John's day at night, and Innocents' day, probably performing on one of these occasions "The fair maid of Bristol," entered at Stationers' Hall 8th February 1604-5. A good many notices, which at the time could not be supposed likely to have any relation to Southampton, might have been inserted here; but I must content myself with one — a letter from Wildgoose and Lennard, reporting that Mr Annesley, of Lee in Kent, was unfit to manage his own affairs, and begging to have charge of him, on 1 8th October, 16031. Concerning this, his daughter wrote to Cecil: I most humbly thank you for the sundry letters that it hath pleased you to direct unto gentlemen of worship in these parts, requesting them to take into their custodies the person and estate of my poor aged and daily dying father: But that course so honorable and good for aU parties, intended by your Lo., wiU by no means satisfy Sr John WiUgosse, nor any course else, unless he may have him begged for a Lunatic, whose many years service to our late dread Sovereign Mistress and native country deserved a better agnomination, than at his last gasp to be recorded and registered a Lunatic, yet find no means to avoid so great an infamy and endless blemish to us and our posterity, unless it shaU please your Lo. of your honourable disposition, if he must needs be accompted a Lunatic, to bestow him upon Sir James Croft, who out of the love he bare unto him in his more happier days, and for the good he wisheth unto us his chUdren, is contented upon entreaty to undergo the burden and care of him and his estate, without intendment to make any one penny benefit to himself by any goods of his, or ought that may descend to us his chUdren, as also to prevent any record of Lunacy that may be procured hereafter. Lewsham 23 October 1603. Cordell Annesley (of Lee) 2. This good daughter, who thus brought her father to rest in peace, after the Dowager Countess of Southampton passed away, married Sir William Harvey, Southampton's step-father. The printers were busy till the end of 1603. Funeral elegies on the great Eliza were poured forth, good and bad. Adulatory verses to welcome the new Sovereign were hastily indited. Some tried to 1 Cecil Papers, ci. 163. 2 Ibid, clxxxvii. 119. xvm] THE COMING OF THE KING 275 combine both and succeeded in neither. Some thought more of Southampton. The writer of "a mournful dittie entituled Elizabeth's Losse" invited You poets aU, brave Shakspere, Jonson, Greene, Bestowe your time to write for England's Queene; Lament, lament, lament you EngUsh Peeres, Lament your losse possest so many yeares, Return your songs and Sonnets and your laies To set forth Sweet EUzabetha's praise x- No, Shakespeare had no thought of pretending to lament the hard jailor of "The Lord of his Love." In dignified silence he let the new King come as he had let the old Queen go. This silence was noted. He did not care. Chettle, in his England's Mourning Garment, entreats him: Nor doth the suver-tongued MeUcert Drop from his honied muse one sable teare To mourn her death who graced his desert, And to his laies opened her Royal eare. Shepherd, remember our EUzabeth And sing her rape, done by that Tarquin, Death ! Shakespeare was deaf even to that appeal. If he wrote anything in connection with this subject, it did not see the light for years. Many think that the 107th Sonnet was his welcome to South ampton. I have had my doubts of it; the first half does not follow Shakespeare's usual methods of construction, the close falls beneath his level. Yet, since it has been regarded as Shakespeare's address to Southampton, it ought to be included here. Not mine own fears, nor the prophetic soul Of the wide world, dreaming on things to come, Can yet the lease of my true love control, Suppos'd as forfeit to a confin'd doom. The mortal moon hath her ecUpse endur'd, And the sad augurs mock thek own presage; Incertamties now crown themselves assur'd, And peace proclaims oUves of endless age. Now with the drops of this most balmy time My love looks fresh, and Death to me subscribes, 1 Greene was dead, but the rhyme was too useful to lose. 276 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Since spite of him 111 Uve in this poor rhyme, WhUe he insults o'er duU and speechless tribes: And thou in this shalt find thy monument When tyrants' crests, and tombs of brass are spent. A more jubilant note was struck by John Davies — not he of the Essex trouble, but John of Hereford, writing-master and poet. In the Preface to Microcosmus, singing the praises of James, the first man that he calls on to join him is Southampton. Then let's be merry in our God and King, That made us merry being Ul bestadd: South-Hampton up the cappe to Heaven fling And on the VioU there sweet praises sing For he is come that grace to aU doth bring. If thou did'st fault, (judge Heav'n, for I wiU spare thee Because my faults are more than can be cast) It did to greater glorie but prepare thee, Sithe greater Vertue now thereby thou hast Before our troubles we seeme goodnesse past But cold Affliction's water cooks the heate Which youth and greatness oft too much doth waste. And Queenes are coy and cannot brooke the sweat That such heate causeth, for it seems unsweete. But yet thy woorth doth wrest from what soere Thereto opposed by unseene violence, Acknowledgment of what in thee is deere That is, the glory of much excellence Fitt for the use of high'st preheminence. The World is in the wane, and worthy meh Have not therein in each place residence : Such as are worthy should be cherisht then And being overthrown, rais'd up agen. He also wrote a Sonnet "To the right noble and intirely beloved Earl of Southampton." Welcome to shore, unhappie-Happie Lord From the deep seas of danger and distresse Where, like thou wast to be thrown overboard In every storm of discontentednesse. O Uving death to die when others please ! O dying Ufe to Uve how others wiU; Such was thy case (deere Lord), such as thine ease, O HeU on earth, can HeU more vex the WiU ? xviii] THE COMING OF THE KING 277 This HeU being harrowed by his substitute That harrowed HeU, thou art brought forth from thence Into an earthly Heaven absolute To tast his sweetnesse, see his exceUence Thy Liege weU wotts true Love that soule must wound To whom Heaven's grace and His doth so abound. Davies also wrote praises of Penelope, Lady Rich, of Lord Mountjoy, and of the Earl of Pembroke, Pembroke, to Court, to which thou wast made strange. At the time of the Essex troubles and his own disgrace, the Earl of Pembroke had written about "bringing those (men, I cannot call them) to their ruin for their wicked action."1 Yet it was his family poet who now wrote the noblest praise of Southampton : To Henry Wriothesley, Earle of Southampton. Nonfert ullum ictum illcesa fceiicitas He who hath neuer warr'd with miserye, Nor euer tugg'd with Fortune & distresse, Hath had n'occasion, nor no field to trie The strength and forces of his worthinesse: Those parts of iudgement which feUcitie Keepes as conceal'd, affliction must expresse; And onely men shew their abiUties, And what they are, in their extremities. The world had neuer taken so fuU note Of what thou art, hadst thou not beene undone; And onely thy affliction hath begot More fame, then thy best fortunes could haue done; For euer, by aduersitie are wrought The greatest workes of admiration. And aU the fake examples of renowne Out of distresse and miserie are growne. Mutius the fire, the tortures Regulus, Did make the miracles of faith and zeale, ExUe renown'd, and grac'd Rutilius; Imprisonment and poyson did reueale 1 Salisbury Papers, xi. 40. Cecil Papers, lxxvi. 51. 278 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. xviii The worth of Socrates; Fabritius' Pouertie did grace that Common-weak More than aU Syllaes riches, got with strife; And Catoes death did vie with Ctssars Ufe. Not to b'unhappy is unhappynesse; And misery not t'haue knowne miserie: For the best way unto discretion, is The way that leades us by adversitie. And men are better shew'd what is amisse, By th'expert finger of calamitie, Then they can be with aU that Fortune brings ; Who neuer shewes them the true face of things. How could we know that thou could'st haue indur'd With a reposed cheere, wrong and disgrace; And with a heart and countenance assur'd Have lookt Sterne death and horror in the face ? How should we know thy soule had beene secur'd In honest counsels and in way unbase ! Hadst thou not stood to shew us what thou wert, By thy affliction, that discri'd thy heart. It is not but the tempest that doth show The Sea-man's cunning; but the field that tries The Captaines courage: and we come to know Best what men are, in their worst ieoperdies : For lo, how many haue we seene to grow To high renown from lowest miseries, Out of the hands of death, and many a one T'have been undone, had they not beene undone. He that indures for what his conscience knowes Not to be Ul, doth from a patience hie Looke onely on the cause whereto he owes Those sufferings, not on his miserie: The more h'endures, the more his glory growes, Which never growes from imbeciUitie: Onely the best compos'd and worthiest harts God sets to act the hard'st and constant'st parts. Samuel Daniel1. 1 From Certaine Epistles, 1 601-3. CHAPTER XIX FESTIVITIES, 1604-5 The King's Own Players performed at Hampton Court on New Year's day at night, but we do not know the name of the play1. The first year of United Britain was signalised by a new form of Court extravagance, which would have scandalised Queen Elizabeth. Costly masques were produced, in which the characters, hitherto reserved for men, were played by women performers, con sisting of the noblest ladies (and the Queen, of all ladies in the land, acted the leading character). A new style of writing was necessary for these, with a new style of dressing. The courtiers crowded to see — some to admire, some to criticise. Southampton certainly saw the masques; we may wonder what he and Shake speare thought of them2. On the 1 1 th of January Southampton had his summons to Parliament duly forwarded; on the 12th there was a conference regarding toleration in religion. On the 1 8th of January the King's Players had a warrant for the payment of ^53 for their performances; and what was doubtless more welcome to them, as being unexpected, was a free gift from the King, on the 8th of February, of £^o3 to help towards their maintenance while prohibited from playing publicly because of the plague. The King left Hampton Court early in February for Whitehall, proceeding thence to Royston and Newmarket. His players seem to have played at Whitehall, for a warrant was granted on the 28th of February for the plays performed before his Majesty, the one on Candlemas day at night, the other on Shrove Sunday at night4. Southampton duly sat in the Parliament of 1604, where the first 1 Dec. Ace. Treas. Ch„ Audit Off. 388, 41. 2 Nich. Prog. p. 424. 3 Audit Off., 388, 41. 4 Dec. Ace. Treas. Ch., Pipe Off. 542 28o THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. bills passed were for the restitution of himself in blood, as well as of the children of the Earl of Essex1. But he did not sit through the session. The Lord Chamberlain announced to the House of Lords that the Earls of Southampton and Pembroke were to be excused, having been commanded to attend the King to Royston. On the 1 2th of March the King, Queen, and Prince came to their palace in the Tower, prepared to complete the proper ceremonies of a coronation by a procession through the city. On the 13th of March the King created Lord Henry Howard Earl of Northampton, and Thomas Sackville, Lord Buckhurst, Earl of Dorset. The Earl of Southampton was in the next day's procession, and his mother (not his wife, who was otherwise engaged). Howes' Chronicle and Nichols' Progresses give accounts of the seven triumphal arches on the route, of the devices and masques prepared by Ben Jonson, Drayton, Webster, Dekker, Daniel, and others. Gilbert Dugdale's descriptions state that King James gave not only to those worthy of honour, but to the mean gave grace, as taking unto him the Lord Chamberlain's servants, now the King's Actors, the Queen taking to her the Earl of Worcester's servants that are now her Actors, and the Prince their son Henry took to him the Earl of Nottingham's servants, who are now his Actors, so that of Lord's servants they have become the servants of the King, Queen and Prince.... The prisoners in the Tower, Cobham, Grey, Raleigh, were removed to other prisons for the time2. The Players, as Royal Servants, were in the Procession. This has been disputed. But the Lord Chamberlain's books3 are clear about it, mentioning the quantity allowed for the cloth of their garments, the occasion of its being used, and the names of the wearers. In great dashing writing, heading the list of the King's Players, is the name of "William Shakespeare," spelt correctly. Foley tells us that on the 24th of the month (probably March) "there was a solemn tilting before Whitehall, the Earls of Cum berland and Southampton with the greatest commendation."4 On April ist, 1604, Southampton wrote to Sir Julius Caesar, Master of Requests, about a ship left at Portsmouth by a Frenchman, which had been seized by his Deputy. His action had now been 1 Lords Journals, a. 264-266. 2 Nichols' Prog. p. 413. 3 Lord Chamb. Books, 11. 4 (5). ' Foley's Eng. Jes. 1. 59. xix] FESTIVITIES, 1604-5 281 called into question. "I thought that when I was made Vice- Admirall by the Admirall he had given me somewhat. I now find that without my privity such courses are taken, that I shall hold a thing in name and shew only." If the Frenchmen who now claim it shew no cause for their claim, he desires "my Deputy should suffer neither loss nor disgrace, neither any dishonour." He suggests that both parties should be heard before Caesar. On the ioth of April Southampton recommended a soldier to Sir Julius Caesar who had been wounded and maimed in service in Elizabeth's time, and required that the help should be continued. On the same day from the Court he writes in favour of a poor man, called Evans. He also asks Sir Julius Caesar to help Thomas Jones, who has lost money in a case with Clement Greene; Greene had three small ships laden with commodities for the Isle of Wight, but the Admiralty attached the same1. Thomas Whitefield, who was of a troublesome and contentious disposition, had commenced a suit against Henry Needier in his Majesty's Court at Whitehall. Southampton asks Sir Julius Caesar to attend to it, on May 17th, 1604. A year after Southampton's liberation, his wife brought him a second daughter2. Doubtless there was some disappointment in this, as he wished this time for a son and heir. But the child was welcomed with honour. The Queen stood godmother to "Anne the daughter ofthe right honourable therll of Southampton baptized in April 1604 in the Chapel, in the second yere of his Majesties' Reign."3 A bill is sent in for "making readie the Chappel at Whitehall for her Majesty for the Christening of the Earl of Southampton's Child." On April 18th Southampton and the Earl of Devonshire were appointed joint Lieutenants of Hampshire4. Southampton was then also doing good service as Commissioner for the Union5. On the ist of May the King was at Highgate, at the house of Sir William Cornwallis, where Ben Jonson's masque, which Gifford calls The Penates, was performed before him. 1 Add. MS. 12,506, ff. 139, 145, 148, 199. 2 Orig. Cheque Book, Chap. Roy. p. 75. 3 Dec. Ace. Treas. Ch., Audit Off. 388, 41. 4 Patent 25 d, also Doyle's Heraldry. 6 Wilson's History of England, p. 29. 282 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. On the 8th of May, 1604, he signed a warrant: James R. Wee wUl and command you immediately upon the sight thereof, to deUver, or cause to be deUvered to our right trustie and right welbeloved cosins Henry, Earl of Southampton, and William, Earl of Pembroke, chosen and elected to be Knights and companions of our Honorable order of the Garter, eyther of them eighteen yards of crimson velvet for their robes, kirtle, hoode and Tippets of our saide Order, and twelve yardes of white sarcenet to eyther of them for lyning of the same as hath been accustomed. And these our letters, signed with our own hand shalbe your sufficient warrant and discharge in this behalfe. Given at Westminster eighth day of May in the second year of our reigne &c. To Sir George Howme Master of our greate wardrobe1. That would naturally have been in preparation for the feast of St George of that year. Southampton was mysteriously and suddenly arrested in June, 1604, and as suddenly released, without trial or explanation2. Rumour was rife. The Venetian ambassador notes the fact with concern. He says on July 6th, 1604: On Sunday night was arrested the Earl of Southampton, Baron Danvers and others, who were confined separately and examined, but aU set at Uberty yesterday morning. I have not heard the reason, probably the maUgnity of their enemies, of whom they have many3. He writes later: I have not found out the real reason. It is said that it was a charge of treason against Southampton that he meant to kiU some Scots who are much about the King, charged by unknown enemies. Southampton went to the King and said that if he knew the name of his enemy he would challenge him, but it passed off with fak words4. Malone says that it was by the machinations of Cecil (soon afterwards made Lord Cranborne) that the King was persuaded to believe that too great an intimacy subsisted between Southampton and his Queen5. It is true they might have been thrown a good deal together, as Southampton had literary and artistic tastes, as well as goodwill to help her about her masques. Probably Malone gathered this from that prejudiced and self-contradictory book, 1 Add. MS. 5756, f. 233. 2 Sir Eg. Brydges, Peers, p. 321. 3 Venetian Papers, vol. x. no. 238-242. 4 Birch's James I, pp. 494-5. 6 Shakespeare, x. 69. xix] FESTIVITIES, 1604-5 283 Anthony Weldon's Court and Character of King James1 Having discussed the trial and condemnation of Cobham, Grey, and Raleigh, Weldon says: Now doth the King return to Windsor, when there was an apparition of Southampton being a Favourite to his majesty, by that privacy and dear- nesse presented to the Court view, but SaUsbury, liking not that any of Essex his faction should come into play, made that apparition appeare as it were in transitu, and so vanished, by putting some jealousies into the King's Head, which was so far from jealousie, that he did not much desire to be in his Queen's companie, yet love and regaUty must admit of no partner ship. Southampton was present at the prorogation of Parliament on the 7th of July, 16042- In July of that year the King granted Sir Fulke Greville the ruined castle of Warwick, at a nominal rent of £5 a year, and of the mills and meadows belonging thereto at the yearly rent of ^20 3. He rebuilt and improved the castle at enormous cost to himself. The tide of the plague had rolled away from London, and it had now become the healthiest place in the kingdom. "Now the Queen has come, the King will stay at Windsor." "The ordinances of the King's Household" were drawn up 17th July4- From Sir Robert Carey's Life5 we learn that the King and Queen went back to Easton Neston to meet their delicate young son Charles, who could not walk at four years of age. Those who intended to beg his custody feared to undertake it; Sir Robert, however, and his wife risked it, after which the child improved every day. Sir Robert had not been otherwise rewarded for his wild ride to the north. The Councillors whom he had forestalled united to hinder him; but in securing this office he made a path for his future. On July 25th Southampton had grants of Basildon, co. Gloucester, Dunmow in Essex, and other lands. The King being peaceably settled in his new kingdom, ambassa dors poured in to congratulate him. There were some peculiarly interesting incidents connected with the Spanish ambassador sent 1 Shakespeare, x. 41. 2 Lords Journal, II. 266. 3 D.S.S.P. James, vni. July 4. My Shak. Warwick. Contemp. p. 169. 4 Harl. MSS. 642, f. 228. 6 Page 164. 284 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. to his Court. Many years since, Halliwell-Phillipps appealed to Shakespeareans to tell him where he might find the reference to the fact that Shakespeare's Company was in attendance on the Spanish embassy. About twenty years ago, in doing other work, I found this reference, but did not use it until I had collected further material for my paper on "The Shakespeares of the Court" in the Athenaum1. On this occasion the special envoy of Philip III of Spain was the Constable of Castille, who had power to agree to and ratify the terms of peace between Spain and Great Britain. Great preparations had been made to receive him, and Somerset House, the second palace in London, was prepared for his recep tion. All expenses were to be defrayed by the King, hence extra servants (not ofthe Constable's train, nor ofthe resident ambassador's household) were provided for him. And among these other servants were the King's Players, who then acted as Grooms ofthe Chamber. We know this from the account of their payment, among the other expenses of the Treasurer of the Chamber 2. To Augustine Phillipps and John Hemyngs for th' aUowance of them selves and tenne of their feUowes his Majesties Groomes of the Chamber and Players, for waytinge and attending on his Majesties Service, by com- mandmente, upon the Spanish ambassador at Somerset House for the space of 18 dayes viz. from the 9th day of Auguste 1604 untiU the 27th day of the same as appeareth by a biU thereof signed by the Lord Chamberlain xnli xiir. Shakespeare is not mentioned, but was probably included. It is a quaint idea to imagine him being taught Spanish Court Etiquette by the Majordomo of the Ambassador, but as for any romance about Shakespeare (or his fellows) being allowed to hear (or even to see) the secret commission which sat at Somerset House, we must let that go. The picture of the members of that historic meeting may be seen in the National Portrait Gallery, Robert Cecil and Lord Mountjoy among them. We may be sure that Shakespeare was one of the many who wanted no peace with the Spaniard. But there was not the same reserve on the public occasions and gala days of that time; so that the King's Players probably enjoyed their little job. 1 12th March, 1910, and my Burbage and Shak. Stage, p. 101. 2 Dec. Ace. Treas. Ch., Audit Off. 388, 41; Pipe Off. 543. xix] FESTIVITIES, 1604-5 285 Southampton was appointed Councillor to the Queen on the 9th of August1, and Cecil was created Viscount Cranborne on the 20th. The Venetian ambassador wrote that the King came to London on the 9th (English Style)2. The Constable came next day to Court attended by Lord Southampton and Lord Effingham, the son of the Lord Admiral. The great banquet given them at Whitehall on that occasion is noteworthy. We can find all about it in the Journal of the Constable's doings (in Spanish) printed at the time, now in the British Museum. Also parts of the story have been garnered by Rye in his England as seen by Foreigners. The Earls of Pembroke and Southampton officiated as gentlemen-ushers. ...The Constable being at the King's side, and the Conte of ViUamediana on the Queen's.... The principal noblemen of the Kingdom were likewise at the table, in particular, The Duke of Lennox, Earl of Arundel, Earl of Suffolk, Lord Chamberlain, Earl of Dorset, Lord Treasurer, Earl of Nottingham, High Admkal, the Earls of Devonshire, Southampton and Pembroke, and many others.... There was plenty of instrumental music, and the Banquet was sumptuous and profuse.... Dancing began in the Audience Chamber. At this baU there were more than fifty Ladies of Honour.... Prince Henry danced a GaUiard....The Earl of Southampton then led out the Queen and three other gentlemen their several partners, who aU joined in dancing a brando. In another the Queen danced with the Duke of Lennox.... The Prince stood up to dance a correnta which he did very gracefuUy....The Earl of Southampton was now again the Queen's partner and they went through the Correnta likewise. Afterwards there was bear-baiting. After all this glory and lavish extravagance came r The Royal Proclamation upon the Peace with Spain and the Archduke whereunto the people made no manner of sign of joy thek way or in any way soever. I have heard it from those who heard it at WhitehaU3. The articles of the Peace between England and Spain are given in the same paper. The display probably led the Constable to advise liberal rewards to Cecil, who had made things move. A list of the fees of the Queen's officials at that time includes the names of Southampton, Lord Cranborne, Lord Sidney, Sir George Carew, Mr Ralph Ewens, &c.4 Nichols gives the list in his 1 Doyle's Off. Baronage, I. 373. Nichols' Prog. p. 268. D.S.S.P. James, cvn. 3. 2 Rye, p. 123. 3 Add. MS. 38,139, ff. 71, 71 b. Manwood's Notes. 1 Add. MS. 38,139, f. 186 b. 286 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Progresses of James I. Immediately after the Spanish Commissioners left, the Court dispersed for the King's hunting progress. Fowler, on Oct. 3rd, wrote from Hampton Court, "The Spanish Ambassa dor hath been here, and presented gifts to Pembroke, Southampton, and others." The Privy Council's Register of this period was accidentally burnt, but part of a copy has been preserved. Thence we find that on November 30th, 16041, the Council wrote a letter to the Lord President and Council of York, to commit one Nalton, a minister, to prison, for speaking of lewd words against the Earl of Southampton, and after to certifie the nature of the wordes, that such order may be taken for his further punishment and reparation of his Lordship's order as shaU be fit. Most likely Nalton called him "Recusant." Nothing further seems to have been done that year. On January 28th, 1604-5 Lord Sheffield wrote to Cranborne: After the writing of my letter, I wrote a letter to the Counsayle at York who have advertised me of the imprisonment of one Nalton, a minister, who was committed by your Lordship for speaking unfitting spitches of my Lord of Southampton.... I should be glad to know what course is to be pursued with him, because the man exclaims he is not brought to triaU. A letter of Southampton's to Viscount Cranborne shews that he has settled at Southampton House in Holborn by November 3rd, 1 604 2. It is in favour of Mr John Ferrour, who had been dispatched by Mr Hudson, the Kinges then agent to her Majesty with business of great trust and important (wherein myself was interested) a day before the decease of the late Queene. He had received no reward, though the King had commanded him to wait on him for a place in ordinary. Little would con tent him. I know your Lordship's forwardnesse out of your own good incUnation to grace the weU-deserver....This courtesie I shaU acknowledge as done to myself.... He wiU prove a grateful and honest minded man. Your Lordship's To do you service, H. Southampton. 1 Add. MS. 11,402. 2 Cecil Papers, cvn. 113 and cxi. 23. xix] FESTIVITIES, 1604-5 287 In another undated letter, not very legible, returning some letters sent from Lord Cecil to him to look over, Southampton says: I wiU be with you in the morning, to foUow such directions as you shaU give me. P.S. I am very sorry for the mischaunce happened to ye King, but I hear it is not much, and therefore I hope wiU not long trouble him 1. [Endorsed "1604."] The special attendants who went before to prepare the Royal apartments sent in their bill to the Treasurer of the Chamber for preparing "The greate Chamber at Whitehall for 2 days in November 1604, for the King's Majestie to see the plaies....For making ready the Banqueting House at Whitehall against the plaie, November 1604.... For making ready the Hall for Plays at Christmas, December 1604. For making ready the great Hall for Sir Philip Herbert's wedding the same month December 1604. For making ready the Banqueting House at Whitehall for the mask... preparing the Hall for Candlemas and Shrovetyde to see the plaies January 1 604-5." 2 We know from the same declared Accounts that the King's company of players had performed on " All Saints Day at night, the Sunday at night following, being the 4th November 1604, St Stephen's Day at night and Innocents' Day at night."3 The payment for each play was £10, but there is no clue to the titles of the plays. Chamberlain wrote to Winwood on December 1 8th : Sir PhiUp Herbert and Lady Susan Vere are to be married on St John's Day at WhitehaU. Three thousand pounds are already deUvered for the expenses of the great Masque to be performed on Twelfth Night. The Queen's brother, the Duke of Holstein, is stiU at Court. The tragedy of Gowry has been twice performed by the King's Players to crowded audiences but the Kmg is displeased and it wiU be forbidden. Princes should not be set on the Stage during thek Ufetime4. The marriage between Sir Philip Herbert and Lady Susan Vere provided gossip for many a day. There was a minor masque, the name of which has not come down to us, performed at Whitehall on St John's Day at night for Sir Philip Herbert, acted by private performers, Lord Pem broke, Lord Willoughby, and others. 1 Cecil Papers, cix. 40. 2 Dec. Ace. Treas. Ch., Audit Off. 388, 42. 3 Ibid. * Winwood, Mem. 1. 41. 288 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. "New Year's Day passed without any solemnity."1 On Twelfth Day Prince Charles was created Duke of York. There was a great display — the Earl of Northampton and the Earl of Dorset bore the robes of estate, the Earl of Southampton carried the coronet, the Earl of Cumberland the golden rod, the Earl of Worcester the cap of estate; and the little prince himself, unable to walk, was carried in thearms ofthe Earl of Nottingham, supported by the Earl of Dorset 2. In the evening the gorgeously appointed Masque of Blackness by Ben Jonson was performed at Whitehall. Carleton wrote very disparagingly of the Masque itself and of the dress of the performers: "Blackness became them nothing so well as their own red and white, you cannot imagine anything more ugly than a troupe of lean-cheeked Moors." One courteous ambassador kissed a black hand, and curious glances were cast at him to see if he had carried any colour away. The King's Players performed on the 7 th and 8 th of January. There is a very strange literary dispute concerning an event of this year, which ought not perhaps to pass quite unnoticed — that is, the date of the revival of Love's Labour's Lost. The Queen's brother was visiting her then; the Earl of Southampton and Lord Cran borne, her Councillors, wished to honour her and her guest by a feast, and at the feast to give a play. Sir Walter Cope was trying to help and must be allowed to tell his own story, as he told it to Lord Cranborne From your Ubrary. Sir, I have sent and bene aU thys morning hunting for players, juglers, and such kinds of creatures, but fynde them hard to fynde, wherefore leaving notes for them to seeke me, Burbage ys come, and says there is no new playe that the Queene has not seene, but they have revyved an olde one cawled "Love's Labour Lost," which for wytt and mirthe he says wiU please her exceedmglye, and this is apoynted to be played tomorrow night at my Lord of Southampton's, unless you send a wrytt to remove the Corpus cum causa to your house in the Strande. Burbage ys my messenger, ready attending your pleassur3. This is undated; but a date may be found for it in this way. 1 Nichols' Prog. James I, p. 469. 2 Ibid. pp. 475, 479. 3 Salisb. Papers. Hist. MS. Rep. m. App. p. 148. D.S.S.P. James, xn. 15. 19- xix] FESTIVITIES, 1604-5 289 Apparently Cranborne did not appropriate that play, but found some other to suit his occasion. One of Carleton's gossipy letters, dated January 1 5th, 1 604-5, says, " Last night's revels were kept at my Lord of Cranborne's. . .and ye like two nights before at my Lord of Southampton's." So Cranborne's feast was the 14th, South ampton's the 1 2th, and Cope's letter the 1 1 th. When was Love's Labour's Lost "revived"? There are three slips of paper, ostensibly lists of the Plays and part of the Revels Books, which used to be called " Cunningham's Forgeries," but of late have been raised to a higher level by some expert opinions. I regret to feel obliged to hold to the opinion expressed by previous authors on the ground of handwriting, doing so, however, because some of the entries given in Cunningham's papers do not agree with known facts. I now take only the one point relevant to my subject. Cunningham says, " By his Majesties plaiers Betwin Newers day and Twelfe Day A play of Loues Labours Lost." Now, such a method of dating is unknown to royal accounts of that nature; there is no record in the Treasurer of the Chamber's Accounts1 of any preparation for any company playing just then; there is no payment made to the King's company for a play, and no other company dare perform that play. It might have been given on either the 7th or 8th of January; but Twelfth Day is on the 6th. My further strictures appeared in the Athenaium, signed "Audi alteram partem," in 191 12. However, we may visualise the fact of Love's Labour's Lost being performed in Southampton House, Holborn, for the benefit of the royal Dane. Chamberlain tells Winwood on the 26th of January, "Eight or ten days since there were above £200 worth of Popish books taken about Southampton House, and burned in St Paul's Church yard."3 It is not quite clear whether the books were found in the neighbourhood of the house, whether they were seized, or whether they were given up. Chamberlain also tells his friend that "Sir Edward 'Stafford died suddenly last week, leaving the first fruits to Sir William Harvey."4 1 Dec. Ace. Treas. Ch., Audit Off. 388, 42, also my Burbage, and Shake speare's Stage, p. 102. 2 Athenceum, 3rd June, 1911, July 22nd and 29th, and October 7th, 1911, p. 421. Times Lit. Supp. Dec. 2nd, 1920, p. 798 and Feb. 24th, 1921, p. 127. 3 Winwood, Mem. 1. 46. * Ibid. 49. s.s. 19 290 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. On the 9th of February William Constable, one of Essex's party, wrote to Lord Cranborne begging help to support the remains of a wretched Ufe which yesterday three years ago was forfeited. . .had not your honour above my merit preserved me.... Now my Ufe and sword is at your service.... It pleased my Lord of Southampton at Woodstock to witness the presentation of my fideUty to your Lordship 1. He also asks "the grant of a small thing, the importation of tobacco into Ireland though the country is poor." In the same month a grant was made to Viscount Cranborne of the interests and terms of William, late Lord Cobham, for his son Sir William Cecil and his daughter, heirs to his wife, Lord Cobham's eldest daughter2- In March an advice was sent to the Lord Treasurer "to grant out of the estate fallen to the Crown by the attainder of Lord Cobham, all that was settled on his wife the Countess of Kildare and his house in Blackfriars where he dwelt."3 (This was next door to the theatre.) The most notable event of the month is given in Rowland Whyte 's letter to Shrewsbury: My Lady Southampton was brought to bed of a young Lord upon St David's Day in the morning, a saint to be much honoured by that house for so great a blessing, by wearing a leek for ever upon that day. March 4th, 1604-5 4. (Whyte was of Welsh descent, his real name being Wynne.) More about that event may be noted. Southampton asked the King and Cranborne to be sponsors. Cranborne, writing to Sir Thomas Lake on March 9th, 1 604-5, from Theobalds, explains that he is "hawking with the Chamberlain and the Earls of Cumberland, Southampton, and Devonshire, but to-morrow all go back to school." Of this Sir Thomas Lake wrote to Cranborne on the 1 6th : This morning whUe I was with his Majesty, my Lord of Southampton came to his Highness to invite him to the christening of his sonne, where- uppon his Majestie wiUed me to adde to my letter, that if my Lord had matched him with a Christian, he could have beUeved my Lord had good meaning in it, but having coupled him with a hound, he thinketh my Lord did it onely to flatter him because he knoweth his Majesty loveth hunting and the begle as weU as any of the company at least 5. 1 Cecil Papers, civ. 11, 66. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. 1 Lodge's Illust. in. 269. 6 Cecil Papers, xciv. 96. Xix] FESTIVITIES, 1604-5 291 James frequently called Cranborne his "little Beagle," but it is probable that the joke was not so pleasant to Cranborne's ear as it was to Lake's. The royal attendants for seeing after the King's palaces note their expenses for the preparation: For making ready the Chapel at Greenwich for the King's Majesty against christening of the Earl of Southampton's son. The christening is entered as on the 27th of March, but the Cheque Book of the Chapel Royal1 and the Declared Accounts say the 26th2, as does the letter of Calvert to Winwood. There was also a gift given To the nurse and midwife at the christening of the Erie of Southampton's chUd being a sonne to whom his Majestie was godfather in person himself in his Highnesse Chappie at Greenwich 26th March 1605. So Lord James Wriothesley had a royal welcome. The King's own turn came next. The Princess Mary was born at Greenwich on April 8th, 16053- Two newKnights ofthe Garter were made — the Duke of Holstein, the Queen's brother, and Lord Henry Howard, Earl of Northampton. Among the titles showered by the King on his nobles at the Royal Baptism on 4th May, James created Robert Cecil Earl of Salisbury, Thomas, his elder brother, Earl of Exeter, Philip Herbert Earl of Montgomery, Sir Robert Sidney Viscount Lisle, Sir John Stanhope Baron Stanhope of Harington, Sir George Carew Baron Carew of Clopton, Sir Thomas Arundel (Southampton's brother-in-law) Lord Arundelof Wardour; Sir Robert Dormer (a cousin of Southampton) Lord Dormer of Wing. John Ferrour, the unlucky messenger to Scotland on the last day of the late Queen, wrote to thank Salisbury for his assurance of favour "through his most honourable good Lord, the Earl of Southampton" — (the letter is undated, but endorsed "1605"). This emboldens him to ask the reversion of the lease of a manor in Norfolk near where he was born4. (He was afterwards of the Virginia Company.) In the Easter term it is noted that the Dowager Countess of Southampton received her £600 promised in part return for her paying the debts of Sir Thomas Heneage5. 1 Original f. 71. 2 Audit Off. 388, 42. 3 Nichols' Prog. pp. 505, 510. 4 Cecil Papers, ci. 23. 6 Pell's Roll Issue, Easter 1605, mem. 10. 19—2 292 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. On Monday, June 3rd, the King, with many noblemen, South ampton among them, went to see the lions in the Tower, and saw a novel form of lion-baiting, repulsive to modern feeling1. On Saturday next to the morrow of Ascension Day, this same term, the Earl of Southampton was summoned before the Justices of the King's Bench by Henry Collier, gent., servant of Sir Edward Fenner, Justice of the King's Bench, on a plea of debt for £300 which he had borrowed from Collier (on the 2 ist of March?) in the Parish of St Mary Arches Ward of Cheap2. Southampton had promised to repay this when asked and had not done so, to the damage of Collier of ^50. John Coppuldyke, Southampton's attorney, could not deny this, and the Court determined that Collier should recover the ^300 from Southampton and 1 os. damages. Samuel Daniel this year published Certain small poems, lately printed including Philotas. Now, Philotas suffered for a treasonable conspiracy against Alexander the Great. Daniel was summoned before the Council to explain his meaning, in its apparent connec tion with the Earl of Essex and Mountjoy. He explained by saying that Philotas had been read by the Master of the Revels and Mountjoy before Essex was in any trouble. Apparently a very short time after this, Southampton was sent from the giddy rounds of Court life to his duties in the south. He acknowledged on 25th June having received a letter from Salisbury "yesterday being Monday," shewing that he knew that one Throgmorton had been in these parts to levy men for the Archduke's service and had raised some in the Isle of Wight by the sound of a drum. I sent a messenger to enquire and had the Mayor of Hampton to dine with me. Grimson pretends to be the Lieutenant for Throgmorton, and used a general passport for him and his, but there was no Ucence to recruit by sound of drum. I have not been there myself nor spoken with the Bayley of Newport. I would be loth to warrant aU circumstances of this case to be trew, for I build not my fayth upon the relation of others. On Saturday, God wilUng, I mean to be there when I wiU advertise you of the truth, and have given orders that if he return, he wiU be stayed. I beseech your Lordship let me, as soon as you may, receave from you his Majesties wiU how I shaU proceed further in it because I am very unwiUing to rely 1 Nichols' Prog. p. 515. 2 Coram Rege Roll, Easter 3, James I, xxi. xrx] FESTIVITIES, 1604-5 293 upon my own discretion, but what dkections you shaU send me wiU, as nere as I can, be performed. Thus recommending unto your Lordship the best love and service I can yeald to any (next unto my Master unto whom I owe myself) rest your Lordships most faithfuU frend to do you service. H. Southampton 1. Tichfield, 25th June 1605. The answer must have been prompt, or the letters crossed, for the next reply runs : My Lord, I am bounde unto you for your care to howld me in a right way, which, God wiUing, I wiU not stray from, and foUow the course your Lordship hath directed. And for the newes you wrote me, especially that of his majesty's health, it was the best I could heare. I pray God ever continue it, and make him as happy as he is of aU men held worthy. The day after I wrote last unto your Lordship Grimson returned unto the Island2. Southampton had told him that none but the King might beat drums or display colours. Grimson answered that Lord Chenys had done it unchallenged a month before in Winchester. Southampton blamed the authorities and added, He is a known recusant, and therefore, as I take it, his act the more skandalous. It was done 3 weeks before my coming into the country, and tiU now I never heard of it, wherefore I hope I shaU escape blame though I cannot excuse the Deputy Lieutenants and justices who were then in the shire.... if I shaU heare of any fleet out of Spayne, I wiU advertise you.... Tichfield 29th June 1605. P.S. I pray your Lordship doe me the favour to commend my service to my Lord Chamberlain and his Lady, unto whom I would have written, but that presently after dinner I must by the grace of God pass the sea, and I have many businesses to despach before my going. There is an undated letter from Southampton to Salisbury about the executors of Sir Edward Bell, endorsed 16053, and a letter from the Countess herself of about the same time. My Lord, I have been alredy so much bound unto your Lordship as it makes me presume att this tyme farther upon your favor in a business now brought unto mee which is this. I am entreated by a good frend of mine to move you for the wardship of the sonne of one Sir Read Stafford, which, if your Lordship have not already disposed of, and wiU bee pleased to bestow upon 1 Cecil Papers, cxc. 106. 2 Ibid. cxi. 90-1. 3 Ibid. cxcn. 48. 294 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. mee, and yet receave some benifitt thereby, myself thus having performed what was desired of mee I refer it unto your Lordship's consideration and with my best wishes rest your Lordship's most assured to command, E. Southampton1. (It may be noted that her signature has now become angular and like her husband's.) It is interesting to note that Southampton's first sale of Romsey after his release was made good to him. The King gave him a regrant in fee farm of the manors of Romsey in Hampshire, and of Compton Magna, co. Somerset. Three grants were again made at the suit of the Earl of Southampton2, the first, of the manors of Romsey and Compton to his faithful servants or helpers Edward Gage and William Chamberlain, and two other grants of his own to two other servants3. About this time also Southampton was worried about a suspicious event4. Two men, Bream and Captain Dunscombe, had got a ship from Plymouth by underhand means, and tried to victual it secretly in the Isle of Wight, it was supposed, for piratical purposes. He wrote and told Julius Caesar, who answered, asking for details. Southampton replied on the 27th June, saying that he knew nothing of Bream personally but "on receipt of your letter I presently sent to the Isle of Wight to enquire of Bream and Dunscombe." He explained all the mysterious arrangements about the ship, "from Tichfield 27th June 1605." He writes again on the 2nd July from Carisbrooke Castle: Whether Bream have committed fresh insolencies as you speake of I know not... we have taken Captain Bream, and Dunscombe has fled... by this bearer I have sent Bream up to you, to use your discretion with him. On September nth, 1605, Southampton wrote to Salisbury, giving information disclosed by Captain Burley, Yarmouth Castle, Isle of Wight, concerning one Booreman's issuing of counterfeit French crowns5. William Camden, who had always a good word to say for Southampton, records among his examples of anagrams one on 1 Cecil Papers, cxcn. 49. 2 D.S.S.P. James, ix. docquet, Oct. 28th, 1604. 8 Ibid. x. docquet, Dec. 17th, 1604. See ante, p. 270. 4 Add. MS. 12,506, x. ff. 111, 123. 5 D.S.S.P. James, xv. 57. xix] FESTIVITIES, 1604-5 295 his name, "Henricus Wriothesleius" — "Heroicus, Laetus, vi virens." This appears in Camden's Remains published that year, p. 156. It is rather singular that in an undated "List of recusants whose fines are granted to Lady Walsingham" there should appear the names of "Sir Thomas Monson, the Earl of Southampton," &c, 1604-5 r?]1 Southampton, in his island, found himself somewhat like Robin son Crusoe; he was monarch of all he surveyed, but he suffered from the lack of fit companions. He wrote to Salisbury touchingly in his next letter: My Lord, Your Lordship knows that aU promises between frendes are to bee kept, which lest you should forget, I must put you in remembrance of a favour you promised when I saw you, whereof if your leasure wiU suffer you I shaU expect the performance, which was to see this Hand sometime this somer, if your Lordship be stiU of that mind (as I hope you are not thus soone changed) I beseech you lett me heare of it 3 or 4 dayes before you come, not to make provision to feast you, for I wiU leave that to those who love you less, and endeavour to make known my affection to you in some what else rather than in meate and drinke, but only that I may meete you at Titchfield, whither I would entreat your Lordship to direct your course, from whence I wiU convoy you (God wiUing) safely over the water (there being your best passage) and see you weU on shore againe att your returne. This is aU I have to troble your Lordship with att this time, therefore thus wishing unto you as much increase of happinesse as yourself can desier I rest your Lordship's most assuredly to do you service H. Southampton2. This July 22nd 1605 Carisbrooke Castle. There is no record whether or not that visit was paid Probably it was not. But Southampton next month had a peep into Court life. For the second time he was in the train of his sovereign visiting Oxford. He is not now described as one ofthe beautiful youths who followed Elizabeth, but as a more staid and responsible man in place of trust. As a noble incorporated of Oxford in 1592, he sat at one reception beside the Vice-Chancellor3. When the University rang the bell at 7 o'clock next morning for a royal sermon, the King was asleep, 1 D.S.S.P. James, xi. 25. 2 Cecil Papers, cxcn. 3 Nichols' Prog. I. 566. 296 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. and it had to be postponed. About 9 o'clock the King came in great state to the church, the Earl of Southampton bearing the sword of state before him1. During the three crowded days of the visit, the King was more than once noted as being asleep at the plays, but very wide awake at the disputations, in which he took a share himself. Samuel Daniel's English pastoral The Queen's Arcadia, played at Christ Church, made amends to the audience for all the others they had endured. There was, however, one little interlude which should be noted. Dr Matthew Gwynne, author of Vertumnus, one of the dull plays, struck a varied note in this. As the King ca'me by the gate of St John's College, he was surprised by a little dialogue in Latin, repeated afterwards in English for the benefit of the Queen and Prince (and others). The device of this was much approved. Three Sibyls appear as saluting Banquo, who was to be "no King, but to be the father of many Kings." These sibyls now in the name of England and Ireland saluted the King of Scotland as the fulfilment of the old prophecy, joining their welcomes to Anne, parent, wife, sister, daughter, of Kings, and to the Princes. Though the name of Macbeth is never mentioned, one cannot but see in the little production the germ of the idea of one part of that great play. The King was pleased with the allusion to his ancestor Banquo (fabulous as he was), and someone present was inspired to carry the idea further. Was it Southampton who saw, heard, and understood, and suggested it to his protege Shakespeare, or was the poet himself in the train of the King there, or merely as a traveller passing through Oxford on his way between London and "home for the holidays"? We can, however, see what Matthew Gwynne suggested, and what Holinshed's Chronicle filled up, in the three "weird sisters" and the witches of Macbeth, the wonderful play which Shakespeare wrote as self-elected Laureate to the King who honoured him2. The King went from Oxford to Lord KnoUes' at Greys, thence to Bisham Abbey, and back to Windsor. Southampton went back to his island. 1 Nichols' Prog. 1. 548. 2 See C. Stopes, "The Scottish and English Macbeth," in Shakespeare 's Industry, p. 78. xix] FESTIVITIES, 1604-5 297 There are descriptions of the reception by Isaac Wake in Latin and Anthony Nixon in English. The following letter to Salisbury seems to be of the same year, though that is not entered : My Lord, I humbly thank you for your letter, which I wish I could answer with any change worth your reading; but the barrenness of this place affords nothing to discourse of but heate in summer, and storms in winter, which is now with us begun. My Lord of Devon was, I imagine, with you before I received your letter, being no longer able to stay from his pleasures att Wanstead in the desolate partes of the New Forest : I wish myself also often att the court to enjoy the presence of your Lordship and the rest of my best frendes, though otherwise I thanke God I am enough pleased with the quiet Ufe I lead heare, yett doe I intend ere longe to be with you, and in the mean and ever wiU rest as I ought your Lordship's most faithfully to doe you service. H. Southampton1. Carisbrooke Castle the 1 6 of September. Southampton soon after that date was on the move. He made a trifling request in favour of a person of the same name as some of his relatives and some of his servants. It is not clear whom he means. My Lord I am entreated by a good friend of mine to move your Lordship in the behalf of one Chamberlayne concerning a matter depending in the Star Chamber between him and one Green and to be heard (as I take it) this next term. My sute is no more but for that which I assure myselfe you would affoord without soUciting which is your lawful favour in that cause of Chamberlayne whose cawse as I am informed is just, and being so, I make no doute but my request shaU be graunted, if otherwyse I leave it. Thus recommending unto your Lordship my best wishes I rest your Lord ship's most assuredly to doe you service. H. Southampton 2. Tichfield 3th of October. One more letter of this period has been preserved: My Lord There is one Captain Gifford, who is a servant and hath been employed by the Duke of Florence and who, as I am enformed, hath beene in England by proclamation declared a pirate. Now my Lord there is of late come into Portsmouth a ship laden with goodes belonging to this man. I beseech your 1 Cecil Papers, cxn. 66. 2 Ibid. cxn. 106. 298 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch.xix Lordship therefore doe mee the favour to lett mee know whether he hath his pardon or not, or if you think fitt it should be winked att, for otherwise the ordinary course as m such cases is to bee taken, and a seasure to be made of the goodes. I hope your Lordship wiU pardon my troubUng you att this present. By the grace of God I intend the next weeke to see you att London and ever rest your Lordship's most assuredly to doe you service, H. Southampton1. Tichfield 23rd October 1605. He was preparing, as many others were, to go to London for the Parliament summoned for February 7th, 1604-5, prorogued till 3rd October, and again till the 5 th of November. Philip Henslowe and Edward Allen, Masters of the Game at Paris Garden, were empowered to take up mastiff dogs to send from the King to the Emperor2. The Lord Archbishop of Canterbury was sworn one of the Privy Council; and the Lord Mayor was told to forbid plays and keep all infected persons in their houses. The Earl of Southampton gave £100 to the Bodleian Library in 1605. Probably the gift was partly in remembrance of his friend the Earl of Essex, who appreciated Sir Thomas Bodley so much3. 1 Cecil Papers, cxn. 130. 2 MS. copy Regis. Privy Council, Add. MS. 11,402. 3 Annals of the Bodleian Library, ed. W. D. Murray, 1890, p. 422. CHAPTER XX THE FIFTH OF NOVEMBER The story of the Gunpowder Plot has been remembered more effectually than most events in history, through its commemoration giving schoolbQys an opportunity for unlimited squibs, crackers, marches with straw-stuffed old clothes, blazes, and bonfires. It would be impossible to reckon how many times Guy Fawkes has been burnt in effigy. Many rhymes have been written about him; perhaps the most popular has been : The Fifth of November shaU ne'er be forgot As long as a soldier wears a red coat. Through repetition this has become a prophecy, and by waiting long enough for it the prophecy has become fulfilled. The soldier no longer wears a red coat, and the explosion which did not take place on the 5th of November, 1 605, has dropped out of memory, through the real pictures of terrific explosions which have since taken place. It is only when great events are lacking that might- have-beens are so faithfully commemorated. Still, at the time it was a warning signal of an explosive state of mind among certain people, and necessitated the use of serious statecraft. The King patted himself on the head for having himself discovered the meaning of the veiled message sent to Lord Monteagle1. Most of the Members of Parliament, Peers and Commons alike, felt some grateful recognition to him for having preserved them, with himself, from the designed desolating horrors. In a letter written by Salisbury on the 9th, describing the course of events, he himself claims to have discovered, from Monteagle's letter, the intention of the use of powder; but having given the secret letter into the King's hand without comment, the royal critic came to the same conclusion. Southampton must have shivered even at the imagination of the 1 Nichols' Prog. 1. 577, 586. 300 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. terrors he had escaped. To him no friendly warning had been sent, though some of his personal friends — some of his relatives even — had been involved in the conspiracy, at least according to popular report. Guy Fawkes, who bore the assumed name of Johnson, was taken in the act. For him there was no hope. Some of the others fled to Warwickshire, partly because many of them lived there, partly because it was a part of the plot to secure the Princess Elizabeth and make her Queen1- Some of them made a brave fight, but were overpowered by numbers. Fire in one case cut off retreat, some were slain. Priests were captured everywhere, of whom the chief was Father Garnett. "Viscount Montague has been committed to Sir Thomas Bennethore Alderman of London Tyrwhitt, who married my Lady Bridget Manners, and Sir Edward Digby have gone to the rebels."2 The scared Parliament met on the 9th of November, but it was chiefly to thank God for His wonderful preservation and to prorogue itself until the 21st, so as to give time for examinations, as the conspirators were to be tried in Parliament. Little more was thought of until the end of the year 1605. Some of the conspirators fled from Warwickshire to Worcestershire. "Tyrwhitt has come to London ... Montague, Mordant and Tresham were sent to the Tower on the 15th."3 Cobham's, Grey's, and Raleigh's plots faded into insignificance before the magnitude of this; yet it could do their case no good that a definite recusant confederation should plan such a subversion of King and Government. Perhaps it was because people required an unusual stimulant to think of other things that so many plays were performed that winter4. On 15th December the Lord Mayor and the justices of Middlesex were instructed to permit the King's, the Queen's, and the Prince's Players to play and recite their interludes at their accustomed places, that they might be prepared to be fit for royal service. Beside the performances of the other companies, John Hemings had a warrant for his own company for the payment of 1 D.S.S.P. James, xvi. 6, 7, 17, 19, 22. 2 Ibid. xvi. 83; xvn. 2, 62. 3 Ibid. xvi. 44. 4 Add. MS. 11,402. xx] THE FIFTH OF NOVEMBER 301 £100 for 10 plays during last Christmas and since. This warrant was given on March 24th, 1 605-6, i.e. James' Accession Day1. Southampton's poet had already begun to devise his play of Macbeth. From the examination of Garnett the Jesuit, the great "Equivocator," he had introduced one of its few topical allusions. Faith, here's an Equivocator that could swear in both the scales against either scale; who committed treason enough for God's sake yet could not equivocate to heaven; O come in, Equivocator2. Viscount Montague had dined with his aunt, Lady South ampton, a fortnight before the discovery, but no suggestion had been given of danger then. Perhaps, as they have not been printed, some allusion may be made to the doings of the Privy Council3. On 15th November: A letter to Sk WiUiam Waad Lieutenant of the Tower, to receive the Lord Viscount Montague without suffering any to have accesse unto him there. On 1 6th November: Letters to the Aldermen to receive into their houses wives and kinswomen of the Traitors who it was not thought fit to commit to prison. Dorothy Grant, wife of John Grant was to be sent to Sk Henry Roe, Elkabeth Cole wife of WiUiam Cole, Mary Morgan wife of Henry Morgan, Martha Percy wife of Thomas Percy, Dorothy Wright wife of John Wright and Margaret wife of Christopher Wright, Mistress Rookwood wife of Ambrose Rookwood to be placed in various safe houses. It is noted that Robert Chamberlain in Aldermanburie was not John Chamberlain's brother.... Mistress Key and Mistress Vaux were discharged upon Mr Lewis Pickering's bond. On 17th November: A letter to the High Sheriff of Stafford to take up the bodies of Percy, Catesby, the two Wrights and other traitors that have been slain and buried, and send thek heads to London. On 28th November 48 prisoners were sent up from Worcester 1 Dec. Ace. Treas. Ch., Audit Off. 388, 43. 2 Macbeth, ii. 3. 3 Add. MS. 11,402. 302 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. and Warwick. On 27th December the Lord Treasurer was in structed that Maintenance was to be aUowed to the prisoners apprehended and for thek wives chUdren and families, that his Majesty's Clemency may appeare even towards those that to him intended such barbarous and savage crueltie. On 28th January the Lieutenant is told to try by way of persua sion with Digby, Winter, and others that are to suffer, to make choice of some of the clergy for their spiritual comfort. The chief executions were on the 30th and 31st of January. Lord Montague1 had a peculiar risk in the open and determined recusancy of his grandmother, Magdalene, Viscountess dowager of Montague, who lived in the family mansion at St Mary Overies, and gave every facility to the coming and going of priests. That she knew of the scheme may be inferred, as she warned her grandson. On August 1 6th, 1606, the Lord Treasurer had a warrant to keep Lord Viscount Montague prisoner in his house "without suffering any accesse of Papists, etc." On September 13th, 1606, the Lord Treasurer is instructed to send Viscount Montague to his house at Cowdray, there "to be restrayned without accesse of any unto him but his own servants, and to go no further than his Park." It was the 28th of June, 1608, before the Council decreed that Viscount Montague may come as often as he likes from Cowdray to London, and remain as long as he pleases, but when he leaves he must go straight to Cowdray. Among the New Year's gifts, Southampton is mentioned as receiving a cup of gilt plate, weighing thirty-two ounces, in which were 20 pounds in gold. The King's Grooms of the Chamber were paid "for making ready several rooms in and about Westminster Hall for the King and Queen against the arraignment of Sir Everard Digby and others in January."2 To Bartholomew Hales, Esq. upon the Council's Warrant dated at the Court of- WhitehaU 15th November 1605 for the paynes and expenses he 1 The Parish Books have an entry in 1593, that a new door should be opened in the Church wall opening into my Lord Montague's house, in place of the old door, stopped up. In 1597, the Register states that Mr Gray, a priest from old Lady Montague's house, was buried here. 2 Dec. Ace. Treas. Ch., Aud, Off. 388, 43. xx] THE FIFTH OF NOVEMBER 303 hath been at in bringing upp thither from the town of Warwick certen gentlewomen and others, that are wives, sisters, and others of aUyance unto some of those of the late traiterous conspirators, in which service he hired a waggon for the conveying of them to London and for dyett and other necessaries by the way, the some of £26. To Adam King messenger by a warrant dated 19th November 1605, for the apprehension of sondrie prisoners and bringing them up, and again for the carrying of letters to the High Sheriff of Worcester 16th Novr. Many men are entered as carrying letters about the conspiracy; William Bradley is allowed payment for taking Stephen Littleton and Robert Winter from Worcester; and the expenses of many other prisoners are noted. Dudley Carleton himself was supposed to be involved in the treason, but was able to clear himself. With these doleful surroundings wedding festivities seemed out of harmony1; yet on the eleventh and twelfth nights after Christmas were performed Hymenaei, to celebrate the marriage of the Earl of Essex to Frances Howard, the second daughter of the Earl of Suffolk. The masque performed on Sunday was written by Ben Jonson and designed by Inigo Jones. The Barriers took place on Monday, Twelfth Day. Nichols gives the words of the masque, and a description of the performances. On Saturday, 22nd March, an extraordinary rumour arose early in the morning that the King had been slain at Woking and all his nobles in defending him2- The authorities were in alarm, the gates of the city were locked, all precautions were taken. The Tower was put in defence, and people went about in tears, while swift messengers were sent to enquire. They had no long journey; for they met the King peaceably returning to London, nothing having happened even to suggest the report. The King was wel comed with fervent joy by all classes of people, and it comforted him not a little. The event was considered important enough for James himself to issue a Proclamation that he was safe and well, which might be dispersed all over the country. Ben Jonson wrote a stanza on the event. A few letters concern the Earl of Southampton more or less, and may be included here. 1 Nichols' Prog. n. 3. 2 Ibid. 39. 304 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Sir Maurice Berkeley to the Council (defending himself against the charge of intending to practise in favour of Catholics) : I do confess that the Countess of Southampton told me that there was a very severe and terrible biU coming from the higher house against CathoUc recusants, but that I promised her to speak against it, when it came amongst us, or not to speak for it, that I utterly deny... whereas I am accused that I wished the Papists would rise, if it be affirmed by two witnesses it is of no purpose for me to deny it... if I had used any words tending to that effect in the presence of two, the lady of Southampton being one of them, and the other one that I cannot yet caU to mind, it might rather be interpreted apparent foUy than secret maUce...it might have proceeded from some humour to make her discover in what perplexity she was, being a CathoUc, or to make her discover as much as she knew of the humour of the CathoUc party... it might be interpreted anything rather than any practice intended for that faction, etc.1 The letter is undated, but is endorsed "1606." Southampton sent a letter by Mr Hawkesworth to Sir Charles Cornwallis in April, 1606: Sir, Having soe fitte an opportunity as the return of this gentleman to you, I could not let him passe without yielding thanks for the many kind remembrances I have received from you, having reason to esteem them at a high rate because it is more than I can any way chaUenge as due. AU that I can therefore say at this time is that I acknowledge myself in your debte, the which if it shaU hereafter lye in my power to satisfie by any affecte of friendshippe either to you or yours, I wUl by God's grace as honestly per forme it as any with whome you have longer contracted Amity. Thus com mending unto you my best wishes I rest your very assured friend Henry Southampton 2. To Sir Charles Cornwallis his Majesties Ambassador in Spain. The Countess of Leicester wrote to the Earl of Salisbury, "On behalf of my niece and nephew Digby, who can find no possibihty of justice, considering the greatness of his adversary, who sits as judge in his own cause," unless SaUsbury and the rest admit him "one of the councU there." He is honest and sufficient to do his Majesty service. "If my daughter of Devonshire do not her best endeavours herein, she is much to blame, being tied thereto by promise and desert."3 [Undated. Endorsed " 1606."] 1 Cecil Papers, cxvm. in. 2 Harl. MSS. 1875, 404 6. 3 Cecil Papers, cxix. 26. xx] THE FIFTH OF NOVEMBER 305 Sir Allan Percy, writing to Carleton from Essex House on April ist, 1606, notes the illness of the Lord Chancellor and of the Earl of Devonshire1; also that there had been "a great quarrel between three gentlemen on occasion of drinking the Earl of Southampton's health." What the real meaning of this was, I cannot discover. Penelope, Countess of Devonshire, writing to the Earl of Salis bury,is glad to hear of his safe recovery from sickness. Assures him of her affection. When she was at Drayton with her mother, the "young hunter" came very weU pleased, tiU SaUsbury's servant came to guide Ld Cranborne to Lady Derby. The fear of parting 3 days made them melancholy; so they concluded to go together. She fears nothing but thek riding so desperately; but Ld C. is a perfect horseman. Her mother wiU grow young with their company. Wansted this Monday 2. [Endorsed " 1606."] Another event of that spring which deeply affected Southampton was the death on the 3rd of April, 1 606, of Sir Charles Blount, Lord Mountjoy and Earl of Devonshire, his friend for years. His romantic and tragic career is known to all students of the period. Born in 1563, blessed with health, strength, good looks, and good wit, he had an early fight with Fate. His father's search after the "philosopher's stone" and his brother's pursuit of pleasure had beggared the family. He vowed to restore its good name, to rebuild the old house. He began well; as courtier, soldier, Member of Parliament, and scholar, he seemed able to rival even Essex in the Queen's favour. He had the audacity to challenge his rival, and, better still, by skill and good fortune to defeat him. They were, however, too like each other in generosity to remain enemies — indeed, they became warm friends. Essex's elder sister Penelope became the one passion of Mountjoy's life. Rarely has a woman had more poetry poured forth in her praise. In her youth she was beloved by Sir Philip Sidney, who wrote for her his Amoretti; Spenser mourned with her and for her when Sidney died. It is evident that her father had intended her to marry Sidney, but his death in Dublin changed many things. The 1 D.S.S.P. James, xx. 4. 2 Cecil Papers, cxcm. 15. S.Sj 20 306 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. arrangements had not gone so far as a formal betrothal, as that would have prevented the sorrows of her future life. She was forcibly married, protesting all the while, to a man she detested. But she was a Ward of State. It is difficult to understand how it could have been done, but Burleigh, her step-father Leicester, and the Queen herself cannot be held free from blame. Possibly his father, Sir Henry Sidney, could not make such a good money offer to her guardians as Lord Rich could. Sir Philip sought to console himself with literature and the company of his sister Mary, Countess of Pembroke; tried to slip away with Sir Fulke Greville to the colony of Virginia, but was brought back from Plymouth by the Queen's orders; was, however, allowed to go to the Netherlands, where he died of the results of a badly treated wound. He had married Frances, the daughter of Sir Francis Walsingham, who afterwards became Countess of Essex. Spenser, Daniel, Davies, and other poets poured forth eulogies of Sir Philip Sidney, and associated her with his memory. The unhappy Penelope in her brother's house met the consoler, who afterwards became her adorer, Sir Charles Blount. Afterwards ensued the most extraordinary romance of real life. Her husband would not divorce her, Lord Mountjoy would not give her up. She never lost her place in society, until, in the reign of James, Lord Rich did divorce her, and Mountjoy, then Earl of Devonshire, married her. A howl of denunciation went up at the act from Church and Court. The pair might have lived it down, but the Earl took a severe cold and died of it at the Savoy on 3rd April, 16061. People said he died of a broken heart, but that was a fiction. Doubtless his heart was sore, for his marriage could not legitimise his children. Then it fell to Southampton not only to mourn for the departed, but to help the survivors. Dudley Carleton, writing to John Chamberlain on May 2nd, says: My Lord of Devonshire's funerals wiU be performed on Wednesday next, in which niy Lord of Southampton is chief mourner, my Lords of Suffolk and Norfolk assistants and 3 other earls.... It is determined not to have my Ladie Rich's armes empaled with his. His Arms shaU be set up single without 1 D.S.S.P. James, xx. 4, 36. xx] THE FIFTH OF NOVEMBER 307 his wife's, i.e. though Ladie Rich had been divorced, they are tied in the conclusion not to marry any other 1- On Sunday, June 22nd, Sophia, the youngest daughter of James and Anne, was born at Greenwich, and she died the next day. The Queen was still keeping her chamber when her brother, Christian IV of Denmark, after many postponements arrived at Gravesend on the 1 6th of July, 1 606. He naturally went first to see his sister in her chamber, but afterwards the two Kings toured together about the country in a royal way. The Register of the Privy Council, on the 1 7th July, makes a minute of the Lords and Ladies summoned to do honour to the King of Denmark. Among these were the Countess Dowager of Pembroke and the Countess Dowager of Southampton. Then follows a long list of noblemen and their wives, among whom were "the Earl of Southampton and his Lady."2 1 D.S.S.P. James, xxi. 4. 2 A minute of letters written to Lords and Ladies to come and honour the King of Denmark &c. 17th July 1606. Countess of Oxford of Cumberland Dowager of Pembroke Dowager of Southampton Dowager Lady Chandos dowager of the late Lord Giles Lord Marquis of Winchester and his Lady Earl of Hertford and his Lady Earl of Southampton and his Lady Earl of Sussex and his Lady Lord Denny Earl of Rutland and his Lady Earl of Pembroke and his Lady Earl of Bedford and his Lady Lord Willoughby d'Eresby and his Lady Lord Mounteagle and his Lady Lord Howard of Effingham and his Lady Lord North and his Lady Lord Chandos and his Lady Lord Hunsdon and his Lady Lord Norris Lord Russell and his Lady Lord Danvers Earl of Lincolne Lord Spencer Lord Cavendish and his Lady Earl of Cumberland and his Lady Add. MS. 11,402. 308 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. The Earl of Bedford and other noblemen were called to prepare themselves for a tilting before the Danish King; Salisbury received both the Kings in his house of Theobalds, and, after a great deal of feasting, hunting, and sightseeing, King Christian regretfully left his hospitable brother-in-law on 14th August, 1606. Among the general free gifts of that year, there were three worth noting: To Magnus GuUdenstern, attending on the King of Denmark, one chain of gold; To Dr BuU [the famous musician] one chain of gold; given by the Queen's Highness to Mr Florio, at his grandchUd's christening, one cup and cover. Shortly after the King of Denmark's departure, the King set out on his southern progress1. He visited the Bishop of Winchester at Farnham, and reached Beaulieu, the Earl of Southampton's place on the skirts of the New Forest, on the 30th of August. The King was very much delighted, both with the place and the manner of his reception. Sir Thomas Lake wrote to Salisbury the next day: ...This day his Majesty dined with the Earl of Southampton and received much entertainment. . . . BeauUeu 1st September 1606. It is probable that it was on this occasion that the following anecdote was related to the King by the Earl, who had learnt his master's taste for Natural History: In his hawking brook at Shellingford 2 he sawe divers fowls upon the river, and a Uttle waye up the stream a Foxe very busie by the banckside. He delayed his sport to see what that creature would doe. The Foxe stepps by, and sheeres up, sometimes a seare brake, sometimes a green meede, puts them in the water, and so lets them drive down upon the Fowle. After he had weU emboldened them by this stratagem, he putts many in together and himself after them, with one in his mouth, and under this covert, gaining upon the thickest part of the fowle, suddenly darts from his ambush, and catches one. This did the Earl report as an eye-witnesse. Authority Sir W. Springe3. 1 Nichols' Prog. n. 95. 2 Query, Little Shelf ord, Cambridgeshire? 3 L'Estrange's Anecdotes, no. 48, 204. xx] THE FIFTH OF NOVEMBER 309 Another of L'Estrange's anecdotes is amusing : Charles Chester, a Court Fool in Elizabeth's time, used always to be girding at Sk Walter Rawley and Lord KnoUes. Rawley once waxed his mouth his upper and nether beard together, and once built him up in a corner, with a mason or two, up to the chin, and left him there aU night 1. Some personal letters, not clearly dated, should come in here, of which those concerning Southampton's anxiety for his sweet wine privilege should stand first. My Lord, I understand that of late there have been divers marchands before your Lo and the rest of the Los, unto whom you made knowen that it was his MaUes purpose for the speedier payment of his dettes to rayse new imposicions of aU kinds of comodities that have not akedy their costomes lately raysed, which newes makes me feare the burthen wiU faU as weU uppon mee as upon the marchantes, for if there shaU bee a new imposicion raysed uppon the sweet wines (whereof I am farmer) I have great reason to feare that it wiU impayre that kind of trade, and so consequently much preiudice mee. My Lo, I have no other to seeke help of for aught concerns mee, but yourself, and therefore you must pardon mee if I bee more troble- some unto you then I should and I humbly beseech your Lo, before this bee engrossed bee pleased to remember (as I protest it is trew) that the best meanes I have to subsist is by this farme, which if it should be overthrowen I should bee enforced to lyve in a very mean fashon. I am nothing doubtful of your Lo: favor and therefore I wiU use no more wordes, assuringe myself in this that concernes in a manner the best part of my estate, you wiU bee pleased to have some care of mee: only I thoughte fitt to putt your Lo. in minde of it, least by the mayny more important affayres that depend uppon your care, this small one mought bee forgott, and thus wishing a long con- tinewance of your honour & happy fortune I rest Your Lordships most assuredly to doe you service H. Southampton2. The 15th of June. If there must neades bee an imposicion layd uppon sweet wines, I beseech your Lo. lett the lyke bee imposed proportionably uppon French wines, for otherwise if the price of them bee so farr under Spanish as there then wiU bee, aU the meaner sort in probabiUty wiU geve over the buyinge them, & serve themselves only with French. Your Lo. must geve me leave to putt you by this in minde of the course you resolved of for Sanddam Castle of which I yet heare nothing. 1 No. 100. 2 Cecil Papers, cxxv. 169. 310 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. The Earl of Southampton to the Earl of Salisbury: My Lo: I have understoode by this bearer her Heynes how carefuU your Lo. is of mee, that I should receave no prejudice by the late imposition layed upon sweet wines, wherof I am farmer, as herin I find my self nothinge deceaved, for though uppon the first hearinge of a proposition lately made unto the Marchantes, concerninge the raysinge of costomes, by your Lo. and the rest of the Lo: I apprehended what would lykewise faU uppon mee, and theruppon was bould to write unto your Lo. Yett was it rather (as my letter wiU testify when it shaU be deUvered) to putt you in remembrance of mee, then that I any whitt douted your favor towardes mee, wch I am so weU assured of that I can geeve place to no suspicion of the contrary, and am also perswaded that your Lo. is so weU satisfied of my affection and fayth unto you, that it weare frivolus to fiU paper wth yealdinge numbers of thankes, seeinge if I should send you a whole volume of acknowledge- mentes and protestations, I can express no more then in few wordes to say I am and ever wiU bee to you as I have professed wcl1 by gods grace I wiU alwayes faythfuUy performe. This bearer did also make mee understand the course your Lo. intended to howld to save mee from loss, unto the w011 I wiUingely submit my self, only one feare I have wch to your Lo. I dare lay open, w1* is that there beeing now but few yeares to come in my lease, when I shaU bee driven every yeare (if my former profitt bee empayred) to crave large deductions, wherby the commodity of both what I have or shaU receave wiU bee apparant, it wiU perhappes rise to a larger proportion then the Kinge wiU bee content I shaU howld, and so overthrow my hope of renewinge my lease, wch then once expired I shaU become bankrowte, wherfore I humbly beseech your Lo. if you thinke it fitt lett me now by your meanes renew my lease, and augment the number of my yeares for the w011 in my opinion I can never have so fayre an opportunity, for first I have no condition in the lease I have alredy wherby I can clayme any such satis faction as your Lo. propoundes, and to have a covenant wherby I may demaund it doth of necessity imply the new drawinge of my lease wth such a condition inserted, then I have at this time just reason to expect the more favor in regard I have akedy a covenant in my lease wherby the Kinge doth tie himself not to rayse any new imposition uppon these wines, and if any bee raysed I am by vertew of that covenant to have the profitt of it, and yet notwthstandinge willingly submitt my self unto his pleasure, and doe not mentione this wth any purpose to contest, but only name it as a motive to procure mee the greater favor in the renewinge my time, w0*1 the longer it bee the more shaU your Lo. make mee and mine bound unto you. I have only one thinge more to move unto your Lo. and then for this time I wiU troble you no farther, vr^ is that if his Mau purpose to lett this new imposi tion uppon sweet wines, that I may farme it, otherwise if it bee not intended to bee lett, that my officer may coUect it for the Kinge, puttinge in sufficient xx] THE FIFTH OF NOVEMBER 311 security to bee accountable for what hee shaU receave to the uttermost. There beseeching &c. The 17 of June1. [Endorsed " 1606."] The Earl of Southampton to the Earl of Salisbury: In this time of my absence (though it be not likely to be long), this bearer has desired me to recommend him to your favour. His business your L. is akeady acquainted with and if you please when you have an idle time to make him attend upon you, & help him in this necessity of his with some good direction how to carry himself to win the favour of his Majesty & appease my Lo. of Worcester, I doubt not but you shaU find him ready to foUowit. 1 o July2. [Endorsed " 1606." Holograph.] The Earl of Southampton to the Earl of Salisbury: My Lo: this gentleman Sr James Fitz-Pierce hath been of late very earnest wa mee to make him knowen unto your Lo: the wch findinge no oportunity to performe by reason of this busy time, I am enforced to satisfy him w01 my letter and aU that I have to say is no more but that I knew him in Ireland weU esteemed both by my Lo. of Essex and by my Lo. of Devon., by the later of w°h (as I take it) for his good desertes hee was made knight : I am acquainted wth no sute hee hath ether to your Lo. or the state & therfore having done what hee desired I rest, &c. The 12 of August3. [Endorsed " 1606."] Again, on the 25th of August, Southampton was pleading with Cecil for a friend whose suit in the Duchy of Lancaster had been unduly delayed : If I did think it any way contrary to the common course of Justice, I would not move it, yet referring your Lordship to your better Judgment &c.4 The Earl of Southampton to the Earl of Salisbury: My Lo: I had much rather doe your Lo : service then bee so often troble- some unto you as I am, yett must I now of necessity renew an owld sute in the behaU of my poore aunt Katherin CornwaUis, who by your Lo. favour hath hetherto Uved free from troble for her recusancy, but is now by maUce lykely to bee indited if your Lo. interpose not some mean to healp her. My Lo. I can say no more for her then I have alredy done, shee is an owld 1 Cecil Papers, cxcv. 18. 2 Ibid. cxcn. 104. 3 Ibid. cxcn. 120. 4 Ibid. cxcn. 312 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. woman, that Uveth wthout skandaU, I am in expectation of some good from her, & I assure my self shee wiU take no thinge so kindly of mee as to preserve her from this danger : if therefore your Lo. hould it fitt and wiU healpe her, it wiU bee to mee (I thinke) a very good turn. Thus wishinge &c. 28 Septr.1 [Endorsed "1606."] Southampton wrote to Salisbury at the end ofthe year: My Lord, if this poore corner of the world did afford any things worth the writing I should ere this have often trobled your Lordship with my letters, but since the receyte of your last (for the which I humbly thank you) I have been as dUigent to enquire as I could, and can heare of no shipp in these quarters that came newly out of Spayne, though before that time we heard almost every day somewhat or other. Now my Lord, I must move you in a business which much concerns me to have care of, wherein also yourself is as far interested as I am, it is con cerning the estate of my Lord of Devonshire, whereof there is now an office to be founde, a jury out of Northamptonshire beeing appointed to appeare to that purpose in the Court of Wards the Thursday next after AllhaUowday, att the which I beseech your Lordship be pleased to afford your owne pre sence, not that we feare anything, but onely because in a matter of that importance I would be glad we mought proceed with as much security as may be. Another request I have to make to your Lordship, which is that, whereas the day appointed for the apparence of this Jury is the 5th of No vember, which day is consecrated to the service of God in regard of his mercy shewed on that day in preserving his Majestie and aU the estates of the realm, and therefore, as I imagine no court in Westminster wiU then sit, that your Lordship would be pleased to put it off until the Thursday fol- lowinge, which wiU be the 12th of November, before which time I purpose, God wiUing, to wait upon your Lordship, being myself also deskous to be there at such time as the matter shaU be handled. Thus wishing your Lord ship as much contentment and happiness as your self desier I rest Your Lordship's most assuredly to do you service H. Southampton. The 26th of Oct. , P.S. I beseech your Lordship if at any time you chance to meet with my Lord Chief Justice before my coming up make him see that you take this business to hart, for in regard of the sute with Champernonne, which de pended! before him, his favor wiU much avayle us, whereof though I nothing doute, yet I assure my selfe, when he shaU find that your Lordship affects it, he shaU be much the more forward to do us good 2. 1 Cecil Papers, cxvin. 104. 2 Ibid, cxciv. 14. xx] THE FIFTH OF NOVEMBER 313 The Earl of Southampton to the Earl of Salisbury: My Lo. I heare since the returne of my brother Arundell that hee taketh the marriage of his sonn much worse then I expected, w°h makes me bould to putt your Lo. in minde of my request unto you, that you would bee pleased to use some part of your auctority wth him to make peace between them. I perswed myself your Lo. doth affect it & I am assured it is in your power to bringe it to pass : I doe therefore beseech your Lo. to bestow some smaU time about it, seeing, as the case standes, the good or ill fortune of the younge man (during his fathers Ufe) dependeth wholy on his pleasure & I make no doute but little paynes wiU bringe it to a good effect. Thus recom- mendinge &C1 This letter is undated, but is endorsed "1606." The commemoration of the Gunpowder Plot was duly per formed on November 5th. Nothing very special took place at Court until Thomas Campion's masque was presented at Whitehall on Twelfth Night, 1606-7, at Lord Hay's marriage with the daughter of Lord Denny. A grant reached the Earl of Southampton, on 14th January, 1607, of the office of Keeper ofthe New Forest for life2. I had looked in every place I could think of for the record of the birth of his second son, afterwards his heir, and I could not find it. Last year Mr R. F. Scott, Master of St John's College, Cambridge, kindly gave it me. It occurred in an unexpected place — in the Register of Little Shelford, co. Cambridge. " 1607. Thos Wryosley S. Henry and Eliz. Wroseley, Erie and Countess of Southampton, baptized 2nd April." (See the volume Ely Epi scopal Records edited by Mr A. Gibbons, p. 354.) Why the Earl should have been there, it seems difficult to say. Probably it was because Shelford Parva was but 9 miles from Royston, so favoured by James, who liked Southampton as a hunting companion. He lived, while there, in a house built by Horatio Pallavicino, with a fine white marble portico in the Italian style. That his abode there was no flying visit may be proved. The same Register records the burial of John Cooke, his servant, in 1608, and of another servant, Valentine Metcalfe, in 1 6 1 53- 1 Cecil Papers, cxix. 103. 2 D.S.S.P. James, xxvi. 12. Ind. Wt. Bk. p. 56. 3 British Museum Add. MS. 5808, vol. vn. f. 304. CHAPTER XXI "SOME TO DISCOVER ISLANDS FAR AWAY1" The call of the sea had rung in Southampton's ear from his youth up. Already the story of the first voyages to the West had become invested with the charms of tradition. His birth was nearly coin cident with the early schemes for settlement, in which his own relatives took a prominent share. His chief dwellings were by the sea, his paths were on the sea. His title was taken from the great southern port of which he was made a freeman in 1 590-1 2. The expansion of the earthly horizon westwards stimulated men's imaginations to poetic flights; the circumnavigation of the globe3 taught them new ideas of science and philosophy. No wonder that Southampton's interest in maritime discovery was un flagging. The first plan for a settlement on the continent of North America seems to have originated with Carleill in 1574, "to discover sundry rich and unknown lands fatally reserved... for England."4 With him were associated Sir Humphrey Gilbert, Sir George Peckham, Sir Richard Grenville, and others5- A new patent was granted Sir Humphrey Gilbert, his heirs and assigns, for planting people in North America in 15786- In 1580 Sir Thomas Gerrard and Sir George Peckham presented a petition that Sir Humphrey Gilbert had assigned to them his patent for discovering heathen lands7. Sir Philip Sidney has distinguished himself in so many ways that his association with early colonisation schemes has been over looked. In 1 58 1 he had a "grant of thirty hundred thousand acres of ground to be by him discovered and inhabited in certain parts of America not yet discovered." He had it duly enrolled in Chancery8- Of this he personally granted 30,000 acres to Sir 1 Two Gentlemen of Verona, 11. 3. a Corporation Books, in. 3 Hakluyt, ed. Maclehose, vn. 285. 4 D.S.S.P. Eliz. xcv. 63. 6 Colonial S.S.P. Eliz. 1. 1. « Hakluyt, vm. 34. 7 Ibid. viii. 40. 3 Close Roll, 23 Eliz. part vn. 1153. ch. xxi] SOME TO DISCOVER ISLANDS FAR AWAY 315 George Peckham, of Denham in Kent1. Each of these men was called by Southampton "cousin" (though not in the first degree2). Sir Humphrey Gilbert's first voyage of 1583 was unfortunate, and he lost most of his money. But he planned another almost immedi ately. He was much helped both in advice and money by Sir George Peckham. Walter Raleigh, who was also interested, sent his bark Raleigh to join his stepbrother's party, but the sickness of the men prevented its sailing with the rest. We all know the tragic end of Sir Humphrey Gilbert in his little boat in the storm. One account of the incident was written by Edward Hayes in the Golden Hind3 and another by "Sir George Peckham, the chief adventurer and furtherer of Sir Humphrey Gilbert's voyage to Newfoundland."4 Raleigh secured a new patent for himself on 25 th March, 1584, and an expedition was sent out by him in the following month under Captains Philip Amadas and Arthur Barlow. They also "took possession" of a stretch of land, but returned to England in Septem ber. In the following April a second fleet was sent out by Raleigh under his cousin, Sir Richard Grenville, who left about 37° N. a colony of 1 08 persons under Master Ralph Lane. In writing home to Walsingham not to attend to Grenville's complaints of certain gentlemen, "because his intolerable pride, insatiable ambition and harsh proceedings to all made him no fit judge," Lane said he had "already discovered rare and singular commodities in the Queen's new Kingdom of Virginia."5 By the same ship he wrote to Sir Philip Sidney as his "dear friend," and urged him not to lose the chance of coming out to the place, "You only being fit for a chief command in the enterprise."6 Hakluyt was then producing his first folio, which he meant to dedicate to Sir Philip Sidney. Fulke Greville, his friend, and he had drawn up by 1585 great schemes of conquest and colonization in that Far West land where Sidney's acres lay — Sidney to find the funds and Drake to assume the public responsibility. They both knew that Elizabeth would not grant them permission to go personally, so they did not ask for it; the 1 D.S.S.P. Eliz. clxi. 44. 2 George Peckham's mother was sister to Southampton's grandmother He lost so heavily that in later years he appealed to Cecil for help. 3 Hakluyt, viii. 34. 4 Patent Rolls, 6 Eliz. 1. 6 Hakluyt, viii. 319. 6 Colonial S.S.P. Eliz. 1. 3, 5. 316 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. secret was a delightful but dangerous one for all concerned. Fulke Greville, with pardonable pride, records how Sidney chose him out of all England, "to be his loving and beloved Achates in this journey."1 They stole secretly down to Plymouth, where Drake was only waiting * a favourable wind to start on one of his buccaneering expeditions. Someone (possibly Drake himself) gave information at Court. A royal mandate was sent to stay them. Sir Philip, with some disguised soldiers, stole it from the pursuivant, so that it was not formally delivered. It was, however, soon con firmed by urgent letters conveyed by a formidable party. The wind was too late in changing, Drake's fleet had to sail without them, and the two youths were taken back to Court, where Greville was denied the foreign travel he so earnestly desired, and Sidney was allowed to go to his uncle in the Low Countries, there to lose his life, severed from his friend. Possibly, had they had their own way, the whole history of American colonisation would have been changed, and Sir Philip have shown the fruition of his riper manhood to the world. Raleigh's colony, under Lane, had many troubles that year and the next2, while Sir Francis Drake was performing wonderful exploits against the Spaniards. When he returned homewards north by Raleigh's colony, the tired and anxious survivors were only too glad to be allowed to return with him (19th June, 1586). They were the first to bring home tobacco. Raleigh had sent out a ship of stores for the colonists, which only reached 37° N. after they had departed. Sir Richard Grenville also went to visit them, but, finding no trace of them, left 50 men to search for them. In 1587 Raleigh made another attempt to colonize, sending out a party of 100 men under Captain John White, to found a city and call it Raleigh. But their supplies failed; White came home for more, and a small fleet was prepared to go to their help in 1588, when the order went out to stay all ships in English waters for defence against the Spaniards. Through the strenuous efforts of White two small ships were sent off full of provisions, but through the heavy storms 1 Greville's Life of Sir Philip Sidney. My Shakespeare's Warwickshire Contemporaries, p. 167. 2 Hakluyt, viii. 345. Purchas, his Pilgrims, vol. xvi. Stith's Virginia, p. 24 et seq. xxi] SOME TO DISCOVER ISLANDS FAR AWAY 317 they became so damaged that they were forced to return. Never more did the sea bring back news of that colony. Raleigh having received for his services in Ireland a great reward out ofthe lands ofthe Earl of Desmond, on 7 th March, 1588-9, passed his Virginia patent to Sir Thomas Smith and Captain John White. They sent out a fleet of supplies to seek the colonists; but they had completely disappeared, and the fleet returned on 24th October, 1590. Southampton must have been moved also by the ocean career of his connection, the Earl of Cumberland \ He had been among the brave spirits who winged the chase of the Armada until it was "scattered by the breath ofthe Lord." His voyages in quest ofthe Golden Fleece are a series of romances. Probably it was in imitation of him that young Southampton learned to wear his hair long, unlike the fashion at Court. The Arundels would give him further food for interest, and the voyage of the Content even more. This was a ship of Sir George Carey, Lord Hunsdon, Governor of the Isle of Wight, which, with other two small ships, held a royal and satisfactory fight, from seven in the morning till sunset, with six Spanish men-of-war and galleys on 13th June, 15912- Hakluyt also prints a most interesting account by Sir Walter Raleigh of "The last fight of the 'Revenge'" on 31st August, 1 59 1. Sir Richard Grenville had been sent by the Queen to inter cept the Spanish Plate fleet, had been separated from his com panions, but encountered the Spaniards, and defied them all, alone amid so many. He would never have yielded, but after his fatal wounds his men surrendered. This narrative is certainly the foundation of Gervase Markham's poem, The Honorable Tragedy of Sir Richard Grenville, though it was dedicated not to Sir Walter, but to a rival3- Captain Raymond's excursion to the East and West Indies is worth noting, as, coming homewards, they were wrecked on the Bermudas, where the survivors stayed five months, built themselves a boat, and escaped in I592*- Sir Robert Dudley, son of the Earl of Leicester, after an ad venturous journey passed the Bermudas in 1594; and his captain, 1 Purchas, xvi. 5, 128. 2 Hakluyt, x. 179. 3 Ibid. vn. 38. * Ibid. vn. 194- 3i 8 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Wyatt gave an account of them1- Sir Walter Raleigh, when in the shadow of the Queen's wrath for his misdoings with her maid of honour, Elizabeth Throckmorton, paid his first visit to America (not in the northern parts, but in the southern) in 1 595. The fabled riches of Guiana fired his imagination and stimulated others to help him, with the hope of regaining the Queen's favour. He published the story of his adventures with a descriptive title, The Discoverie of the large, rich, and beautiful Empire of Guiana, with the relation of the great and golden city of Manoa (which the Spaniards call El Dorado), etc., -undertaken, as he said, in the winter of his life "so as to appease so powerful displeasure."2 A second voyage to Guiana was described by Laurence Keymis in a letter to Sir Walter Raleigh, who had subscribed liberally towards it. A third voyage to Guiana, set forth by Sir Walter Raleigh, is described by Thomas Masham. Sir Walter had left a servant of his, Francis Sparrey (or Sparrow) by name, when he was over there himself in 1 595. This man had been taken by the Spaniards, but after long imprisonment had escaped and returned to England in 1 602. Meanwhile the last voyage of Sir Francis Drake and Sir John Hawkins ended (after victorious exploits) in Panama, Hawkins dying on 12th November, 1595, Drake on 28th January, 1 595-6 3. Southampton had at last got on shipboard, meaning to go with Essex to fight the Spaniard at Cadiz, but was recalled by the Queen, as Sidney and Greville had been. He did command a ship in 1 597, and distinguished himself. Hakluyt's volumes came out in 1589, 1598, 1599, and 1600, and Southampton must have read them. William Strachey takes up the story. Thus Sir W. Raleigh, weried with so great expense and abused with the unfaithfulness of the ymployed, after he had sent (as you maye see by these fiue several tymes) coUonies and supplies at his owne charges, and nowe at length both himself and his successors thus betrayed, he was even nowe content to submit the fortune of the poore men's lives and Uef of the holy accion itself into the favour and proteccion of the God of aU mercy, whose wiU and pleasure he submitted unto to be fulfiUed, as in aU things eUs, so in this one particular. By which meanes, for seventeen and eighteen years 1 Hakluyt, vn. 203. 2 Ibid. x. 348, 441. 3 Ibid. xn. 23, 66. xxi] SOME TO DISCOVER ISLANDS FAR AWAY 319 together, yt lay neglected, untiU yt pleased God at length to move againe the heart of a great and right noble earle amongst us, Candidus et talos a vertice pulcher ad imos, Henry Earle of Southampton, to take yt in consideration, and seriously advise how to recreate and dipp yt anew into spiritt and life; who therefore (yt being so the wiU of the EternaU Wisdome, and so let aU Christian and Charitable hearted beUeve in compassion to this people) begun to make new enquiries and much scruteny after the country to examyne the former proceedings, together with the lawfulnes and pious end thereof, and then, havmg weU weighed the greatnes and goodnes of the cause, he lardgely contributed to the furnishing out of a shipp to be commanded by Capt. Bartholomew GosnoU and Capt. Bartholomew Gilbert, and accompanyed with divers other gentlemen, to discover convenient place for a new colony to be sent thither, who accordingly in March, anno 1602, from Falmouth m a bark of Dartmouth caUed the Concord sett forward holding a course for the north parts of Vkginia. At which tyme, likewise, Sir W. Raleigh once more bought a bark, and hired all the company. . .for chief Samuel More ...to find those people he had sent thither... in 15871. They reached 340 N., but took little trouble to search, preferring to trade with the natives and return home. The good ship the Concord setting forth about the 14th Maye foUowmg, had more success. The following chapter2 tells ofthe success of this good ship "set forthe by the Earl of Southampton." It made land about 430 N., and found it wonderfully fertile. The voyagers would have stayed as a colony; but they wanted to sell their merchandise at home, and returned by the middle of July. Much was commended the diUgence and relation of Captain GosnoU; howbeit this voyage alone could not satisfye his so intent a spkit and ambition m so great and glorious an enterprise as his Lordship the foresaid Earle of Southampton, who laboured to have yt so beginne, as that it might be con tinued with all due and prepared circumstances and saffety, and therefore would his lordship be concurrent the second tyme in a new survey and dis patch to be made thither with his brother in law Thomas Arundell Baron of Wardour who prepared a ship for Captain George Waymouth3. 1 Travailes in Virginia by William Strachey, Secretary and Recorder there, book 11. chap. v. p. 153. 2 Ibid, book 11. chap. vi. p. 155. 3 Ibid. chap. vii. p. 158. Sloane MSS. 1622. 320 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. He also found rich land with a fair river, and took possession of it in the name of the King. On Weymouth's return his good report joining with Captain GosnoU's cawsed the business with soe prosperous and faire starres to be accompanied as it not only encouraged the said Earle (the foresaid Lord ArundeU being by this tyme changed in his intendment this way, and engaged to the Arch Duke...) but likewise caUed forth many firme and harty lovers, and some long affected thereunto, who petitioned the King, and were granted a patent on the tenth of April 1606. These words of William Strachey, the first secretary of Virginia, are all the more necessary to be inserted here, because they are so little known. They give a new idea of the relation of Southampton to the colonies, he being made the figure-head of the new and abiding work of the seventeenth century and Jacobean settlement. Sixteenth century labours had been fruitless, nothing was left of them but a tradition, some experience, and the name "Virginia." To that James added " Britannica." There is no doubt that Southampton in the Tower would cheer himself by reading Hakluyt's new edition of 1 600, which contained the records of the voyages to the West. Indeed, it seems nearly certain that the folio volume depicted at his right hand in the por trait of him taken in the Tower was that very identical volume. But it seems surprising that Strachey should have claimed for a prisoner1 the active energy of sending forth a new expedition. The puzzle is, not where he found the interest, but where he found the money. Captain GosnoU and Captain Weymouth agreed as to the fertility and desirability of the Western land. The former had struck it about 43° N., and recorded the multitude of fish about Cape Cod, the multitude of vines on the islands, the richness of the soil, and the safety of the harbours2. Captain Weymouth's party was settled after Southampton was free. He was familiar with the care of forests, the qualities of soil; he understood ships and the management of them; he had made himself familiar with the views of experienced captains trading in all parts of the world; he had the power of attracting men to his service and keeping them there. Sooner than 1 See also Brown's Genesis of the United States, I. 26. 2 Purchas, xiii. 302. Brown's Genesis, p. 26. xxi] SOME TO DISCOVER ISLANDS FAR AWAY 321 he expected it, he had succeeded to the government of the Isle of Wight, in reversion, after the death of Lord Hunsdon, and he had the command of money. Exactly five days after the christening of his first-born son James at Greenwich, with the King as sponsor, on 26th March, 1605, he would be seeing off this second great adventure. James Rosier, a servant of the Arundels, wrote the account of the voyage, and Purchas gives liberal extracts from it1. The Archangel started upon Easter Day, the last of March, about 5 o'clock in the afternoon from the Downs, bemg weU-victuaUed and furnished with munitions and aU necessaries, our company being nine and twenty persons, of whome I dare boldly say few voyages have been manned forth with better seamen generaUy in respect of our smaU number. They drew near land at 41 \° N. on Monday, 13th May, and stood off till the dawn of Saturday, Whitsun Eve, when they took shelter in a well-wooded island with abundance of fruit and plentiful supplies of fowl and fish. Some canoes of savages came to see them from the east. They reached a fine harbour at the mouth of a beauti ful river, whose banks were fertile and fit for pasture. We cannot describe the worthiness thereof, the abundant utiUtie and sweet pleasantness, and its goodness for shipping... any man may conceive with what admiration we aU consented in joy; many who had been traveUers in sundry countries, and in the most famous rivers, yet affirmed them not comparable to this they now beheld. Some that were with Sir Walter Raleigh in his voyage to Guiana, in the discovery of the river Orinoco, which echoed fame to the world's ears, gave reason why it was not to be compared with this. There was no sign that any Christian had ever been on that shore; so Captain Weymouth erected a cross, and took possession of it in the name of King James. Many of the men wished to settle. " We all concluded we should never see the like river in any degree equal, until it pleased God we should see the same again." The captain reckoned that point, sixty miles up the river, as 43° N. One would like to know where in latitude 41 1° N. they had first seen land, and what is the modern name of that unequalled river. They were safely back in Dartmouth on 18th July, 1605. Mr Brown says: '^The period between the return of Weymouth and the return 1 Purchas, xviii. 335. Brown, p. 27. 322 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. of Dale, June 1616, was the period of the First Foundation."1 Had that failed, the United States would not have been as they are to-day. Mr Brown notes a very mysterious agreement which no one else records. In the autumn of 1605 Captain Weymouth intended to make a merchant voyage back to Virginia, but was diverted from his intention by a more ambitious scheme. An agree ment was drawn up by Sir John Zouch of Codnor, in the County of Derby, and Captain George Weymouth of Cockington, Co. Devon, that Zouch should pay the expenses of two vessels fully fitted, and Weymouth should be next in command under himself. Zouch was to give Weymouth £100 in twenty-one days and allow him to fulfil his agreement with certain merchants to take their shipments. When they should arrive near land, Weymouth was to give Sir John the best advice he could as to a settlement; Sir John was to choose first what land he wanted, and Weymouth was to choose second. The agreement was signed by four witnesses, one of them James Rosier2. But nothing more is known as to this apparently poaching scheme. Captain Bartholomew GosnoU had been on a voyage to the East and had returned to London. He had much admired the charms of Virginia and bestirred himself now to return. He prevailed on Edward Wingfield, Captain John Smith, and a few others to assist his efforts. Six months after the return of the Archangel, the Privy Council instructed Lord Chief Justice Popham and Sir John Herbert to call together those they thought fit and confer about the plantation of Virginia3, and they record the Patent of 1 oth April, 1 6064, not for one company only, that of London, but for a second for the Merchant Adventurers of Plymouth and the western ports. The first colony was to be at some convenient spot between 3 1 ° N. and 41° N., the second colony to be formed at least 100 miles north of the first. The chiefs of the first company were Sir Thomas Gates, George Somers, Dr Richard Hakluyt, Thomas Harman, Rawly Gilbert, William Parker, and George Popham. The King's Colonial Council included Sir Walter Cope, Sir Ferdinando 1 Brown's Genesis, 1. 33. "2 Ibid. 33-64, 75-95. 3 Privy Council Register. 4 Colonial Entry Book, lxxix. 1-12. Purchas, xviii. 400-459. Patent Roll, 4 James I, part 19, No. 1709. xxi] SOME TO DISCOVER ISLANDS FAR AWAY 323 Gorges, Sir George More, Sir Henry Neville, Sir Fulke Greville, Sir Edwin Sandys, and Sir Thomas Roe. The literature of the time, in so far as it reflects the progress of western discovery, is not abundant. Daniel in 1603, in Musophilus, alludes to the " unformed Occident." The satirical play Eastward Hoe, 1 605, brought Chapman, Marston,and even Ben Jonson into trouble. They were imprisoned, with a threat of having their ears cut off. Some said it was because the play was supposed to throw scorn on the Scotch as a nation; others, that it was because ofthe mockery of great men at Court in their schemes of adventure, discovery, and colonisa tion. Southampton mayhavebeen marked as one of these. SirPetronel Flask says: "I am sorrie (by reason of my instant haste to so long a voyage as Virginia) I am without means by any kind amends to shew how affectionately I take your kindness." x Quicksilver says of him: "All he could any wise get he bestowed on a ship bound for Vir ginia."2 Captain Sea Gull gives a description of Virginia: "Wild Boar is common there, as tame Bacon with us, and gold commoner than copper." The Earl of Southampton and his brother-in-law were then known to be fitting out the Archangel; the four falcons of Southampton's arms have even been described by some heralds as sea-gulls; and Captain Sea Gull is possibly a satire on GosnoU or Weymouth. It is possible that Ben Jonson's share was limited to the chaffing of his rivals, a habit rather encouraged at Court. The Spanish Tragedy is quoted; "Hamlet" is the name given to Lady Flash's footman3. Her sister's marriage was hastened "That the cold meats left at your wedding might serve to furnish the nuptial tables," and she herself sings Ophelia's ballad, " His head as white as milk, all flaxen was his haire." Ben Jonson implies that he voluntarily shared his friends' imprisonment; but he wrote a very humble appeal to Salisbury to work his pardon and deliver ance, assuring him that all the objectionable parts had been put in by the players themselves. After due delay they seem to have been delivered without further punishment4. A very different spirit inspired Drayton's Ode, published in a small octavo* volume, undated, but about that time. Drayton must have read Rosier's account of Weymouth's voyage; so it could not 1 Eastward Hoe, in. i. 2 Ibid. i. i. 3 Ibid. in. 2. 4 Cecil Papers. 324 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. have been written before 1605, and, as it addresses those about to* start, it could not have been written after 1606. In the 1619 edition it is the nth poem, Ode to the Virginian Voyage. You brave heroique minds Worthy your country's name. Captain Christopher Newport was in charge of the transport of the colony, and the fleet left London on 20th December, 1606. Contrary winds made it the 5th of January before they put out, to sail by the Canaries, then the customary route to Virginia1. On April the 26th they sighted the Chesapian Bay, where they meant to settle. The story of the settlement is one of trouble and difficulty- caused by discord, chiefly arising from lack of discipline. Too many undesirables had been shipped over to get rid of them, ignorant of any useful industry. Everything being considered common property, these were not ashamed to eat what they had not earned. They had at first chosen an unhealthy site. Many died. "On the 20th August, 1607, died Kenelm Throgmorton; on the 22nd died Captain Bartholomew Gosnold, both honourably buried." Starva tion came. "If God had not put terror in our enemies* hearts, and also pity to bring us provisions, we should all have died." The labours of thirty of the best sustained the lives of nearly 200 of the others. These deserved well; but out of the chaos arises only one grand heroic figure, that of Captain John Smith, who possessed all the qualities necessary to make a successful settler. He taught them to dig, to build a fort, to fashion boats, to barter with the natives. He always took the difficult jobs himself, travelling through the neighbourhood to see how the land lay, to learn the language, to make treaties with the tribes. More than once he was nearly slain, and he was only saved by the courage of Pocahontas, the favourite daughter ofthe wily King Powhatan. On his life and fortunes hung the fates of many. But jealousies against him prevailed, and at last a cruel accident forced him to return. The second company sent out, on May 31st, 1607, an expedition under Captain George Popham, President; Captain Rawly Gilbert, Admiral; and Captain Edward Harlow, Master of the Ordnance. They began ambitiously, but the weather was against them, and they returned to England on the' 1 Purchas, xvin. 459. Papers of Captain John Smith, principal agent and "patient" in Virginia. xxi] SOME TO DISCOVER ISLANDS FAR AWAY 325 death of Sir John Popham, their President's father, in 1 608. Not withstanding the failure ofthe second colony, the Earl of Southamp ton and his friends of the Isle of Wight employed Captain Edward Harlow to make another voyage of discovery and investigate the islands about Cape Cod, which Captain Weymouth found. The natives of the district called Aggawam treated the explorers kindly, and Aggawam was renamed Southampton by Prince Charles. The disorders in the first colony increased; everyone who came home told his own tale to screen himself. The Council read everything through a mist of lies. Sir Ferdinando Gorges wrote to Salisbury on 7th February, 1607-8: "Our second ship has returned The people have split up into factions and disgraced each other We shall have much ado to go forward as we ought. For my own part, I should be proud if I might be thought worthy to be the man commanded to the accomplishment thereof."1 His offer was not accepted. The King granted a new charter on the 23rd of May, 16092, abrogating the old, extending the bounds and the privileges of the colony, and forming a new London Company, which included some of the higher nobility — the Earls of Salisbury, Suffolk, South ampton, Pembroke, Lord Sheffield, and others. Sir Thomas Smith remained treasurer. Among the members were William Crashaw, clerk, B.D., and Raleigh Crashaw. This new company on the 29th of May invited the Englishmen resident in the Low Countries to join. The letter was signed by Southampton, Pembroke, Lord Lisle, Lord De la Warre, etc. These names attracted so many subscribers that they began preparing their fleet in that same month. The government was intrusted to Lord De la Warre, who sent Sir Thomas Gates as his deputy, Sir George Somers as Admiral, and Captain Newport as Vice-Admiral. The King insisted that each of these should be furnished with his new commission, and whoever should reach the colony first should read it to the inhabitants, and take order there upon. Some question of priority having roused jealousy among the three leaders, they agreed all to go in the Admiral's ship, the Sea- 1 Cecil Papers, cxx. 66. 2 Colonial Papers, I. 17. Colonial Entry Book, vol. 1. xxxix. 49, 728. Patent Roll, 7 James I, pt. 8, 23rd May. Brown's Genesis, ¦ZT.g. 326 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Adventure, t with 150 men. There were eight ships and a small pinnace, the number of men in all being 500. They became separated from each other in a great storm. Seven of the ships arrived in Virginia by the nth of August, but the Admiral's ship and the pinnace were missing, and therefore there was no new governor appointed. Captain John Smith, the only survivor of the original Council, had been acting as president, but, meeting with nothing but con tempt, he had sailed for England after his serious wound, leaving George Percy president in his stead1. He left "four hundred and ninety odd men, three ships, seven boats, commodities for ten weeks' provision, corn newly gathered, hogs, chickens, goats, sheep, ammunition, tools, nets, and necessaries sufficient." His greatest maligners soon cursed his loss. The Indians had no respect for any other man among them, they boldly stole, and cut off all stragglers from the camp. Fear kept even the industrious from hunting, fishing or planting. George Percy was far from well. In six months they had reached their "starving time." By the time the ships arrived, their numbers had been reduced from 500 to 60. And the Council at London went on hopefully, knowing nothing of all this woe. The postscript of a letter written by Southampton to Salisbury on 15th December, 1609, 's interesting, as shewing the King's love of natural history. Talking with the Kmg by chance I towld him of the Virginia Squirrels, which, they say, wiU fly, whereof there are divers brought into England, and hee presently and very earnestly asked mee, if none of them were pro vided for him, and whether your Lordship had none for him, saying that he was sure you would gett him one of them. I would not have troubled you with this, but that you know so weU how he is affected to these toyes, and with a Uttle enquiry of any of your folks you may furnish yourself to present him att his coming to London, which wiU not be before Wensday next and the Monday before at Theobalds, and the Saturday before at Royston2. William Strachey, in his Travailes in Virginia, notes: A smaU beast they have which the Indians caU Assapanick, not passing so big as a rat, but we caU them flying Squirrels because, spreading their legges, 1 Stith's Virginia, pp. 108-112. 2 Col. Papers, 1. 19. D.S.S.P. James, 65. xxi] SOME TO DISCOVER ISLANDS FAR AWAY 327 from whence to either shoulder runnes a flappe or fynne, much like a bat's wing, and so stretching the largeness of their skynne, they have been seen to make a pretty flight from one tree to another, sometimes twenty or thirty yardes1. In the same year as this, in which he openly joined the Virginia Company, Southampton joined the East India Company. In their Court Minutes of May 30th, 1 609, there is entered : Power to the Governors to admit the Lord Treasurer, the Lords of Worcester, Southampton and others, favourers of the Company, and no mere merchants, to be free of the East India Company, they being adven turers or otherwise 2. In the Court Minutes for July 6th, 1 609, is noted : A brace of Bucks sent by the Earl of Southampton to the Company to make merry withal in regard of their kindness in accepting him of their company3. On October 27th of that year: Lord Mounteagle asked to be made free of the Company, on the same conditions as Lord Southampton, he adventuring ^500, and giving the Company a brace of Bucks yearly at the Election (wiUingly granted) 4. On January 9th, 1 609-1 o5, the Earl of Southampton asked the Company to admit Mr Haines, whom he had appointed to manage his adventures. In the year 1610 sad news travelled from West to East, which plunged the nation into dismay. The seven ships had arrived without their admiral, had found the colony crushed and despairing, calling for food and necessities. Mr Brown notes in his Genesis that the first time Virginia was mentioned in Parliament was in the debate on 14th February, 1609-10, whether or not Sir George Somers had lost his seat by going thither. They did not then know that he had not yet reached his destination. Lord De la Warre had not started as soon as he had intended, and William Crashaw preached what was meant to be a Godspeed sermon on the 2 1 st of that month, "before the Right Honorable Lord la Warre Lord Governor and Captain General of Virginia, and others of his Majestie's Council for that Kingdom." South ampton would certainly be present. The sermon has been printed, 1 Strachey's Travailes in Virginia, bk 1. p. 123, 1. 10. 2 No. 433. 3 Bk 11. 119-123, 448. 4 Bk 11. 143, 463. 6 Bk 11. 479. 328 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. and Brown gives copious selections from it. The preacher speaks of the lawfulness, excellency, goodness, and plain necessity of this present action, the principal end being the plantation of a Church of English Protestants and the conversion ofthe heathen. It sheds a curious light on the reverend gentleman's attitude to a burning question of the day. The discouragements have been from enemies. The Spaniard is not an enemy, the French foUow our example, the Savages invite us. There are only three enemies, the DiveU, the Papists and the Play ers... they play with Princes and Potentates, Magistrates and Min isters... nothing that is good and holy can escape them, how then can this action?... The DiveU hates us, so do the Players1 because we resolve to suffer no idle persons in Virginia, which course, if it were taken in England, they know they might turn to new occupations.... Those of the Council are blessed, those of the Colony are the Lord's Apostles.... Blessed be the Lord God of Virginia.. . .1 am not worthy to be thy Apostle, but I vow and devote myself to be in England thy faithful factor and soUcitor, and most desirous to do thee service. This is entered at Stationers' Hall as "A Sermon preached by Master Crashaw intituled a Newe Year's gift to Virginia by W. Crashaw B.D. and Preacher of the Middle Temple, March 19th 1610." Lord De la Warre finally started on April ist, 1610, and reached the settlement on June 9th of that year, to find that the company in the admiral's ship had been saved, and had brought succour to the colony; but this had been in vain, and all had already started homewards, while yet there was provision enough to let them reach Newfoundland. A series of miracles seems to have happened. Of the nine boats sent out by the Council of London, only the pinnace perished. The Sea-Adventure, or at least its company, had not been so hapless. They had been living through a great epic poem ofthe sea. They had lost sight of their party on the 25th of July, 1609; had been driven through the gates of death to a haven of hope; had saved all their party and much of their property; had been sheltered, fed, and encouraged in the Island of Devils (the Bermudas) to build two pinnaces under Sir George Somers' direction; and had escaped to 1 Was Crashaw thinking of Eastward Hoe ? And was he yet to learn to think of Chapman in another light? xxi] SOME TO DISCOVER ISLANDS FAR AWAY 329 the settlement, and found themselves there in much better con dition than either the settlers or the voyagers in the seven other ships. The general hopelessness depressed even the leaders, and they planned, as we have seen, to save the lives of the men and sacrifice the colony. Lord De la Warre was just in time to stop them. He made them all turn their boats back to the fort, and sent Sir George Somers and Captain Argall in their new-built ships back to the Bermudas for an immediate supply of food, and Sir Thomas Gates back to England for many urgent necessaries. The governor, by that ship, sent an official letter narrating the circumstances, written by his secretary, W. Strachey, to Lord Salisbury, who endorsed it "received September 1610." Thus the country first heard a little of the tempest. Sir George Somers knew the difficulties he had to en counter, but agreed cheerfully (it is said he suggested it) to go in search of food for his company. He again encountered storms, and had some difficulty in forcing his way into the island that he never expected to see again. He was not young, he overstrained himself in the efforts he made to fulfil a duty so urgent; he died there, and the island became his monument. His nephew and followers forgot their duty to the colony and returned home in his ship, leaving the island with but three men on it, while they carried the admiral's body home to bury it in his native place of Whitchurch, Dorset1. Captain Argall had missed finding the Bermudas altogether, but returned home with supplies that he had secured elsewhere. Not long afterwards Lord De la Warre fell ill, appointed Sir Thomas Dale president until the return of Sir Thomas Gates, went to the wonderful bath in the West Indies to refresh himself, and returned home. His speedy reappearance much discouraged the Company, seriously strengthened the evil reports of the colony's condition, and hampered home effort. But his Lordship gave a public oration on the charms and opportunities of Virginia, and on his own in tention of going back to end his days there, and that restored hope. The literature of the period is extremely interesting, especially to those who search for contemporary events which throw light on Shakespeare's plays. Shortly after the return of Sir Thomas Gates 1 Purchas, xvm. 528; xix. 85. * 330 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. the London Council drew up a declaration ofthe wonderful deliver ance of the party in the Sea- Adventure, and the advantages to be expected from the improving state of the colony. This was dated 1610, but it must not be forgotten that the year then ended on the 25th March, so it is quite probable this meant March, 161 1. Silvester Jourdan, one of the passengers on board the Sea-Ad venture, came home with Sir Thomas Gates, and, hurrying to reach the ears of the public first, hastened to dedicate his MS. to " Master John Fitz James Esquire, Justice of the Peace in Dorset shire," probably a friend of Sir George Somers. He did not risk taking out a licence, in case he would be stayed, and he dates his little quarto 1610, but of course that also might mean any date before 25th March. Now, Malone thought that he had discovered these two publications, and by them he fixed the date at which Shakespeare must have secured his ideas for The Tempest. He ex plains this in a little quarto privately printed by himself in 1 808, and this is reprinted in the Variorum edition of Shakespeare's works in 18211. This view has been held by many writers since; but is quite insufficient to prove Malone's statement that Shake speare's Tempest was probably completed in the spring of 161 1; and Jourdan's account was insufficient to originate Shakespeare's vivid pictures in his early scenes. [We have no definite proof that Southampton carried on in his busier years the active interest in Shakespeare which he had felt in his youth. Neither is there anything to set against a possibility that he did continue this interest, though their meetings must necessarily have been at rarer intervals. Such a suggestion seems to arise in relation to this very question. Shakespeare may have read Silvester Jourdan's narrative early in 161 1, read it with interest, and might have taken notes. But it was not Silvester Jourdan who inspired him to the, writing of The Tempest. It was the writing of another, who also had shared in the dangers of the Sea-Adventure, but had not come home with Sir Thomas Gates — a writer whose work was not published till 1625. How then did Shakespeare know of it? None of his fellow-writers knew of it — not Chapman, nor Daniel, nor Drayton, nor Jonson; how then did he find his inspiration? It evidently was from a private letter written by this 1 Vol. xv. 385. xxi] SOME TO DISCOVER ISLANDS FAR AWAY 331 William Strachey, secretary to Lord De la Warre, and afterwards appointed Recorder of Virginia, the very man who, a few years afterwards, described Southampton's work on the colonies in such glowing terms as have been recorded above. This private letter was addressed to an "Excellent Lady" whose name is not given. A "Noble Lady"? There were many "Excellent Ladies" in Eng land. Who was this lady? Much depends upon that. It might have been Lady Cecily, daughter of Sir Thomas Sherley (sister of the three adventurous brothers who made the world their home) and wife of Lord De la Warre. Or the letter may have been written to Elizabeth, Countess of Southampton, as likely to be interested in the accidents of the voyage as well as the affairs of the colony. She was the "most-honoured Lady" to whom Anthony Gibson dedicated his Defence of Women, and the "Gracious Lady" later addressed by the Master and Fellows of St John's College, Cam bridge. The position of her husband in regard to the colonies makes this quite possible,' and the fact that the letter was not published until she was winding up her husband's affairs in 1625 rather strengthens than weakens the probability of the attribution. Whether Strachey's letter reached Lady De la Warre or Lady Southampton, Southampton himself would be sure to have seen it. And it is more than possible, it is even likely, that, after others con cerned had perused it in the leisurely way of those days, he might secure it to lend to Shakespeare. This would probably be early in 161 1. Strachey himself came home at the end of 161 1, and he might well have met Shakespeare, gossiped with him, and, finding his keen interest, might have shown him his draught copy of the letter. At least, in some way or other, Shakespeare saw that letter, and he could not have written his play until he had done so. To the spell of Strachey's impassioned word-painting Shakespeare surrendered himself; he could see through Strachey's eyes, and he conveys to us the visions he sees through Strachey's words and phrases. The Heavens looked black upon us, not a star by night not a sunbeam by day.... The winds singing and whistUng through the shrouds.... The sea sweUed above the clouds, and gave battaile unto heaven.... Windes and seas were as mad as fury and rage could make them1. 1 Purchas, xix. 6. 332 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. He describes the labours at the pumps, the hopeless efforts continued only through custom, the recourse to the "strong waters." Prayers might be in many hearts and Ups, but were drowned by the out cries of the officers.... Nothing was heard that could give comfort.... Nothing was heard that might encourage hope1. They saw an apparition of a little round Ught, like a faint star trembling, and streaming along with a sparkling blaze, half the height of the maine mast, and shooting some time from shroud to shroud... three or four hours together2. When they were driven ashore, it was not on the rocks but between the rocks; and the miraculous calm came, and all on board landed on the "little sandy bay." It is in that letter Shakespeare discovered his "island far away." We know that Southampton discussed literary questions with Shakespeare in his youth — "Thou art all my art." It is possible that he did so now. Let us imagine it. I took that letter to the Prince and Princess, WiU; it moved them more than aught else that ended well. You must get these conceits somehow into the play you wiU write for her wedding. She wiU understand. They have not settled the Bridegroom yet. I feared that there might be some Spanish blood enriched. But the Prince has sworn to me she shaU not marry against her own sweet wiU. That settled, I know whom she wiU choose. The Palsgrave of the Rhine, young, like herself, fair, true, and debonair. But that matters not for the substance of your play; whoever he be, he must come over the sea to win our precious Island Princess. Suit her, never mind him at present. I'U find up some new-old legends to help your plot, and I had a bundle of books ready for you, amongst them one by a Scotchman. In spite of their bare rocks some of them can produce rare flowers of poetry. Hear him : "These golden Palaces, these gorgeous HaUs. Evanish all Uke vapours in the air."3 And, WUl, bend thy proud soul to the new fashion of Masques. You can do them too — none better, for her sake. When is Pandosto coming out? Were old Robert Greene aUve,' he would have more to say of "borrowed feathers." I am glad you saved BeUaria in your play. That was a rare con- ceipt of your PauUna — a noble woman indeed. But, I forgot, WiU. If ever 1 Purchas, xvm. 403. 2 The Greeks called the light " Castor and Pollux, ' ' the Italians ' ' St Elmo's Fire." 3 Darius, by William Alexander, Earl of Stirling, 1603. xxi] SOME TO DISCOVER ISLANDS FAR AWAY 333 you send more royal babes out in boats again to seek their fortune, do not let the bears eat up their guardian. Do not try an Infans Mirabilis again. Fawnia might inherit her mother's nature and beauty, but she would not inherit her language, her manners, her thoughts — without example and without mstruction. (Don't I know with my own ?) And, WiU, if you could give some faint reflection of the Sieur de Montaigne, it would please the Queen, and me, and my dear old tutor himself, the resolute John Florio. Begin at once, soul of invention ! The Winter's Tale came out that spring; Forman saw it at the Globe in May, and the poet turned to the wedding play. A work so full of art, philosophy, and characterisation could not have been written in a hurry. Malone says he was certain it was produced in 161 1, but you may search his works in vain for any proof further than that he had discovered Jourdan's book1, and the Council's "Declaration," published in 1610, and therefore (not even thinking that the year ended on 25th March) that the poet must have done his work in a hurry, for no particular reason. Cunningham believed that too, but the three play lists of the seventeenth century make so many errors that we are not bound to believe they happened to be right on this one statement2. Shakespeare's play was ready in time, and awaiting the Princess; but she had to wait, not for the bridegroom, but for her brother. He died, and all the nation mourned. Plays were held back till February, 161 2-1 3. Then Chapman wrote his long-winded Epicede on Prince Henry, and his version of The Tempest in the passage beginning "The poor Vir ginian miserable sail." Then Daniel set on his Masque of the Virginian Priests of the Sun Then Shakespeare produced the wonderful creation miraculously initiated by the storm, A contract of true love to celebrate. And some donation freely to estate On the bless'd lovers. (Tempest, iv. 1.)] 1 See his Incidents of The Tempest, 1808; also vol. xv. Shakespeare, p. 404, edit. 1 82 1. 2 Extracts from Revels Books, 1842. Shak. Soc. Pubhc. Times Lit. Supp. Dec. 2nd, 1920, p. 798, and Feb. 24th, 1921, p. 127. CHAPTER XXII THE OCCURRENTS IN ENGLAND There was trouble among Southampton's elder relatives in 1607. The Dowager Lady Montague was very ill. Lord Shrewsbury wrote to Salisbury "very early on Thursday, 16th April, 1607,"1 asking him to see that "order be taken that day for the old Lady Montague his kinswoman, or it would be too late." She was a very fervent Catholic, and her house at St Mary Overies was a residence and rendez-vous for priests. Yet powerful influence favoured her. "When under notice of search for the powder-treason, she ob tained letters from the King's Council 5th April 1606... that none besides four by herself named should search her house."2 Again she was sued for not going to Church, and she received protection. The King's Council, by letters addressed to the Attorney-General on 19th April, 1607, commanded that no sentence should proceed against her as to her true allegiance to the King. Probably reminded of her mortality by these dangers, the Countess Dowager of Southampton made her will on the 22nd of April, 1607. This document is too important to the family history to be passed by without some analysis. In reasonable estate of body and perfect memory she wiUed her body to be interred... "as near as may be to the body of my dearly loved husband Henrie late Earl of Southampton in the church at Tychfield. My executors to see to this, inhibiting them to use any pompe, vain ostentation, ydle ceremonie, or any superfluous charge at or about my funeraU; neither more blacks to be bestowed than on my household servants.... I leave to my Honorable and deare sonne Henrie Earle of Southampton Ten pieces of hanging of the Story of Cirus: Six pieces of hanging in which the Months are described, Two pieces of hangings with gold wroughte in them and Sir Thomas Henneage his Armes. A Scarlet Bedde with gold lace, with aU the furniture, stooles, chayres and cusshions, and aU other thinges belonging to it ; and a white Satin Bedde embroidered, with the Stooles, chayres, cusshions, and aU other furniture. AU my chayres, Stooles, and Cushions of greene 1 Cecil Papers, cxx. 166. 2 Life of Lady Montague, by her Confessor. ch.xxii] THE OCCURRENTS IN ENGLAND 335 Clothe of Golde. Two of my best down beddes, with bolsters, piUows & Blanckets, Four of my best Turkey Carpets, whereof one of them is silk. Two of my best and fayrest basons and Ewers of Silver, with 4 pottes of silver belonging to them : Sixe of my best and greatest candlesticks of silver, and a ringe of gold with a fayre table diamond in it, which Sir Thomas Heneage had of Sir Walter Raleigh, Sixtene loose diamonds, which my desire is that my said deare sonne should set in a George of gold, and weare in memory of me, his loving mother. Also I give to my good and loving daughter-in-lawe EUzabeth Countess of Southampton, my double rope of round pearls which myself did accustom to weare about my necke; my best Tissue Kktle, and 6 pake of my finest sheetes, with twelve piUowbeers. Also I bequeath to my good daughter the Ladie ArundeU, wife unto the Lord ArundeU, my jeweU of golde sett with dyamentss, caUed a Jesus, yf she happen to be Uving at the time of my decease. I give to Katharine Poole, one of my waiting gentlewomen, one hundred pounds in redie money, within a year after my decease, and to the saide Katharine Poole, and Katharine Gates my other wayting gentlewoman, aU my wearing apparel (except my garments of tissue, and such as have pearles in them) and aU my wearing linen to be divided betwixt them. To John Brooke my servant £20. Among the rest of my servants men and women ^40 to be distributed. To George, Lord Carew, Baron of Clopton, one gUt christening cup with a cover to it. AU the rest of my goods and chattels, household stuff and estate, to my deare and weU-beloved husband Sk WiUiam Harvey, whom I make sole executor of this my last wiU and testament, praying him as an argument of his love to me, that he wiU be careful of my page Robert Jones, his sister's son, and in his discretion, at my request, to provide for him that he may be enabled to Uve, and to know that I had a care for him. Lastly I appoint my good and loving friend George, Lord Carew, Baron of Clopton, to be the Overseer of this my kst wiU, desking him in a friendly care and assistance to see this performed. I have set my hand and seal to this on 22nd AprU 1607. M. Southampton. Memorandum. I leave my deare son, aU the pictures in the Uttle gaUerie at CopthaU. M. Southampton1. Probatum fuit 14th November 1607, by Sir WiUiam Harvey, Mil. This will reyeals much of the personal character of the testatrix. She was unostentatious in a prudent way, because she was relatively poor, and had to be economical, if she wished to help her relatives. She was affectionate in disposition and forgiving in heart. One has only to compare her will with that of the husband who left 1 P. C. C. Huddleston, 86. 336 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. her "as bare as he could," to realise these points in her character. Her son had not pleased her at one time, but there is no reminiscent note of offence. He would naturally receive back the family property tied for her dower, and she was eager to keep up the family dignity through him, by bequeathing to him all her best and most showy furniture. At the same time, she is anxious to help her present husband, because he needed money help. He would under stand just why she acted so, and the world would understand. Court gossips wrote of her, "the old Countess of Southampton is dead, she hath left the best part of her stuff to her son, and the most part to her husband." On the 2nd of May, 1 607, Gervase Markham, who had been exiled to Belgium for complicity in Lord Cobham's treason, ap pealed to Salisbury from Brussels. He had been cleared at the Bar.... Mr Walton and Mr Brooke had hatched that unfortunate action. I could never be wonne until my Lord of Rutland had gotten from me those unfortunate packes which so much bUnded my understanding as made me then be touched with a beastly, bUnd, inhuman humour which hath ever since made me odious to myself. My Lord Cob ham and his brother had nothing taken from them, my Lord Gray had a book prepared for him, Sir Walter was displaced, but with recompense.... I only had aU taken from me... by the favour done me in dooming me banish ment.. . .1 have had no opportunity to shew my sorrow for my fault1. He prays for mercy and pardon. In the following month he wrote again (24th June, 1607)2. He had lost both his father and his father-in-law, and through them £280 per annum. He again entreats pardon, that he may return and earn some money to live. His enemies here prevent him from doing so. (These appeals seem to have been in vain; he writes again in the same strain on 31st March, 16083.) Salisbury, writing to Sir Thomas Lake, explains that he has been to take a last look at Theobalds before it passes to the King. The owners of the neighbouring lands are to meet him, to compound for enlarging the Park. The Earls of Suffolk, Worcester, and Southampton met him at Hatfield to discuss the site of his future habitation4. 1 Cecil Papers, cxxi. 23. 2 Ibid. cxxi. 101. 3 Ibid. cxxv. 69. 4 D.S.S.P. James, xxvn. 7. xxii] THE OCCURRENTS IN ENGLAND 337 The King had always greatly admired Theobalds, the residence of the Earl of Salisbury, and wished it had been one of his own palaces1. The prudent Secretary gratified his master's wish, and formally handed it over to the King on 22nd May, in exchange for Hatfield. There were great doings at the delivery of Theobalds to the Queen, with a masque by Ben Jonson. Southampton's only sister, the "sweet Lady Arundel" of Court gossip, died on 27th June of that year; so she probably did not receive the legacy left her by her mother. Her brother would / certainly attend her funeral at Tisbury, Wiltshire. The Grooms of the Chamber note their expenses in making ready Beaulieu Church and the Earl of Southampton's house at Beaulieu for his Majesty in July, 16072; also "for making readie the house of the Dean of Salisbury, July and August; for making readie two severall houses for his Majestie to dine at the Earl of Pembroke's at Wilton, and Mr Corrantes at Cranborne Chase, Aug. 1607." For the King was back again that year, to see sport in the New Forest. On the 5th of August Sir Thomas Lake wrote to the Earl of Salisbury from Winchester: Concerning the Proclamation sent from my Lord of Southampton, because his Lordship doth so earnestly in his letter desire that his Majesty would take an exact view of it, his Lordship hath putt off the consideration of it until his being at BeauUeu. This day being a festival day here, his Majesty was attended here this day by the Earls of Pembroke and Mont gomery and others of the ordinary trayne, and besydes with the Earl of Southampton, the Lord Sandys, and the Lord Chief Justice and some gentlemen of your country, who have been fayne to scatter for their dynner. Wherewith his Majestie was much offended, that upon such a time for a meale there had not been a table for the receipt of the noblemen and gentle men resorting to the Court3. Among the State Papers is preserved a List of Abstracts of Letters received by Salisbury, probably drawn up for him by his clerk. One of these notes runs: The Erie of Southampton 10 August. His debt was for arrerages of subsidy in the Queen's Time, part of which he will pay this next Terme, 1 Nichols' Prog. a. 128. 2 Dec. Ace. Treas. Ch., Audit Off. 389, 46. 3 Cecil Papers, cxxi. 168. s.s. 22 338 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. other parts he can soon make appear no way to concern him. The rest of his debt is upon a forfeiture of a bond, for iooo marks for woods, for which he desires forbearance until next Terme, and then he wiU submit himself when he shall speak with your Lordship to make order as your Lordship shaU set downe1 On the ioth of August the King was at Beaulieu; by the 20th he was visiting Salisbury 2. On the 1 6th of September the King's daughter, Lady Mary, died, but little notice was taken of the event3. Southampton wrote to Salisbury in November: My Lord, the Bearer, Captain GosneU, having lateUe returned from Constantinople in his journey hath lost his companion Captain Sasy [?] who died in the way homewards. He had a pension of the King of 3/ a day, the which the bearer thinketh will bee easily procured by your Lordship's meanes, though for my part I am not of his opinion, yet can I not deny him my letter, which he wiU neades have. All that I can say for him is that I thinke he both hath, and may hereafter depose as much, and if he had it I should be very glad of it. Thus recommending unto your Lordship my best wishes, I rest your Lordship's most assuredly to doe you service H. Southampton4. 2nd Nov. [1607?] Chamberlain, writing to Carleton, starts the news of the follow ing year on the 5th of January. "All the holidays there were plays, but little company to them." On January 8th "there was golden play at Court. Nobody brought less than £300," and he records their losses. Southampton's name was not among the gamblers. The Thames was frozen over that winter, and long remained so. The Queen's second great Masque of Beauty, which had been prepared for Twelfth Night, was postponed until 14th January, when it was performed at Whitehall. Ben Jonson in his Intro duction explains that the Queen had " intermitted these delights for more than three years." Ben Jonson had another masque ready for the marriage of Viscount Haddington and Lady Eliza beth Ratcliffe 5, on Shrove Tuesday at night. 1 D.S.S.P. James, xxxvi. 48. 2 Rymer's Foedera, xvi. 663. 3 Nichols' Prog. 11. 134. Cecil Papers, cxciv. 19. * If the date is correct, this cannot be Captain Bartholomew GosnoU, who died in Virginia 22nd August, 1607. But he is known to have had a brother of like tastes. 6 Nichols' Prog. 11. 164. xxii] THE OCCURRENTS IN ENGLAND 339 On the 19th of April, 1608, the Earl of Dorset being Lord Treasurer departed out of this world as he sat at the Council Table with the rest of the Lords, about three or four o'clock in the afternoon1. On the 6th of May following Lord Salisbury was appointed his successor in the office of Lord Treasurer, though he retained his secretaryship also. The Venetian ambassador wrote his official letter on May 21, 1608, in which he said: They are very anxious here about Irish affairs, and beside the provisions akeady reported, they intend to send over with the title of Commander-in- Chief the Earl of Southampton, an officer who has fought with distinction on previous occasions in that Island2. But that proposition, as so many others concerning him had done, took no effect. People were anxious about the prospects of the harvest, and a proclamation was issued on the 2nd June to give orders how to deal with it. James wrote an extraordinary letter to Salisbury on 5th August, while he was on Progress. He addressed the new Lord Treasurer as "My little Beagle,"3 and while speaking of the Councillors who managed "a feminine Court" in his absence, added: For your part, Maister 10, I cannot but be jalous of your greatness with my wife, but most of aU am I suspicious of 3... never having taken a wife in his youth. This seems to refer to Lord Henry Howard in "his grey hairs." Fulke Greville had also lived unmarried, but was little likely to be suspected in that way. I notice this because it seems to imply some allusion to the suggestion made against Southampton in 1604. Southampton made a claim through Salisbury to the half of La Motte's ship as Vice- Admiral 4. The Earl of Southampton was much affected by the dearth. He wrote to Salisbury on the 25th of September, 1608 : The Skarsity of corn is so great in this Countrey that mayny are driven to supply themselves with seede for this sowing time out of other partes it 1 Privy Council Register, Add. MS. 11,402. 2 Vol. xi. p. 255. 3 Nichols' Prog. a. 203. 4 D.S.S.P. James, xxxv. 63, 23rd September. 22 — 2 340 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. being not heere to be had.... There hath been payd at Hampton (i.e. South ampton) within these sk weekes past out of the country the summe of .£14,000 in redy money unto strangers for corne brought thither by them, as I am enformed by the Mayor1. On the 24th of October Southampton had a request to make: My Lord, I was purposed ere this to have attended upon your Lordship myself which caused me hitherto to forbeare to write; but having now occation to stay somewhat longer then I determined, and my rent daye drawinge neere, I must bee bowld to putt your Lordship in remembrance of my losses att Bristow by reason of Purveyance, to enquire whereof you were pleased to dkect a commission, which hath accordingly been pro ceeded in, and I perswade my self the witnesses that weare by vertue of it examined wiU testify for me that my complaint is just, for I protest unto your Lordship uppon my fayth and honesty I have abated it out of the rent I receave for that porte, as the farmer hath and wUl att any time bee redy to affirme upon his oath, wherfore I humbly beseech your Lordshippe to bee favourable to mee in aUowinge it, which though it bee a matter of smaU vaUew with the kinge yet is it a greate somme in my purse, and much more then out of the meanes of my fortune I can spare. I have also another sute unto your Lordship, which is that, if any in the behalf of the marchantes trouble you aboute the aUowance for leakage which they desier, you wiU bee pleased to deferr any proceedings in it untiU I may my self wayte uppon you which I purpose God wUUng shaU be shortly. Thus recommending you &c I rest H. Southampton 2. 23rd October [1608 ? endorsed]. Mr Adam Newton, the Prince's tutor, as secretary for the Prince communicated to Lord Salisbury: His Highness hath commanded me to signifie his heartie thanks for your Lordship's three fold courtesies. First for the ger-fakon...a present fit for a Prince... next for the scarf and gloves wishing to the parties propitiam Junonem pronubam (to use his own words) for both their fathers' sakes whom he hath cause to love. And last, for the message sent by my Lord of South ampton which (as his Highness sayeth) was nedeles, he having given but a smaU token of his love unto him, who he is desirous should remember him in his absence, and expect another day from him greater testimonies of his affection. From the Court at Thetford. ist December 16083. 1 D.S.S.P. James, xxxvi. 34. 2 Cecil Papers, cxlv. 54. 3 Ibid, cxxvi. 76. xxii] THE OCCURRENTS IN ENGLAND 341 Affixed to this letter at the side are some lines added in Prince Henry's own handwriting: My Lord instead of thanks, I send unto you the topps of half doson of those Herons your Ger faulcon hath kiUed, to make you a feather for St George's Day hoping you wiU not think me one of them quorum amor pluma gratia est. Henry. The next news of the Prince are not so amiable. The Venetian ambassador, on December 26th, 1608, noted: The Prince of Wales, who has been staying in the Country some distance from the Kmg his father, complained to his majesty of the distance, and he was told that he might make what other arrangements he Uked for himself. He sent to the Earls of Southampton and Pembroke to remove their house holds and thek horses, as he desked to occupy their lodgings. They refused, and the Prince had them removed by his people, to the indignation of these gentlemen, who are of very high rank. This is a great proof of spirit on the part of the Prince, who, though only fifteen years of age, gives the highest promise in aU he does1. It does not appear how this breach of good manners was atoned for; something must have been done (if it were true) either by the Prince or his father to soothe the wounded feelings of these two proud noblemen. The Prince settled a yearly pension on Mr Silvester on December 28th, 1608. In February he gave to Izaak, the painter, for his Highness' picture given to Sir Robert Douglas, £5. 10s.; to Mr Lid- gate, the Chronicler, at his Highness' command, £26. 13*. 4-d.2 On January 6th the Prince gave to the Schoolmaster of St Martin's, who presented the King's Book on Emblems and pictures to his Highness, £5, and on February ist for the great Spanish Bible he paid £20, and for a ring with 32 "dyamants" given to Sir John Harington £100. Early in January, 1 608-9, Chamberlain wrote: "We have had a dull and heavy Christmas, no manner of delight or lightsome news, only there were plays at Court." The Masque at Court was put off till February 23rd. It was the Masque of Queens by Ben Jonson, with a magnified Witch Scene, which Inigo Jones helped to devise; and the Vision of the twelve 1 Vol. xi. p. 393- " Prince Henry's expenses 342 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. famous Queens of History, of whom the twelfth and last was the best, Bel- Anna, the present Queen of Britain. On February 25th Robert, the second Earl of Dorset, died at Dorset House (soon after his father); and, two days afterwards, his son Richard, the third Earl, married the celebrated Anne Clifford, daughter of George, Earl of Cumberland. On the 8th of April Magdalene, the old Viscountess Montague, who had been struck with paralysis in the intense cold of the previous winter, died in the odour of sanctity. It is evident that the Earl of Southampton had remained Vice- Admiral \ After a long and unavailing search through privy seals and patents I discovered that he had been appointed to the office by the trustee of his childhood, Lord Charles Howard, Lord Admiral. Southampton appointed as his deputy Vice-Admirals Edward Quinby and Edward Jennings, and sealed their patents with his own family seal in 1609. The Earl of Southampton to the Earl of Salisbury : My Lo: I have sent your Lo. by this bearer a couple of howndes for the hart deere, wherof the one wch is the dogg I know to bee a good one, beeinge bredd and made in my owne grownd: the bich is geeven unto mee, and much recommended by some that understand those kind of creatures better I thinke then aU the officers of the Exchequer, and therfore beleeve weU of her, the time of the yeare beeinge such as I can make no triaU of her; I should be gladd to doe you some better service w011 tiU I may I hope you wiU be pleased to accept of this. I must now putt your Lo. in mind of a letter you wrote unto mee, this winter past about timber for the reparation of Hurst Castle, wch your Lo. was wUUnge to bee enformed whether it mought bee spared of the Kinges in the He of Wight, unto wch I made answer that it was a commodity very skarse there, from whence if there should bee any taken there beeinge much use of timber for the maintayninge of his Maties howses in the Hand, wee should ere longe find want our selves : wch I dare now more boldly affirme havinge since more particularly enquired of it: your Lo. then seemed to bee satisfied with it, & towld mee when I was att London' that you had appointed it to bee taken other where: yett since my cominge hither I am enformed that the commissioners appointed for the reparations of Hurst CasteU, have geeven their warrant for the takinge of timber to his Maties use in the Hand, and have caused certayne trees to bee marked uppon Mr Worseleyes [interUned: "his Maties ward"] land, & would have felled them but that I have caused stay to be made therpf untiU 1 B.M. Lord Frederick Campbell's Charters, vn. n. xxii] THE OCCURRENTS IN ENGLAND 343 your Lo. bee acquainted therewith, wch I thought fitt, it beeinge strangely apprehended in that contry where in no mans memory was ever knowed any purveyance to bee aUowed, w011 makes them greately affrayed of this begin- ninge wherfore I humbly beseech your Lo. bee pleased to deUver us from this scare, & suffer not more to bee imposed uppon us now then hath been in former times & wee shaU have cause to pray for you thus ever wishing &c. The 14 of June. I beseech your Lo. be pleased to signify your pleasure unto mee con- cerninge this particular att the return of this bearer1. [Endorsed "1609."] On the 17th of July the Council granted a pass to Thomas Coryate to travel to parts beyond the sea, and the great walking tour was begun which resulted in his Crudities* - [One event happened in 1609 which should be specially noted. "Shakespeare's Sonnets" were entered on the Stationers' Registers on May 20th. It is clear that they were not published by the poet himself, or it would have read " Sonnets by William Shakespeare." It is equally evident that they were not published by the Earl of Southampton. Thomas Thorpe takes the responsibility of editing them. He dares not dedicate them to anybody, but he "wishes" something, which, read in ordinary prose, is quite clear. "Thomas Thorpe, the well-wishing adventurer, in setting forth wisheth Mr W. H., the only begetter of these ensuing sonnets, all happiness, and that eternitie promised by our ever-living poet." A great deal of conjecture has been written about Mr W. H., with none of which I agree. By far the most probable solution is the simplest, which I have often "set forth." There was one faithful friend of the family, known to have been associated with the Countess before the days of the young Earl's trouble with Lord Burleigh about his objection to being married against his will; this faithful friend became the Countess's third husband and con sequently the Earl's step-father. She, as we have seen, left " the best part of her stuff to her son, and the most part to her husband " and executor. The Countess of Southampton died in 1607. After winding up her affairs, her widowed husband was married again in 1608, to Miss Cordelia Annesley of Lee, Kent. In the course of preparing his house to receive her, he could hardly fail to find a 1 Cecil Papers, cxxvn. 79. 2 Privy Council Register, Add. MS. 11,402. 344 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. manuscript copy of "Shakespeare's Sonnets," written either in his own handwriting, the poet's, or the Earl's. Now, as it is exceedingly probable that it was he who suggested to Shakespeare to pitch his Sonnets in the Arcadian key, urging the youth to matrimony, he looked at the collection with a critical eye, and thought "these are too good to let die." Thereupon he handed them to Thorpe and washed his hands of them. The grateful Thorpe published them, sending a copy, somewhat as a wedding present, wishing him "all happiness, and that eternitie promised by our ever-living poet"; which means Then what could death do if thou shouldst depart Leaving thee living in posterity ? (Sonnet vi, and others.) a very happy prospect for a childless widower who weds a young wife. There is no objection in the use oi" Mr W. H." "Sir" was not a title in the same way as Earl or Baron. Lady Southampton always called her husbands in correspondence, " Master Heneage " and " Master Harvey," though both of them were knights. The late Dr Furnivall was argued into agreeing that though my theory was not absolutely certified, it was the best which had ever ap peared. Dr Brandl has accepted it in his translation ofthe Sonnets.] The young Earl, we have seen, had been made free of the town of Southampton in 15911. Among his fellow Burgesses were the worshipful Roger Manwood, one of the Queen's Majesty's Justices of the Court of Common Pleas, appointed in 15772; Fulke Greville, Esq., son and heir of Sir Fulke Greville, on 27th January, 1580; Martin Furbisher, gent., 17th March, 1 58 1; Sir Walter Raleigh, ioth September 1586; the Right Hon. Sir Edward Seymour, Lord Beauchamp, and the Earl of Hertford, 4th June, 1588; Right Hon. Robert, Earl of Essex, 13th August, 1589. Then come the Earl of Southampton on 9th January, 1 59 1 ; Don Antonio, King of Portugal, nth May, 1591; Right Hon. Ferdinando, Lord Strange, 3rd October, 1591; Sir Christopher Blount in 1594; William, Earl of Pembroke, 21st October, 1603; James, Lord Wriothesley, son and heir of Henry, Earl of South- 1 Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. xi. App. in. p. 21. 2 Original Corporation Books. xxii] THE OCCURRENTS IN ENGLAND 345 ampton, 6th January, 1623-4; Thomas Wriothesley Esq., on the same date. The Earl's name had been temporarily removed from the books when he was convicted in 1601, but was replaced in 1603. In 1605 the Earl started ironworks in his property, as his grand father Viscount Montague had done in his1. But the Court Leet Jury complained that the chief master of them, Chamberlain, was engrossing the woods and underwoods which were formerly rented to the town (Court Leet Records, 1605). In 1508 one Tim- perley applied for a lease of the sweet wines from the port, but the corporation refused him, saying if they let them to any, it would be to their good lord the Earl of Southampton. However, that was never settled; another had the grant. The corporation entertained the Earl and other Knights ofthe Musters on 2nd August, 1608. In the summer of 1609 the Royal Progress passed again by Farnham, Salisbury, and Basing to Beaulieu. On the 3rd of August Sir John Drummond, Usher to the King at Beaulieu, wrote to the Mayor and Aldermen of Southampton to send twenty strong men to wait on the King in Beaulieu by 5th August2. This was thought a very strange request and strangely couched. Drum mond evidently did not know the jealousies that existed between the town and the county, and a messenger was sent to enquire what was the meaning of the demand. But the Earl of Southampton had heard of it, understood the position, and, with Sir Thomas Lake, discharged the town from the order and found the necessary men in the shire. From the accounts of the Treasurer of the Chamber we find that he paid To Walter Alexander gentleman usher one yeoman hanger, 2 groomes of the Chamber two groomes of the Wardrobe, and one groom porter... for riding, waiting and attending his Highness into the Isle of Wight to Caris- brook Castle, from thence to Tichfield, the Earl of Southampton's House, and so back again to Bewly, the space of 8 days July & August3. This would seem to refer to an unrecorded flying visit of the Prince. Among the Prince's expenses for August occurs the item: 1 Assembly Books, Southampton. J. W. Horrocks, pp. 373, 430. 2 Southampton Books, Town Clerk John Friar. 3 Dec. Ace. Treas. Ch., Audit Off. 389, 46. 346 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. "To my Lord of Southampton's man with cheese and oysters. To my Lord of Southampton's Coachman £1." Occasionally the Earl of Southampton could give good advice to the Earl of Salisbury, as when, on 15th December, 1609, he wrote: My Lord, Uppon Wednesday morning I went to Newmarket and before the Kinge went to dinner I delivered unto him what I received from your Lordship concerning the proiect of leasinge the Copps in Whittlewood; he gave me a very patient and silent hearinge while I tould him with what caution your Lordship had proceeded, and answered nothing untiU I sayd that notwithstanding what was done yet, your Lordship's end being chiefly his satisfaction, you had forborne to perfect any thinge in it untiU it had received his approbation, as best able to judge of the fittness of it, and therefore resolved that the lease should pass without his owne hand unto it, then as it seemed I touched the right stringe and he answered mee unto that very ioyfuUy that therein you had done exceedinge weU, addinge that the old treasurer was wont to let such leases without ever acquainting him with them. I tould him your Lordship respected too much the pleasing of him to lett any of this nature without his own aUowance. In conclusion, for it would be too longe to relate aU that passed between us, hee approved aU your proceedings in this business, and spake of you as hee useth to doe when hee is best pleased, yett my Lord, if you wiU give me leave to teU you my conjecture, I thinke you wiU finde him very adverse to the letting of any lease of woodes in his forrests, for soe hee declared himself unto mee, unto which I tould him my opinion, and so left to dispute it further as a thinge not belonging unto mee, only I thought fitt to let your Lordship know what I found. I have also since my coming hither enquired how the King came to know of this matter and finde that Sir Robert Knowles coming lately out of these partes to the Courte spake ordinarUy of it, as by that meanes it came to the Kinges eare aU that my Lord Gerrard said was only that he heard of such a course intended, wherein if he committed an error in this respect towards your Lordship's privity it was not maUiciously, for he acknowledgeth himself bound unto your Lordship in many wayes and especiaUy for that forrest, for by your meanes he confesseth to have procured the custody of it, and therefore I should bee very gladde you would not continue your offence taken against him, and thus wishmg a long continuance of your Lordships happy fortune I rest your Lordships most assuredly to doe you service, H. Southampton1. To this Southampton adds a happy thought, that the King had heard of the Virginia squirrels and would like one very much, and 1 D.S.S.P. James, l. 65. xxii] THE OCCURRENTS IN ENGLAND 347 advises Salisbury to make enquiries and get one, to bring to the King the next time he came to Court1. A contemporary diarist lets us know what people thought of Southampton as Governor of the Isle of Wight. When this island was fortunate, and enjoyed the companie of Sir Edward Horsey, my Lord Hunsdon, or my Lord of Southampton, then it flourished with gentlemen. I have seen with my Lord of Southampton on St Georges Downe at Bowles from thirty to forty knights and gentlemen, where our meetings were then twice every week, Tuesdays and Thursdays, and we had an ordinary there, and cards and tables. Mutamur. The gentlemen which Uved in ye Island in the 7th yere of King James his reigne aU Uved weU, and were most commonly at our ordinary.... His just, affable, and obUging de portment gained him the love of aU ranks of people, and raised the island to a most flourishing state 2 Southampton found the castles in his charge very much dilapi dated3. He appealed for £1000 for restoration, but acknowledged that much could be done for £300 4- Salisbury instructed the Receiver for Hampshire on July 9th to pay ^3005 to Southampton for repairs at Sandham and Yarmouth Castles. But the money was not forthcoming and Southampton advanced it, and wanted it refunded. A privy seal was granted to allow the money on 20th March, 1609-10; two particular books were made out, the one subscribed by Sir John Menny, and the other by Sir John Leigh. But still there was delay, examination, and re-examination before it was settled. Also aUowed for repairs of Yarmouth by making of two buttresses to stay up the waUs of the said Castle, footing the north west corner of the Castle and the foundation thereof between the same buttresses and the sea having worn away the ground, and divers coynes from thence; repairing the old waU at the east end of the Castle, facing of it with Ashlar that the sea may decay it no further 6- On October 7th, 1609, Southampton asked Salisbury to stop sealing certain warrants to the King's tenants in the Isle of Wight, as it was better that he should deal with the contractors himself7. 1 Given in Chapter xxi. 2 Sir John Oglander's Diary, p. 22. 3 D.S.S.P. James, xlvii. 4. 4 Ibid, xlvii. 21. 6 Ibid, xlvii. 22. * Dec. Ace. Treas. Ch., Audit Off. 2515. ' D.S.S.P. James, xlviii. 89. 348 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Again a warrant was issued for payment of that j^oo1 an^ new items. Mathias Brading, Mason, for his traveU and charges in providing of stone to pave the platform 66/8. More to him for his travel to SaUsbury and attending the Earl of Southampton 4 dayes, with a particular charge of the said reparation and to know his Lordship's pleasure and directions 10/. More for his travel to Bewly and Tichfield to acquaint the said Earl with the pro ceeding of the work 5/ & for 4 daies travel to Sandham & work there £4 17/. The Venetian ambassador noted on 24th December, 1 609 : The Prince is to run the Usts (combatter una bariera) on Epiphany. He wiU be the ChaUenger, backed by 5 comrades, three EngUsh, who are the Earl of Arundel the Earl of Southampton and Sir Thomas Somersett, and two Scotch, the Duke of Lennox and Sir Richard Preston. The Venturers are about forty in number. The CouncU arranges aU 2. Prince Henry was a youth ambitious of knightly glory, and he had arranged for Twelfth Night, 1609-10, a famous tournament called "Prince Henry's Barriers."3 He and six assistants were to challenge fifty-six defendants, so that each challenger had to fight eight times. He chose for his assistants the Duke of Lennox, the Earl of Arundel, the Earl of Southampton, Sir Thomas Somerset, the Lord Hay, and Sir Richard Preston (shortly afterwards created Lord Dingwall). Though the Prince would not be sixteen years old until the 19th of February, he shewed great agility and skill. He feasted his company afterwards all night until the morning, which was Sunday. The next day, 7th January, there was a great feast, at which the best deserving among the defendants received prizes. These were the Earl of Montgomery, Sir Thomas Darcy, and Sir Robert Gordon, who obtained two. Speeches written by Ben Jonson were interwoven with the festivities, of which the first was The Lady of the Lake. On February 23rd there was trouble in Parliament about the King's debts. There is little wonder when we see how much went in such festivities, how irregular the grants had been, and how much he had had to pay up. The privy warrants on the Exchequer of ist March, 1 609-10, should be noted: among these, that of £8000 to Sir Walter Raleigh 1 D.S.S.P. James, vin. 115. Warr Bk, II. p. 114. 2 Venetian Papers, vol. xi. p. 744. 3 Nichols' Prog. 11. 264. xxii] THE OCCURRENTS IN ENGLAND 349 for Sherborne. Elizabeth took all her "traitor's" lands; Lady Essex and her children were left with but £40 a year, according to one State Paper. James was more considerate. Chamberlain, in a letter to Winwood on 2nd May, 1610, tells him that Salisbury meant to send abroad his son, Lord Cranborne (who had just been married). The Lord Treasurer hath sent over his secretary Kirkham to take order to furnish the Lord Cranborne with aU necessaries to foUow the French King in the journey. More of our court gaUants talk of taking the same course if the voyage hold. Indeed it were fitter they had some place abroad to vent their superfluous valour than to brabble so much as they do here at' home, for in one week we had three or four great quarrels, the first twkt the Earls of Southampton and Montgomerie, that feU out at Tennis, where the Rackets flew about thek ears; but the matter was taken up and com pounded by the King without further bloodshed1. The "brabbles" of the other combatants were not so easily pacified. Lord Cranborne's plans were interfered with, for that very month of May rang with the dreadful news of the murder of Henry IV of France by Ravaillac2- This event gave a great scare to King James, who had all suspected persons exiled; and his subjects, through the House of Commons, took anew the oath of allegiance3. It gave a great shock to Prince Henry, who, young as he was, seems to have grasped the meaning of the great schemes which the French King had in hand. The British Court went into mourning, and the King sent over a special envoy, with messages of sympathy for their loss, to the French Queen and the Dauphin. But the festivity which had been planned went on. Prince Henry was to be made the twelfth Prince of Wales. He was to go to Richmond and return on Thursday, the last of May, 16104. The Mayor and Aldermen of London planned to proceed by water to meet him at Chelsea and present an aquatic spectacle called "London's love to the Royal Prince Henry." An address was delivered by Corinea riding on a whale, and Amphion on a dolphin saluted the Prince with music. There was not room on the river 1 Winwood, Mem. in. p. 154. z Howes Chronicle, p. 995. Nichols' Prog. 11. 310. 3 Proc. James, 2nd June, 1610. 4 Nichols' Prog. 11. pp. 315, 346, and other histories of the time give full accounts. 350 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. for all the boats that day, but they opened to let the Prince's barges pass. The King and Queen were watching the order of the show from Whitehall, and the Prince landed to salute them and then withdrew to rest. On Sunday, June 3rd, there were twenty-five Knights of the Bath created. A water-fight with pirates was intended to take place, but it was postponed till Wednesday. On Monday, June 4th, the Prince was invested. The elder noblemen were in chief attendance on him, but others were present at the ceremony, including the Earls of Southampton, Bedford, Pembroke, and Montgomery. After the ceremony the King dined privately, but the Prince in the Great Hall, surrounded by all the eminent states men. The Earl of Pembroke was server, the Earl of Southampton carver. On the 5th the Queen produced a "glorious masque," "Tethys or the Queen's Wake," devised by Samuel Daniel. On Wednesday there was a tilt, then the sea-fight with the pirates, winding up with fireworks. Immediately afterwards the King went on Progress to Holdenby; on the 24th of August he was at Woodstock. On September 20th he was at Theobalds, which he left to see the launch of his new " man-of-war. There was some hitch in the arrangements, and the launch did not take place till the next morning. The Prince was greatly interested in the Navy, and was having a ship built for himself. The affairs of the Lady Arabella received much attention in the Privy Council till the end of the year1. The last entry of the copy of the Council Register was a comforting one. There was plenty of barley and wheat in Sussex; prices were under the rate, and wheat might be exported. Therewith the copy abruptly stops, and is not commenced again until 161 5. Upon New Year's night 1610-1, the Prince of Wales and twelve others gave a very stately masque of "Oberon or the Fairy Prince," by Ben Jonson 2, and later the Queen gave two, also by Ben Jonson, "Love freed from Ignorance and Folly," and "Love restored. " 3 These were performed by gentlemen the King's servants. Southampton's anxiety that his farm of sweet wines would be impoverished by the King laying a tax on the importation was 1 Add. MS. 11,402. 2 Nichols' Prog. a. 376. 3 Ibid. 11. 388. xxii] THE OCCURRENTS IN ENGLAND 351 soothed by his being granted on nth June an annuity out of the customs on sweet wines to the amount of £2000 per annum1. Some irregularity in the wording of the grant necessitated a regrant at the end of the same year 2. There is an entry in the Titchfield Register on 24th June, 1 6 1 1 : "The same day Titchfield Haven was shut out by one Richard Talbot's industry, under God's permission, at the cost of the Rt. Hon. the Earl of Southampton." A letter on the 27th of June states: "The Earl of Southampton hath been in speech to go Extraordinary Ambassador into France, but my Lord Wotton is now assigned." Chamberlain writes on November 13th, in the same year: The Earl of Southampton is appointed to go into Spain to condole the death of that Queen, which wiU be a step to a Councillorship, the missing of which he took very unkindly. He writes again on December 4th that The Earl Southampton's journey to Spain is laid aside, and the cere mony of condoUng shaU be left to the Ambassador resident there, as likewise the Masque that was preparing here is put off as unseasonable so soon after the death of a neighbour Queen. This is accounted for by the Venetian ambassador, who, on 23rd December, 161 1, explaining all the cross-embassies which had been caused by the Spanish coldness in regard to the marriage of Prince Henry, says: There is talk of sending an Ambassador Extraordinary on the excuse of conveymg condolences for the death of the Queen. It is said that Lord Southampton hath excused himself, and perhaps to avoid talk they wiU content themselves with commissioning Secretary Cottington to deal with it who was long in Spain with CornwalUs3. It is quite likely that the Earl of Southampton did not care to go to Spain just then; but it is much more likely that Salisbury had given a hint that he did not wish him to do so. Chamberlain begins the following year with telling what he thought a good joke: One Copley, a priest, domestic Chaplain to Lord Montague, faUing in love with an ancient CathoUc maid there that attended the chUdren, they have both left thek profession and faUen to marriage. 1 D.S.S.P. James, lxiv. 16. a Ibid. lxxi. 28. 3 Venetian Papers, vol. xn. p. 398. 352 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. After that there are no news but of the Earl of Salisbury's health. He had been very ill the year before, but had recovered sufficiently to walk in his garden. But in 1612 the illness took a more serious turn. Anxious friends watched with him through the night. An undated letter of Southampton's to George, Lord Carew, I refer tentatively to this period. My Lord, I have received a letter from my Lord of SaUsbury whereof I assure myself you know the contentes, for to you I am directed to return my answer, which is this, that if you wiU come hether this night I wiU to Hatfield with you, God WilUnge, to-morrow, otherwise if you wiU stay att London I wiU caU you there to-morrow in the morninge and goe alonge with you to find SaUsbury, but if you resolve upon that course, send your coach tonight to Waltham, whither mine shaU carry us, for so wee shaU despatch our journey the sooner. Thus in haste, &c. I rest. (This Monday 2 of ye clock.) I pray you if you come not hether tonight yourself fayle not to send one unto mee that I may know how to steer my course x. From Paris Beaulieu wrote to Mr Trumbull, Resident at Brussels, on May 6th, 1612: We have been here a long time in Apprehension for my Lord Treasurer's Sickness, whereof we do now the more apprehend the danger, by reason of going to the Bath at this Time of the Duke of BouiUon's being here, and the Count of Hanaux, who have such important negociations in hand; and I wiU not conceaU from you what Dr Mayerne the French Physitian, who is con- tinuaUy about his Lordship, hath lately written to my Lord of the Nature and State of his Desease; which is "que c'est une disposition d I'hydropsie compliquee avec le scorbut, Lesquels sent deux mauvaises hostes en un corps faible et delicat: mais par la force de son courage invincible, nous ne laissons pas d'avoir espirance de sa gukrison, bien qu'elle soit longue et difficile." Whereby you may see what slender hopes he doth oppose to the force of such EviUs. Of his Lordship's miscarrying, I do not doubt but you apprehend the Inconvenience as weU as we, for the great Loss which the King & the State should have in his Person, and the particular Interest which my Lord Am bassador should have therein, especiaUy at this time of his Absence, which could not be but very prejudiciaU unto him: But Deus...meliora dabit.. ..In that confidence I remain your most loving &c John Beaulieu2. Mr Fynett wrote to Mr Trumbull the whole sad story from Hatfield on 28th May, 161 2: 1 Cecil Papers, clxvii. 141. 2 Winwood, Mem. in. p. 367. xxii] THE OCCURRENTS IN ENGLAND 353 We left London the 27th of April, with smaU hopes and less UkeUhood that such a journey could profit, otherwise than in his Lordship's WiUingness (not the least part of cure in sickness) to undertake it. By the way of our sk night-Baytes (at Ditton my Lord Chandois's, Caussam my Lord Knowles's, Newberry Mr Doleman's, Marlborough Mr Daniel's, and Laycock my Lady Stapleton's) his Lordship made many stops and shifts from his Coach to his Utter and to his Chair, and aU for that Ease that lasted no longer than his imagination.... The thkd of May he arrived at Bath, and upon his first Tryals (wherin as in the rest, he spent once a day but one hour of Time)... he discovered such cheerfukess of Humour, Riddance of pains, recovery of Sleep, Increase of Appetite and decrease of swellings.... After some days' joy for such blessed Effects, the Disease, that had taken Truce not Peace, began again to discover its maUgnant Qualities, brought new melanchoUy Paintings and other dangerous Symptoms, so frequent as the Intermissions were interpreted but for lucida intervalla. TheBatb was no more used (as that which afforded the utmost vktue it had in making a kindly humour in his leg for the drayne of the Humour) but was thenceforth, in the speculation of his Lordship's then attending Physicians, Dr Atkins and Dr Poe, held hurtful rather than profitable. So after some sixteen days' Abode there and three or four severaU Affrightings, that we should there have lost him, his Lordship was resolved to return to London, with aU his weakness; and so did, the Thursday before the Sunday (the 24th of May) that he died at Marlborough. His sickness. . .had been long, and painfuUy Ungering. In all that time his incomparable judgement and memory never failed him (now and then only nearest his End, and in the extremities of his Fits letting faU some wandering words, but far from distracted passion, or any way offending) his soul and mind for heavenly resolution so settled, and his Profession that way (expressed k often Conferences and Prayers with Mr Bowles, his household Chaplain) so clear and Christian, as brought Joy in our Sorrow, and in our greatest Discomfort fuU assurance of his best Happiness. I must not forget to teU your Lordship, that the day before our Departure from Bath, my Lord Hay arrived there sent purposely from his Majesty (who not long before had received some hopefuU likelihoods of his recovery) with a Token, a fair Diamond set or rather hung Square in a gold ring without a Foyle and a message accompanykg it to this purpose; that the Favour and Affection he bore him was and should be ever as tbe form and matter of that Ring, endless, pure, and most perfect. From the Queen he received by the same hand another gracious message and a Token, and at the same time the Uke Remem brance from the Prince's Highness deUvered by Sir John HoUis; all comforts, and confirmations of his never otherwise than most faithfull and best deserving service. My Lord of Cranbourne, (now Earl of SaUsbury) posted down upon the news of his irrecoverable estate, having been in obedience of my Lord's pleasure tiU then absent, and had the unhappy happiness of a Son to be at s.s. 23 354 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. the closing of the Eyes of his most happy Father. The Body is this day brought with the Attendance aU the way of some thirty or forty of us his servants to Hatfield, where the FuneraU, according to his wiU, is at fit time to be solempnked1. Salisbury, on the 8th of May, had written from Bath to his son, Lord Cranborne2, about his illness (his last letter to him). There is another account of that tragic journey preserved, written by his chaplain, John Bowles3. Salisbury had made his will on the 17th of March, 1611-124, adding a codicil on the 4th of May. It was proved on the 6th of June, 161 2. There was no remembrance of any kind of Southampton in the will, and his name is not mentioned among those who attended the relatively quiet funeral at Hatfield that month. It was but shortly after he and the rest of the Virginia Company obtained their new Charter that year that he departed, and it seemed fit that the two chapters of historical events should be brought up to an even date. Gossip was busy about the departed. Chamberlain wrote on May 27th: Some think he hastened homewards to countermine his underminers, and cast dust in their eyes. As the case stands, it was best that he gave up the world, for they say his friends feU from him apace, & some near about him, and howsoever he had fared with his health, it is verily thought he would never have been the same man again in power or credit. I never knew so great a man so soon & so generaUy censured, for men's tongues talk very Uberally and freely, but how truly I cannot judge.... It is generaUy thought that the Earl of Southampton and the Lord Sheffield shaU be shortly sworn of the Council. Upon the Earl of Pembroke's preferment to that place, the Earl of Southampton retired himself into the country, but his spirit hath walked very busily about the court ever since. The Earl of Dorset, on June 23rd, i6i3,adds: "Whengreatmen die, such is either their desert or the malice of people, or both together, as commonly they are ill spoken of, and so is one that died but lately, more I think than ever anyone was, and in more several kinds." , In 1598 George Chapman published the first two and five other Books of his Translation of the Iliads and dedicated them to the Earl of Essex. Some years later — not earlier than 1609 — he published his Homer... in twelve Bookes of his Iliads, dedicated to 1 Winwood, Mem. m. 367. 2 Cecil Papers, cxxix. 106. 3 Add. MSS. 34,218, f. 125. 4 Ibid. i. 138. xxii] THE OCCURRENTS IN ENGLAND 355 Prince Henry. At the conclusion he added fourteen sonnets to likely patrons. Among these is included one To the right valorous and virtuous Lord, Henry, the Earle of Southampton. In choice of aU our Countries noblest spirits (Borne slavisher Barbarisme to conuince) I could not but invoke your honored merits To foUow the swift vertue of our Prince. The cries of Vertue and her Fortresse Learning o Brake Earth, and to Elysium did descend To call up Homer; who therein discerning That his excitements, to their good, had end (As being a Grecian) puts on EngUsh armes And to the hardy natures in these dimes Strikes up his high and spiritfuU alarmes, That they may deare earth of those impious crimes Whose conquest (though most faintly aU apply) You know (learn'd Earle) aU Uve for, and should die. This evidently refers to Southampton's interest in colonisation. If Chapman really is " the rival poet" of Shakespeare's Sonnet, we cannot wonder that the patron continued to prefer Shake speare's more mellifluous praise. The whole of the Works of Homer were published in 161 6 dedicated to the Memory of Prince Henry. In this some of the adulatory sonnets were removed, but Southampton's remains. George Wither also addressed him in his Epigrams in tentative lines, which seem to seek a patron. They begin To Henry, Earle of Southampton. Southampton since thy province gave me birth And on these pleasant mountains I yet Keepe, I ought to be no stranger to thy worth1. I have looked up all the Cambridge Subsidy Rolls and Court Rolls, all the Inquis. Post Mortems, but in vain, to account for South ampton's residence at Little Shelford. It evidently was to be near the King's hunting box at Royston. Mr H. W. Eadon kindly tells me that the Earl gave a bell to the Parish Church of Little Shelford, on which appears "Ricardus Hitchfield me fecit. +13: Henry Wryesle, Earl of Southampton 161 2." 1 At end of Abuses Stript and Whipt, 1612. 23—2 CHAPTER XXIII A NOBLE GIFT TO ST JOHN'S COLLEGE LIBRARY The feelings of the Earl of Southampton on the death of the Earl of Salisbury must have been strangely mixed. He had lost a friend, not only in the eyes of the world, but in private life — a friend to whom he owed even life itself. The memory of his great debt must have pressed heavily on him at times, "so burdensome, still paying, still to owe." He was his own man now. To no other did he owe any obligations more than he could pay as an equal and a free man, to none did he owe any allegiance save to the King and his family. It was one of the great crises of his life, but unfortunately we have nothing to tell precisely how it affected him., By June, Chamberlain had discovered that the King was much troubled by competitors for the Secretaryship. On the 17 th he wrote to Carleton: Sir Henry NeviUe wiU never see you wronged.. . .Too much soUciting hath hindered him; and the flocking of ParUament men about him and their meetings and consultations with the Lord of Southampton and the Lord Sheffield at Lord Rochester's Chamber hath done him no good. So the King says he wiU not have a Secretary imposed upon him by ParUament, and the Earl of Southampton is gone home as he came without a CounciUor- ship. In the meantime the King himself supplies the Secretary's place and aU packets are deUvered to the Lord Chamberlain as to the King1. At Whitsuntide there were four priests hung at Tyburn; "the Earl of Arundel and his young son were present, and the Viscount Montague with divers ladies in coaches, yet it was early, between 6 and 7 in the morning."2 About the middle of June, Prince Henry was preparing a new toy. He was passionately fond of ships, had just had a great one of his own built, and had commissioned Phineas Pette, the famous. ship-builder, to shape him a small new boat as a pinnace to. 1 D.S.S.P. James, lxix. 71. 2 Ibid. lxix. 67. ch. xxiii] ST JOHN'S COLLEGE LIBRARY 357 it. The King had been planning an extensive new Progress, and left Theobalds on the 20th July. On the ist of August Sir Charles Cornwallis began to refer to the Prince's indisposition. "He was subject to many strange and extraordinary qualms, which bleeding at the nose frequently relieved." Few noticed it at first; everybody was talking about his sister's intended marriage. He had always favoured the Palsgrave above the other competitors, and he was now eagerly looking forward to his arrival, and to the plays and jousts which would be associated with the marriage festivities. A sudden coolness had gathered round his own projected Spanish marriage, and the Prince did not seem to care. Some indefinable change had taken place in him; his natural enjoyment of life, exercise, and study seemed to have departed. Everything he did required an effort; yet he refused to give up engagements, though he was unfit for them. He went to Richmond, and would walk late in the mists and dews by the river, which was then thought very dangerous. He did worse. He would go out bathing after supper, and would practise swimming at night in the river. His father had commanded him to join him at Belvoir Castle on August 7th; he put off the journey till too late, and then had two days of forced riding in order to arrive at the Court in time for the date appointed. The Earl of Rutland was not then Roger, the Earl of South ampton's friend and connection. He had been carried out of the Castle to the family vault at Bottisford on July 22nd, and his brother Francis was Earl in his stead. So soon had festivities followed on the heels of woe. The King left Belvoir on the ioth of August, hunting as he went. Apparently the Prince was with him. On the 26th of August the King and Queen, with a full Court, met at Woodstock. At that Palace, which belonged to the Prince, he entertained his father and mother from Wednesday until Sunday the 30th. The next day he went to Richmond, that he might be ready to meet the Count Palatine. But the young wooer did not arrive then; it was the 16th of October, Friday night at 1 1 o'clock, when he reached Gravesend. His first welcome was delivered next day by Lord Hay for the King. On Sunday, as he passed up the river to pay his first visit, thirty great guns saluted him from the Tower, and gave notice to the Earls of Shrewsbury, Sussex, Southampton, and others to wait upon the 358 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Duke of York at the Stairs at Whitehall, there to receive him and conduct him to the presence of the King, the Queen, the Prince, and the Princess. His reception was very cordial, and he shewed due appreciation of it. "He becomes himself well; and is well-liked of all," said Mr Fynett. There was talk of nothing but masques, tilts, and barriers, but the Count Palatine did not seem to care so much for these subjects, as for conversation with the Princess. Poor young lovers x- Already a dark shadow hung over their horizon. Thomas Dekker was employed for the pageant on Lord Mayor's Day. The Palsgrave dined in the Guildhall, and the Archbishop talked to him in Latin. Prince Henry was sick and unable to come. Doctors had long been consulted; some were obeyed, others defied. The Prince resented his loss of strength at such a time. He loved his sister dearly; he had looked forward to honour her as much as he could; he had intended to escort her, heading a guard of honour to the utmost confines of the States' dominion. Just at the beginning of the usual season of festivities, on November ist, his illness became serious2- He often called for his sister — "Where is my dear sister?" She tried to be with him and comfort him, but they kept her back, lest there might be infection in this strange disease. All efforts to help him failed, and he died on the evening of November the 6th — "the expectation of Europe, the hope of all Britain, the pride and glory of his parents." He was torn away from all, and the page of history he had hoped to fill remains a blank. Southampton must have felt the death more than many; he had been much about the Prince and had been associated with many of his plans. In watching the youth develope into manhood he must have thought of his own son James and hoped that he might grow up a fit peer for such a Prince; but it was not to be. The mourning at the funeral on 7th December, 161 2, was real mourning, not merely "inky cloaks."3 Prince Charles, now heir-apparent, was chief mourner; Southampton was one ofthe twelve Earls assistants to the 1 The date of the Princess's birth was August 13th, 1596, that of the Palsgrave three days later. 1 2 The whole history of the period can be found in Nichols' Progresses, II. 446-526. 3 See as to Southampton's mourning, L.C. ix. 6. xxm] ST JOHN'S COLLEGE LIBRARY 359 chief mourner. At the offerings after the funeral, the late Prince's helmet and crest were borne by the Earls of Southampton and Pembroke. Princess Elizabeth was much afflicted, for she and her brother were special friends and alike in tastes. Of course, all plays and festivities were stayed, and the marriage was postponed until May Day. It must have been a peculiarly trying time to the Count Palatine, but he seems to have conducted himself well. Chamberlain had written on 6th November about some of the Court intrigues, and added, "Sir Henry Neville takes great pains to reconcile all, yet there are exceptions taken to him that he cannot come in himself but he must bring his man, Sir Ralph Winwood, and his champion, the Earl of Southampton, and who soever he thinks good." On the 12th he speaks of the illness and death of the Prince: "the world here is much dismayed and the doctors blamed. Raleigh hath lost his greatest hope through him." On December 17th he found time to write "Sir Francis Bacon hath set out New Essays, where, in a Chapter of Deformity, the world takes notice that he paints out his little cousin [Salisbury] to the life." The Queen had been against the marriage at first, not thinking the Elector Palatine a magnificent enough match for her daughter. But she had learned to like her son-in-law, and possibly this was the reason that an earlier date for the marriage was fixed, and the solemnities relaxed with the New Year. "The affiancing of the Palsgrave and the Lady Elizabeth took place on Sunday 27th December 161 2 (St John's Day) in the great Banqueting Room, before dinner," says Chamberlain. He wrote again on February 4th, "On Sunday kst, and on Candlemas Day, the Prince Palatine and his Lady were solemnly asked openly in the Chapel, and next Sunday will be the last time of asking. . . .The Prince Palatine goes to be installed at Windsor on the 7th. The time of their departure is prefixed to be on the 8th of April, after Easter. They go attended by the Duke of Lennox, the Earl of Arundel, Viscount Lisle and Lord Zouch. Lord and Lady Harington accompany them." They were married on St Valentine's Day, 14th February, 1 61 2-3, in the Royal Chapel at Whitehall. Her tutor, Lord Harington of Exton, preceded the bride, who was led between her younger brother, Charles, and the Earl of Northampton, the 360 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. youngest and oldest bachelors at Court. She was dressed in a richly embroidered gown of white satin, and wore a coronet of gold set with pearls and diamonds shining above her amber-coloured hair, which hung down plaited to her waist, between every plait a roll of precious stones. Her train was carried by sixteen ladies, dressed in white satin adorned with jewels. The King was in a sumptuous black suit, the Queen in white embroidered satin. Chamberlain says: There was excessive bravery, the Lady Wotton had a gown that cost .£50 the yard for the embroidery, the Earl of Northumberland's daughter was very gaUant, and the Lord Montague, that hath paid reasonably weU for his recusancy, bestowed £1500 in appareU for his two daughters.... There was running at the ring.... The Lords' Masque, and another less fortunate.... Sir Francis Bacon was the chief contriver of the Masque of Gray's Inn The Marriage of the Thames and the Rhine.. . .By what iU fortune I know not, they came home as they went, the King was too tired to wait up longer. It was attempted again on the 24th, more successfully. One may wonder how the Rev. William Crashaw viewed the "Maske ofthe two houses, Middle Temple and Lincoln's Inn," on the 1 5th of February, by George Chapman, the very man who had scoffed at Virginia in Eastward Hoe, who now gave his chief maskers Indian garments, while their priests were elevated into being the Priests of the Sun; also whether, by any chance, his friend Strachey confided to him his satisfaction that the poet Shakespeare had used his letter in planning the gorgeous play of The Tempest, "a contract of true love to celebrate." Southampton seems, long ere this, to have lived in open con formity with the Church of England. But he was unable to shake off old ties with recusants, and remained a permanent believer in the right to freedom of conscience, as advocated by Essex. He sometimes got into trouble through his friends (perhaps Lady Southampton remained a Catholic), and one case crops up here. A certain pamphlet entitled. Balaam's Ass was found, dropped pur posely in the Court on 28th April. It was supposed to be meant as an answer to the King's book, Monetary Preface, an Epistle, and was supposed to refer to the King as Antichrist. A recusant named John Cotton was accused, was proclaimed on 1 1 th June, and seems to have been secured at once, for his first examination was at xxiii] ST JOHN'S COLLEGE LIBRARY 361 Lambeth on 14th June. He stated his age to be 53; he denied writing the book. He had been at Southwark and went over the water to go to my Lord Southampton's. In the boat he was very heavy, yet he proceeded on his way towards Southampton House, whither he went very warily about 4 o'clock. He landed at Temple Stairs, went to Mr Wotton's house in Chancery Lane, where his brother Richard and Mr Wakeman were. They went with him to Southampton House, where he was shown the Proclamation. He had been at Douay; his kinsman, Mr Anthony Copley, told him of Balaam's Ass. The Earl of Southampton wrote to the Archbishop of Canterbury a letter undated, queried May? 161 3: I have sent your Lordship by this bearer the paper bookes found in John Cotton's Study (none of which, as his brother Richard assures me, to whom I shewed them) are written with his own hand. Hee can give no assurance, as he says, of bringing up John Cotton, for he stiU protesteth he knoweth not where he is, but he hath as he teUs me sent to seek him, and doubteth not, if his messenger find him, he wiU readUy come. This is aU I have had from him this morning, whereof I thought fitt to advertise your Lordship that sedng there is no certaynety in this course, you mought not delaye what otherwise m your wisdom you woulde think fitt to be done. P.S. Your Lordship may boldly commit anything that concerns him by word of mouth to bearer1. It may be noted that Southampton is not recorded as being present at the royal marriage. He may have been on duty at the Isle of Wight, or he may have purposely absented himself, through some feeling of offence, or his name may simply have been omitted by accident from the accounts of the proceedings. As already shewn, he was supposed to have been disappointed at not being made a Councillor. Pembroke had been offered the honour, though his family nobility was no older than Southampton's, while in age he was seven years younger. It was not until after Easter that the bride and bridegroom set out to their home, with an escort of honour headed by the Duke of Lennox, the Princess, however, with very few personal attendants (and all of them Scots). Lord and Lady Harington accompanied her to her new home as guests for a visit. They travelled leisurely, so that the Princess might see the towns and the people might see 1 Hist. MSS. Com., Earl of Ancaster's MSS. p. 362. 362 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. her. It was the 6th of June before she arrived at her husband's Court at Heidelberg, where his mother and sister were waiting to receive her. There was much display of grandeur. A thousand knights and gentlemen escorted her, and tiltings and banquets formed part of the renewed wedding festivities. Now, it is rather strange to find that Southampton also was on the continent that summer. It seems possible that he may have combined a visit paid ostensibly to the Spa with the fulfilling of Prince Henry's wish to escort his sister to the very bounds of the States' dominion, or to pay her a bridal visit of respect as soon as she was installed in her beautiful home at Heidelberg. At any rate, he was in the States and was returning from some port on the North Sea coast by August. Meanwhile, it had become known to nearly everybody that the young Earl of Essex had not been happy in his marriage to the Lady Frances Howard, daughter of the Earl of Suffolk. She had now taken a fancy to the King's favourite, desired to marry him, and had had the audacity to make out a case against her husband for nullity of marriage. The public were also very much interested in the affair of Sir Thomas Overbury, who had been secretary to Lord Rochester and disapproved of this proceeding. The Progress was expected to begin on the 1 2th of July by Farnham, Basingstoke, and Salisbury to the Earl of Southampton's at Beaulieu, where the King was to stay twelve nights. The owner of Beaulieu was waiting fair winds when he wrote to Sir Ralph Winwood on August 6th, 1613: Sir, I perceive by your last Letter that you have been of late particularly advertised of the Proceedings in England, and how the Busyness of which we desire so much to hear the Conclusion, is stiU in suspence. The Difficulty aUedged is the not having as then accommodated the Matter of Sir Thomas Overbury, which many times bred Disturbance and hindred the Performance of the Resolution taken; and it is in vaine to hope for any good Issue of the other untill that be settled, which I thinke to be done long ere this after this manner ; that upon his Submission he shall have leave to travail, with a private Intima tion not to return untill his Majestie's Pleasure be further known: And much adoe there hath been to keepe him from a pubUque Censure of Banishment and loss of Office, such a rooted Hatred lyeth in the King's Heart towards him; and that Blocke being now removed, I find the same Confidence that I left PLATE VI THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON IN HIS PRIME (Attributed to Rubens; Mrs Holman Hunt's collection) xxiii] ST JOHN'S COLLEGE LIBRARY 363 touching Sir Henry Neville; which I shall be as glad of as any, but (as I wrote before) this often deferring hath made me doubtfuU. Of the Nullity 1 1 see you have heard as much as I can write; by which you may discern the Power of a King with Judges, for of those which are now for it, I knew some of them when I was in England were vehemently against it, as the Bishops of Ely2 and Coventry3. For the Business itself, I protest I shaU be glad, if it may lawfully, that it may go forward; though of late I have been fearful of the Consequence, and have had my Fears encreased by the last Letters which came to me; but howsoever, the manner of interposing gives me no cause of contentment.I stay here only for a Winde, and purpose (God wiUing) to take the first for England, though, tiU Things be otherwise settled, I could be as weU pleased to be any where else; but the King's coming to my House imposeth a Necessity at this time upon me of returning. When you come over I assure my self you wiU not so soon go back, but that I shaU have opportunity to see you often. In the mean time recommending my best wishes to you, I rest, etc., H. Southampton4. There was a postscript of introduction of Captain John Tubbe, a man of extraordinary learning and valour, who had been abroad with the Earl; but unfortunately this has not been printed with the letter. Captain John Tubbe's elder son, Henry, had the Earl for godfather, while his younger son, Robert, had the Earl of Essex, and both families favoured the lads greatly5. Southampton did catch the fair wind which would carry him direct to Beaulieu in time for the King. He could not afford, at that time, to offend his easily-excited Sovereign, who always enjoyed the attention of his host at Beaulieu. The next information we have is through the Venetian ambassa dor on 27th August. I set out early for the Court, reached Kingston the same evening, Win chester the foUowing day, and came on Sunday to BeauUeu where the King was.... He said he knew that the Spaniards had a hand in some of the Irish affaks. They foment but are not able to do much, there or elsewhere. The 1 The suit brought against the young Earl of Essex by his wife. 2 Lancelot Andrewes, afterwards translated to Winchester in the year 1618. 3 Richard Neyle, translated to Lincoln on the 5th of December in this very year. 4 Winwood, Mem. III. 478. 6 J. C. Moore Smith's Life of Henry Tubbe, born at Southampton, 1619. 364 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. King wished me to go to Scotland. Tomorrow I shaU set out for the Baths to take leave of the Queen there, and then shaU continue the journey1. In another letter written on the same day he says: The King spoke of the affairs of Germany. The Count of Schomberg is expected in a few weeks on behalf of the Elector Palatine.... The King decides on most matters for himself. In the execution of them he makes considerable use of the Viscount Rochester and another. Since the death of the Earl of SaUsbury, affairs have been conducted with more secrecy2. The King must have found his prudence rewarded when he received a very secret letter from his ambassador in Spain (Sir John Digby), dated September 9th, 16133. This disclosed the embarrass ing secret that not only the late Lord Salisbury,, but other living members of his Council, with SirWilliam Monson, who was Admiral ofthe Narrow Seas Fleet, had been and were still receiving pensions from Spain. Sir John Digby proved his statement correct by later letters. The cipher name of Salisbury was Beltenbras, but later information, and the memorials of Villa Mediana, give the name of the pensioner as well as the date of his death. Did Southampton hear it from the King? It is not clear, but the King sometimes poured out his thoughts to him about other men. Lord Rochester was created Earl of Somerset on the 4th of November, 161 3; Lord Pembroke carried the sword of honour and Lord Southampton the cap of estate. Somerset's marriage quickly followed. On St Stephen's Day, December 26th, Lady Frances Howard had her second wedding festivity, and again a masque was presented before the company. There is no record of the Earl of Southampton having been present. It is possible that he was in town r at the beginning of February, 161 3-4, when Mrs Jane Drummond, one of the Queen's maids of honour, was married to Lord Roxburgh, and many great people were present. "The gentlemen servants belonging to the Earls of Pembroke, Worcester, and Southampton waited. On the morrow the Queen gave them a feast, and her hand to kiss." 1 Venetian Papers, vol. xm. p. 31. 2 Ibid. pp. 32, 33. 3 Dr S. R. Gardiner discovered the letters of Sir John Digby, and gave the contents in his History of England, 1863, and the enlarged history, vol. 1. chap. 1. p. 215. Zuniga noted how, since the death of "Beltenbras," the English match had grown cold. He was the only furtherer. Zuniga in March told the Spanish Secretary that the pension list would only have to be altered because of withdrawing that of the Earl of Salisbury. xxiii] - ST JOHN'S COLLEGE LIBRARY 365 The Register at Titchfield records the death of "Edward Quinby Esquire, Steward to the Right Honorable the Earle of Southampton 27th day of Januarie 1613-4." This was one of the gentlemen whom he had appointed Deputy Vice- Admirals in 1609. Early in March the King had news that his daughter Elizabeth had brought the Palsgrave a son, which rejoiced the royal grand father not a little. The child was christened on 6th March, 161 3-4, at Heidelberg under the names of Frederick Henry. On the 1 5th June of that year died Henry Howard, Earl of Northampton, "the oldest bachelor," who, with her brother, had led the Princess to her wedding. The Queen's brother paid her a surprise visit on 1 9th July and brought her great joy and excitement, for they were very much attached to each other. He professed to have no political intentions, or plans of his own to serve: he just came from pure love to see his sister. But it has been conjectured that he had an intention of expostulating with James on the slights thrown on his sister by the ' Earl of Somerset. Finding that the favourite's power was decreasing and grave suspicions were abroad, he thought it better to be silent. James, like his Tudor predecessors, was very susceptible to personal beauty in man or woman. In his first favourite he found not only that attraction, but had been moved by the feeling of warm sym pathy for young Car's accident, and a recognition of his, and his family's, support of the claims of Queen Mary. As Miss Strickland says, " If it was not in the power of James to revenge himself on his mother's foes, to do him justice, he never forgot her friends." Car, as he rose in favour, grew insolent, and James, though more blind than Elizabeth in spoiling favourites, had begun to tire of him. During that year Southampton received the dedication of a peculiar book of history, written by a remarkable man — The Scholar's Medley, by Richard Brathwait, 1614. To the Right Honorable, Henry Lord Wriothsley, Earle of Southampton, Learnings Sdect Favourite; Ri. Brathwait wisheth perpetuaU increase of best meriting Honours. Right Honorable, So rarely is PaUas Shield borne by the Noble, or supported by Such whose eminence might Revive her decayed hopes; as Brittaines Pernassus (on which never were more inhabitants planted, and Homer-like, more usuaUy expulsed) is growne despicable in herselfe, because protected by none but 366 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. hersdf. Hinc ferrea Tempora Surgunt. . . : wanting their Cherishers (those Heroicke Patrons) whose countenance in former times made the studies of the Learned more pleasant (having their Labours, by such approbation, seconded). Yet in these times (my Honourable Lord) we may find some royall Seedes of pristine NobiUty (wherin we may glory) reserved, as it were, from so great ruines, for the preservation of Learning, and the continuance of aU vertuous Studies; amongst which your Noble Sdfe, as generaUy reputed learned, so a prof est friend to such as be studious of Learning: a character which ever held best correspondency with honour, being a favorite to them who can best define honour: expressing to the Ufe, what proprieties best concord with so exquisite a Maister-piece. It is observed, that aU the Roman Emperours were singular in some pecuUar Art, Science, or Mystery: and such of the Patricians as could not derive thdr native descent (with the particular relation of their Ancestours most noble Actions) were thought unworthy to arrogate any thing to them selves by their Vertues. These Romanes were truely Noble, bearing their owne Annals ever with them, eyther to caution them of what was to be done, or excite them to prosecute what was by them commendably done: nor knew they Honour better Umned, or more exactly proportioned, then when it was beautified by the internaU Ornaments of the mind. Many I know (my good Lord) whose greatnesse is derivative from their Ancestours unto themselves, but much Edypsed by their owne defects : and Plants which had a Noble-Grafter, use now and then to degenerate. But so apparent is Tour Lustre, it borroweth no Ught but from your-Selfe; no eminence but from the Lampe of Tour Honour; which is ever ready to excite the Vertuous to the undertaking of Labours wel-meriting of their countrey, and generaUy profit able to aU Estates. In Subjects of this nature (my Honourable Lord) I cannot find any more exact than these Surveies of Histories, many we have depraved: and every lascivious Measure now becomes an Historian. No study in his owne nature more deserving, yet more corrupted none is there. O then, if those ancient Romans (Mirrours of true Resolution) kept their Armilustra with such solemnity, feasts celebrated at the Survey es of their weapons: We that enjoy these Halcyon dayes of Peace and Tranquillity, have reason to reserve some Time for the solemnizing this peaceable Armour of Histories, where we may see in what bonds of Duety and Affection we are tyed to the Almighty, not only in having preserved us from many hostUe incursions, but in his continuing of his love towards us. We cannot weU dijudicate of com forts but in rektion of discomforts: Nor is Peace with so generaU acceptance entertained by any, as by them who have sustained the extremities of Warre. Many precedent experiments have we had, and this Isle hath tasted of misery with the greatest; and now revived in her selfe, should acknowledge her miraculous preservation, as not proceeding from her owne power, but derived from the Supreame influence of Heaven; whose power is able to Erect, support, Demolish, and lay wast, as he pleaseth: Hinc Timor, Hinc Amor I xxiii] ST JOHN'S COLLEGE LIBRARY 367 Hence wee have arguments of Feare cjf Lovel Feare from us to God; Love from God to us: Cause we have to Feare, that subject not our understandings to the direct Line and Square of Reason, but in our flourishing estate (imi tating that once renowned Sparta) who was... Nunquam minus fcelix, quam cumfcelix visa...; Abuse those exceUent gifts we have recdved, contemning the menaces of Heaven, and drawing upon oursdves the viols of Gods wrath, heavier diffused, because longer ddayed. We should re-collect our selves, and benefit our ungratefuU minds with these considerations: that our present felicity be not buried in the ruines of a Succeeding Calamity. These Histories (my noble Lord) be the best representments of these motives. And in perusing Discourses of this nature (next to the Sacred Word of God) we are strangdy transported above humane apprehension, seeing the ad mirable Foundations of Common-weales planted (to mans thinking) in the Port of security, wonderfuUy ruinated: grounding their dissolution upon some precedent crying sinne, which layd their honour in the Dust, and Trans lated their Empire to some (perchance) more deserving people. Here CiviU Wars, the OriginaU causes of the Realmes subversion: There Ambition bred by too long successe : here Emulation in Vertue, the first Erectresse of a flourish ing Empire: There Parasites, the Scarabees of Honour, the corrupters of Royally disposed affections, and the chiefest Engineres of wrack and confusion, buzzing strange motions in a Princes Eare, occasioning his shame, and their owne mine. Here states happy before they raised themselves to the highest type and distance of happinesse. And generaUy observe we may in our Humane Compositions, nothing so firm as to promise to it selfe Constancy, so continuate as to assure itselfe perpetuity, or under the Cope of Heaven, any thing so soUd as now subject to Mutability. This Survey (my Lord) have I presumed to Dedicate to your Honour, (sprung from a zealous and affectionate tender) not for any meriting Dis course which it comprehends, but for the generaUty of the Subject: and Native harmony wherein Tour Noble disposition so sweetely closeth with it. Your Protection wiU raise it above it SeUe, and make me proud to have an Issue so highly Patronized : It presents it Selfe with Feare, may it be admitted with Favour: So shaU my Labours be in aU duty to Tour Honour devoted, my Prayers exhibited, and my selfe confirmed Tour Lordships wholly Ri. Brathwait. One event of that year must certainly have impressed South ampton deeply. Lord Grey of Wilton died in the Tower, an unpardoned prisoner, on 6th July, 1614. He was unmarried, but the devotion of his mother was touching, and her efforts to secure 368 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. his comforts, if not his release, were unremitting. An elegiac poem was written on him, interesting for its sympathetic feeling, and some fine lines, though some of the facts stated in it are incorrect — Tam Martis quam Artis Nenia, or the Soldier's Sorrow and Learning's losse, by Robert Marston — "An elegiacall poem upon the ever admired life, and never sufficiently deplored death of Thomas Lord Gray, Baron of Wilton." It gives the legends of his youth, the great work of "the dread father of this daring son." The poet describes his return to Oxford and the Court, and the Queen's favour. There is an evident allusion to South ampton, who is possibly intended by the poet's phrase "an elder power " unless it be Essex, or Sir Francis Vere. Plumbean Saturne, duU malevolent Striving to crosse each peaceful exigent Moved an unkindly strife... Twixt Honor twyns faire emulation too Pointed att both, both dareing like to doe, Checked in his charge, though mateless in his mind, What best he might have held was there assigned Unto an elder power whose yeares beinge more At best but wrought as he had don before... Thyself sole patron both of Armes and Artes... The perfect test of matchless Chivalry. Southampton must have meditated on his own sad imprisonment in the Tower, when he too was like to die without an heir, and thought how narrowly he had escaped. How soon after his release had his rival taken his place there, never to come forth alive, and now his "Arms" and his "Arts" had been wiped out by a prison sponge! In him his line became extinct. Southampton must have felt it all the more clearly because it was he now who was waging war on the Continent, near the scene of Lord Grey's exploits. He and the young Earl of Essex had joined Lord Herbert of Cherbury and other volunteers, on behalf of Count Maurice of Nassau in the old dispute concerning Cleves and Juliers. Spinola had invaded the country. The Dutch, alarmed at his pro gress, led by Count Maurice, also entered the disputed territories, and seized Emmerich and Rees in the Duchy of Cleves. In September, 1 6 14, an effort was made to induce James to send over an army to xxiii] ST JOHN'S COLLEGE LIBRARY 369 help the Protestants, and, failing that, to encourage volunteers. The effort was ineffectual. Southampton and Essex, disappointed in the lack of support, came home. Spinola entrenched himself before Wesel; Count Maurice followed. By the command of his King Sir Henry Wotton mediated for peace, and with the help of the French ambassador arranged a pacification at Xanten on November 2nd, 16141. Lord Herbert interviewed Spinola and offered to help him if he went to fight the Turks. Spinola refused, and Lord Herbert went to Italy. George, Lord Carew, writing to Sir Thomas Roe in September, 1 61 5, says: "The Ladie Arabella is dead in the Tower, and by night buried in her grandmother's tomb in King Henry's Chappie." In October of that year he tells the same correspondent: The King being at BeauUeu, the Earl of Southamptons house, Mr Secretary Wkwood informed the King that by indkect and malUtious meanes Sir Thomas Overbury was poysoned in the Tower. The King, who is impartiaUy just k aU his wayes (although the information poynted at the Earl of Somer set) gave commandment for the enquiry of it. The Earl of Pembroke was made Lord Chamberlain in 161 5, an appointment which becomes important in many ways to South ampton in later years. What may be called (for the standard of the times) rather a grudging dedication was, about this date, presented to the Earl by Joshua Sylvester, a native of the town of Southampton, prefacing his Memorials of MortaUtie. Written in Tablets or Quatrains by Pierre Mathieu. The first Centurie. Translated, and dedicated To the Right Honourable Henry Earle of Southampton by Joshua Sylvester. ShaU it be said (I shame it should be thought) When after ages shaU record thy worth My sacred Muse hath left South-Hampton forth Of her Record, to whom so much shee ought? Sith from Thy Town (where my Sarania taught) Her slender Pinions had their tender Birth; And aU, the Uttle aU, she hath of worth Under Heav'ns blessing, only thence shee brought For lack therefore of fitter Argument, 1 Dumont, Corps Diplomatique, v. pt 2, p. 259. s. s. 24 370 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. And lother now it longer to dday: Heer (whUe the part of Philip's Page I play) I consecrate this Uttle monument Of gratefuU Homage to Thy noble Bounty; And thankful love to (my deer Nurse) Thy County. Humbly devoted, Joshua Sylvester. It may be noted, in passing, that it was during the King's visit to Cambridge in 1615 that he first distinguished among his fol lowers, a youth, George Villiers, who was fated not only to eclipse the Earl of Somerset, but to endanger the fortunes of the King and the safety of the country. With him came no other aids to grace beyond his own personal beauty and attractive manners. James saw in his face a likeness to one of the Italian masterpieces on his walls at Whitehall (a picture of St Stephen) and was strangely drawn to the owner, however unlike the soul beneath it was to that of the first martyr. The King, calling him "Steenie" (the pet name for Stephen), loaded him with favours. A further fact about Villiers is strange — that he had previously attracted the Queen and called himself her servant, and that, throughout James' life and after his death, Prince Charles also was devoted to him. Some interesting episodes in Southampton's life are gleaned from the books of his own College. Perhaps it would be well to begin with the appointment of Owen Gwynne as Master of St John's College on 1 6th May, 1 6 1 21. That year the Prince of Wales and the Prince-Elector Palatine, with a numerous train of nobility, visited Cambridge. "A public Act was kept before them in which, Mr Williams (formerly the Master's pupil) being concerned, he came down upon that great occasion. Being an active man, and already in the eye of the court, part of the streams of its favours were turned upon his college." A full account ofthe entertainment is entered in the College books. Trumpets sounded from the tower to welcome the Princes; the Master's gallery was furnished with great magnificence for their reception; speeches were delivered and verses distributed. The King's and Queen's pictures were sent down on that occasion, and have ever since hung in the gallery. "The Earl of Southampton, (who had formerly been a worthy member of the society) assisted at the Solemnity, and, the Master 1 Baker's Hist, of St John's College, n. 201. xxiii] ST JOHN'S COLLEGE LIBRARY 371 being unacquainted with such ceremonies, Mr Williams bore the greater share, wherein he found his account." Two years afterwards the University was honoured with the presence of King James (in March, 1 614-5) and he was so pleased with his entertainment that he came again in the May following, when he was entertained by the College at a cost of £500. Mr William Crashaw, who had been admitted Fellow of the College1 by mandate from Queen Elizabeth (the See of Ely being vacant) on 19th January, 1593-4, about the very date referred to as that of the King's visit, was engaged in a special transaction. There is some little mystery about it, the tradition being that Crashaw was so eager a bibliophile that he spent all, and more than all, of his money in purchasing books, and got into trouble. The Earl of Southampton came to the rescue. Apparently he purchased Crashaw's library, not to add to his own, but to leave it accessible, alike to Crashaw as to all the members of St John's College. There was one little hitch. The books were offered before any building in the College was ready to receive2 them. There was a discussion how to make some of the Fellows' rooms fit for the purpose, but ere long a munificent donation of the Mr Williams mentioned above enabled them to build the library as we see it now. The following letters tell the rest, or at least much, of the story. Salutem in Christo. Worshipful Sk, I wiU accordinge to my appointment with my Lord bee at Cambridge with you soon after Easter and then go forwarde God wilUnge m yielding my best assistance to his Lordship for the weU managinge of that good motion his Lordship made to me for our Ubrarye. And whilst I Uve it shaU be my hartes ioye to do any service to the house; and for the present businesse you shaU be furnished from me with 3000 volumes if so many be found needful, whereof over 2000 1 wiU upholde to be as good books as are in any Ubrary in Christendom, and some such as are scarce in any other Ubrarye of this land. And with some 500 Manuscript volumes (whereof I wonder you have none in your Ubrarye) some very ancient, some very rare, and many never printed. Against that time his lordship desires you to consider of fitting the roome, and I am yet of mind Mr Hoordes chamber is better to be divided as it is, then put into the Ubrarye; that so it may be as a private Ubrarye for the smaU books and for many books of such 1 Mr R. F. Scott, Master of St John's College, in The Eagle, vol. xxiii. No. 126, December, 1901. 2 Baker MS. B.M. 8364, f. no. 24 — 2 372 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. natures as are not fit to be obiects for every eye. But I leave that to your discretion. And do further desire, because you shaU have no books from me but such or of such impressions as you have not alreadye, that therefore you would cause to be made an exact catalogue of aU your books you have alreadye according to the manner of this note inclosed, so you shaU have ondy those you have not, and such as I have not fit for you may be fitt for some other Ubrarye. So tiU then recommending my service and love to your self Mr President and the rest of our good friends I rest Your servant in Christe W. Crashawe. Ag. Burton Mar. 23. 1614. To the worshipful my very good frende Mr Doctor Gwynn the Master of St Johnes CoUege in Cambridge or in the Master's absence to the president,, haste 1. In the May following Crashaw writes again : Salutem in Christo. This noble Earl persists in his honourable intendment towards our Librarye and therefore wiUed me to write to you to sende up by the first the Catalogue of the Books you have alreadye and their impres sions, and you are Uke shortly to have a faire parcel of bookes, some ancient manuscripts and others printed. So hopinge to receive it the next weeke (seeing I wrote out of the northe more than 2 months before that it might be readye) with my daUy prayers and hartye endevours for the good of our house I take leave and rest, From my Lord Sheffeylds Your assured friend and servant in Christ house in St Martins in W. Crashawe. the fields May 5, 161 5. To the right worshipfuU my very good friends Mr Doctor Gwin the Master of St Johns CoUege in Cambr. or in the Master's absence to Mr President,, haste2. The replies from the College do not seem to have been preserved, and Crashaw writes again : Worshipful Sir, Having received your Catalogue I overviewed my Librarye exactly, and though you have good books, yet find I great store in mine that yours hath not, and for the good of the CoUege am content to pick out such as you want. And to this end I have delivered alreadye into Southampton house almost 200 volumes of Manuscripts in Greeke Lattine English and frenche, and about 2000 printed books whereof you have not 1 The Eagle, vol. xxm No. 126. 2 Ibid. xxiii] ST JOHN'S COLLEGE LIBRARY 373 one in your Ubrarye. You may therefore do weU to have care to make your rowme fit, for his lordship intends to be very honourably bountifuU to you in his kinde. But for my part I could wishe you would advise before you be at any cost whether some other part of the house were not a fitter place1 than dther wiU or can be, though you take in Mr Hoordes chamber. I wiU be with you God wiUinge this July, wishing I might do you any further service and with remembrance of my love do rest tUl then and ever your servant in Christ W. Crashawe. June 30th 1615. Sk I pray let one of your men deUver me this inclosed, for he hath a booke or two I would not misse. To the Right WorshipfuU my very good frend Mr Doctor Gwinn The Master of St John's CoUege in Cambridge, haste *. The interval seems long before the next letter, and unbridged by any suggestion. Salutem in Christo. Sk, since my coming to towne I was with my Lord Southampton who wiUed me to learne how you proceeded with your Ubrarye, for that he desked first to sende the books he formerly promised, and after to do more as he findes your occasions and his owne intendments and abiUtye to corresponde. I am also a sutor to you for myself... for a lease.... Your assured frende and servant in Christ W. Crashawe3. Whitechapell June 11, 1618 The Countesse of Shrewsburye is againe committed to the Tower for the olde cause wherdn she againe refuseth to answer. The later newes of Sir Wa. Raleighes unfortunate voiage you wiU see by the proclamation. To the right worshipful My very good Frende Mr Doctor Gwinn the Master of St Johns CoU. in Cambr., these, haste. A much longer interval elapsed before this transaction was com pleted, caused apparently by the recognition of the need of larger space for the College Library4, and the attempt to begin to build, 1 "Whereof the chambers near the Butterie were fitted up, but the books not delivered till 1626," Baker MS. xix. 276a. 2 The Eagle, vol. xxiii. No. 126, R. F. Scott. 3 Ibid. 4 It may be remembered that Southampton kept a residence in Little Shelford. Now the fact that one of his servants was buried there in 1615 suggests that his lord was then in residence. If so, he would be sure to ride over to Cambridge occasionally to see how the library buildings were getting on, and thus by conversation save correspondence. 374 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. made easy for them by the munificent gift of another son of the College, referred to above, Bishop Williams, then Lord Chancellor1. It is interesting to realise that the Earl of Southampton seems to have made the acquaintance of William Crashaw through his connection with the Virginia plantation, as well as William Strachey, as may be found in my chapter on Virginia. It has always seemed to me extraordinary that a private Puritan divine should have had such a large library, at a time when large libraries were rare, and especially that he should have had so many books which might be termed "recusants' books." His letters are, I think, open to another meaning than that which has been gener ally accepted, that the whole of the books which were designed for St John's had originally belonged to "William Crashaw." They certainly imply that the Earl of Southampton had agreed to buy (or compensate Crashaw for their loss), but they also imply that the Earl had arranged with him to take all the trouble of the transaction, in reading, naming, classifying, cataloguing, and com paring catalogues. By the latter process, i ooo books were weeded out of the gift, as the St John's Library already owned copies of the same. These might do for some other "library." How? By the Earl's gift or Crashaw's? Now, while it appears almost too wonderful to be believed that William Crashaw should have become possessed of so extensive a library, especially of MSS., it would be very natural to believe that the Earl might have owned as large a library. There was more than one way in which he might have secured it. In the first place his grandfather, Thomas, founder of his title and fortune, had nearly a free hand in going through the freshly surrendered abbeys and priories at the Dissolution. He had no special literary tastes, but whatever books the houses owned would probably be left for him in Titchfield, Beaulieu, Quarr Abbey, and the branches of Hyde Abbey. Again, in 1596 Southampton had eagerly desired to go as a volunteer with his adored friend the Earl of Essex to the taking of Cadiz, and was only forbidden to do so at the last by the Queen's mandate. At the subsequent sacking of the city Essex had chosen for his share the contents of the library. Judging from the 1 "The Earl of Southampton's picture in the Gallery is dated 1618," Baker MS. xix. 276a. xxiii] ST JOHN'S COLLEGE LIBRARY 375 characters of the two men, what would be more likely than that on his return the Earl of Essex should console his friend for his disappointment by giving him a share in the spoil? Thirdly, he had travelled in at least three countries, Ireland, France and the Nether lands, and he might have picked up many a prize, for he was known to be a patron of letters and rarities would be offered him. There are several notices of recusant books having been found in and confiscated from Southampton House, but now that he had himself given up the old ritual, and yet remained appreciative of the beauty and value of the old books, the Earl might wish to secure some of his prizes from future spoliation by enclosing them in the walls of St John's. From other examples we may infer that the Earl might wish to give Crashaw as much help and as much pleasure as he could in the transaction, concealing his own full share of the gift, content that the thing should be done, seeking no glory for himself other than was necessary. Therefore he might have sent packages of the books he had selected to Mr Crashaw's house to be read, digested, patched and trimmed if necessary, and then to be returned to Southampton House before their final exodus. Crashaw would feel justified in speaking of the combined collection as "my books." It seemed only fair to the Earl to point out this possible explanation of a very peculiar relation between the two men. [While I have indulged in a little imagination on this subject, I may as well suggest another idea that has floated into my head. We have no knowledge of the relations that obtained between South ampton and his poet in the seventeenth century. Shakespeare had retired to his native town; Southampton was involved in many public duties that kept him out of town. They were not likely to be able to meet often, even if they had the will. The last time we know that Shakespeare visited London was on the 1 6th of November, 16141, because on the 17th his cousin, Thomas Green, wrote in his Diary, " My cosen Shakspeare commyng yesterday to towne, I went to see him how he did." We do not know how long he stayed, or what he did during his visit. But he might have called at South ampton House, on his patron's coming from the Low Countries, to "see him how he did," and to enquire if there were more news of 1 My Shakespeare' s Environment, p. 85 (Shakespeare and the Welcombe enclosures). * 376 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch.xxiii the young married pair whose "contract of true love" he had celebrated. Then, also, he might have heard of, and might have seen, some of the wealth of books Southampton was preparing to pour into the lap of his Alma Mater. This is, of course, pure fancy. But it is possible that my theory about the amassing of the books which helped to enlarge St John's Library and initiate its MS. collection may be discovered some day to be founded on fact.] Southampton seems to have handed over some of these books himself. In the Book of Memorials1 of those deposited in the Library is an acknowledgment of the receipt of 400 volumes worth £360, a catalogue of which is among the MSS. As an old student he was liberal. "Ego Henricus Comes Southamptoniensis admissus eram in Alumnum hujus Collegii D. Johann. Evang. Oct. 26. An. Dom. 1585." The story of the final deposition of the gift is concluded in my last chapter2- 1 Book of Memorials, pp. 329, 1127, line 20, St John's College. Baker MSS. xix. 276 a. 2 Also see pamphlets reprinted from The Eagle articles by the Master of St John's College, vol. xxiii. No. 126, Dec. 1901, vol. xxxvi. No. 166, March, 1915. Also volume for June, 1918. CHAPTER XXIV A LONG PROGRESS Perhaps there should be mentioned here the special work of the industrious John Minsheu, author of a Spanish grammar and compiler of a Spanish dictionary, in which he had been helped by Sir Henry Spelman and many in Oxford and Cambridge, who was now trying to publish his Guide into Tongues. He had been granted a patent for its publication in 1611 and for the sole printing of it for 21 years. He had been much helped and en couraged by Oxford University; but he was poor, and could not pay the great expenses of publication, and wanted subscribers. These he found much more abundant in Cambridge1, and he himself records the fact, together with the names of the sub scribers. There is a little literary question here. Some copies of his Guide into Tongues have not this list. Was it lost? Or was it withdrawn because he had stated that "the Stationers' Company would have nothing to do with the book"? It was finally published in 1 61 7, folio. After the title-page should follow on the next page "A Catalogue and true note of the names of such persons (which upon the good liking they have to the worke, being a great helpe to memorie) have received the Etymological Dictionarie. . . from the hands of Maister Minsheu the author and publisher of the same in print " Among the subscribers are the King, the Queen, the Prince, the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lord Chancellor Sir F. Bacon, the Earl of Pembroke Lord Chamber lain, the Earl of Southampton Captain of the Isle of Wight, Mr Camden Clarentieux at Armes, Mr Brooke York Herald... Mr Davenant of Oxford, Mr Joshua Silvester, Dr Dunne. A Cambridge anecdote relates that an undergraduate, who was showing a country cousin round the Colleges, was asked. "Whose are these four statues?" "These? These are Faith, Hope and Charity!" "But there are four of them. Who is the fourth?" ' l One right worthy nobleman had " disf urnished his Library for years to lend me books." 378 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. "The fourth — oh, of course, that is Geography]" It might have been true in the days of which we are writing — for Geography had taken possession of many men's minds with a compelling power like that of a Christian grace or of a patron saint. We have seen examples of it in the chapters on the colonies — but it also stimulated the love for, and the recognition of the need of, dictionaries, as a medium towards understanding the languages of far countries. Southampton was one of these who took the lead in that interest. Among his friends were many others. One of these was Sir Thomas Roe, knighted by James in 1 604. He was much liked by Henry, Prince of Wales (and his sister Elizabeth), who sent him on a voyage of discovery to the West Indies on 24th February, 1609-10, to the mouth of the Amazon, "then unknown to English explorers." He sailed 200 miles up the river, and found it a much larger and more interesting one than the Orinoco. He explored the coast for thirteen months, but found no trace of gold; thence he returned to the Isle of Wight in 161 1. Twice again was he sent to "discover" in the same district, and he did much scientific work. In 1 6 1 5 James sent him out, at the expense of the East India Company, to the Court of the Great Mogul, as his ambassador and as representative ofthe Company to arrange treaties for factories and other privileges. Roe took two years to accomplish this. (Afterwards he was am bassador at Constantinople, also working there in the interests of the East India Company.) George, Lord Carew (a common friend of Southampton and of Roe), wrote to the latter on 3rd January, 161 5-6: "It is said that the Lady Penelope Spencer, the Earle of Southampton's daughter, is dead." It has been noted that this is an error. Lady Penelope did not die until long after — she was buried on July 16th, 1667, "leaving a character for all female virtues." But it has not been noted that there was a foundation of truth in the error. The Earl of Southampton did lose a daughter either late in 161 5 or early in 1616, for the Titchfield Register has the entry: "Buried The Lady Marie the daughter of the Right Honourable the Earl of Southampton the ioth day of January 161 5-6." Now, this must have been a late-born child, for, though I have found no entry of birth or christening, there remains in Titchfield Church PLATE VII ELIZABETH VERNON, COUNTESS OF SOUTHAMPTON (At Welbeck Abbey) xxiv] A LONG PROGRESS 379 the white marble monument to this little child, dressed in the garb of an infant with hands palm to palm in the attitude of prayer. It remains the only tombstone of his family put up by himself. Carew's letter fortunately did not reach Sir Thomas Roe before he sent the following, with part of his Diary, to Southampton on 14th February, 161 5-6: My Lord, Since my arrival in this country I have had but one month of health, and that mingled with many rdapses, and am now your poor servant, scarce a crow's dinner. The fame of this place hath done it great credit in England, but lost as much with me, for though the King is as rich as a Turke and every way as great, yet, for want of care, learning and civiU actes, aU thinges, even the Court, are mingled with such barbarisme as makes aU contemptible. The King sits out like a player in the gaUery over a Stage to be seene, but no man but Eunuchs comes up to him, so that he spends aU but hunting howres among his women. But what have I to doe with any descriptions, where the fates have provided me an Historiographer as fit for it as Xenophon for Cyrus, or Homer for Achilles, the unwearied Coriatt, who now is in my house and hath not left a pillar nor tombe nor old Character, unobserved, almost in aU Asia : and is now going to Samarkand in Tartary, from thence to Prester John in Afrike, and hath written more volumes than leaves k his last Venetian traveU, wherein he holds stiU the- correspondence of going on foote. He is already or shaU be shortly the greatest traveUer doubtless of the world. But to say a Uttle of our estate here for myself, I stand in good terms with the King, who never gave that respect to any ambassador of Turke or Persian, but our residency here is inconstant, for we stand or faU, as the PortugaU is in disgrace or creditt. They feare both, cannot hold friendship with both, and watch occasion to adhere to the stronger. These later years the PortugaU was so decayed, being by us twice beaten and eaten out of trade; by the Persian besieged, disgraced and almost turned out of the Gulph, having nothkg but the Castdl of Ormus left, and that distressed for want of reUef from the mayne, which, if it had been prosecuted, had utterly cast him in this quarter. But the Sophy in this noble purpose was diverted by necessity to defend himself, for the Turk is ready to enter his dominions with three armies, by 3 waies, by Bagdatt, Armenia, and Trebizond, which causes him to forbid the transport of his silkes, and soe, whUes he putt out his enemies eye he destroyed his own Uver, for now no way was left to rayse money, the Spaniards being in disgrace, the Turk in armes. In this extremity Sir Robert Shirley (who was welcomed like bonum auspicium; for He arrived in the kstant, wrought upon his wants, and by the assistance and suggestion of some Friars, procured him to rdease aU the Portugal! prisoners, to open the 380 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. mayne, and to send him Ambassador to Spaine, to offer the King, not only aU the silkes and commodities of his Kingdomes, but, for security, his coaste to fortifie. He is departed with a great trayne in Jan. 1615, and wiU I feare arrive before my advice (which tryes a new way overland) in July 1616. However this seemes, because far off, a smaU matter, and yf we once in some haste refused it, yet it is of so great consequences, yf such poore under standings as mine moorne thereat. First it wiU advance the King of Spaine's revenue a milUon of doUars yearely, enrich his subjects that shaU engross the greatest commodityes of the East into their hands that wiU serve Europe at their price and pleasure. It wiU restore him aU his credit here, where he lay languishing for breath, (O what happiness, how had it advanced the peace of Christendom, if he had lost these Indies, and it had been malum omen to have one branch faU off in the height of an Empke which hath his periode. But now he shaU have occasion to send fleets hither, which the trade he had would not defray, that wiU master this Coast, and then all those wavering and inconstant princes wiU cast us off, and make peace with prosperity. I could enlarge this, but if your Lordship choose to consider it further, you shaU see my grounds, if you wiU command the copy of my discourse to the Committee, though I know your own judgment wiU pierce to the inwards of this negotia tion. I have wrote to the King somewhat amply, perhaps with more zeale than judgment, but were I brought to dispute this, I could urge such incon veniences as were a work of much merrit to prevent, but as in aU businesses the Starte half wins the goale. I thought aU India a China Shop, and that I should furnish aU my friends with rarityes, but this is not that part, here are almost no civiU arts, but such as stragghng Christians have lately taught, only good carpets, and fine lawne, aU commodities of bulke, wherby I can make noe profytt but pubUque- ly. Muske, amber, civett, Diamonds as deare as in England, no pearle but taken for the King who is invaluable in JeweUs. But I am not alone cossened in this here, but in the King's LiberalUtye he aUows me nothing but a House of Mudd, which I was enforced to build halfe, that is, it is as good as any favourytt of £100,000 per annum dweUs in, for no man having inheritance, no man will build, yea the King is heire to aU men's goodes that dye and setts their chUdren to begin the world anew with small pensions, which increase as they rise in favour, but aU Uve upon his guifftes and government, except tradesmen, to whome he wiU be also heire. Yet though I Uve in such a house, perhaps many wayes in more state and with many more servants than any Ambassadour in Europe, such is the custom here, to be carried in a bede all richly furnished, by men's backes up and downe, though it needs not, for these are the finest horses that I ever sawe of Gennet size and infinite store, besides guards and footemen of which only I keep 24. But this my expected UberaUty fayUng, makes aU tedious and loathesome, for though the King hath often sent to me, yet the bounty is only expressed in whyle (sic) hogges. xxiv] A LONG PROGRESS 381 You expect no Ceremony and I have learned none here, but I am ever, and wUl dye soe, your Lordships most affectionate servant _ _ p Give me leave to present my humble service to my Lady, my Lady Penelope, my Uttle lady mistress for whom I will be provided with presents. Adsmere, The Great Mogul's Court Feb. 15. 1615-61. In the spring of that year died William Shakespeare, who had elected the Earl of Southampton the patron of his poems — no mean honour. We know nothing of the relations of the two men in later years. Still we must suppose that a tender regret at least suffused the heart of the busy nobleman at the early death of one so gifted in both poetry and drama. That is to estimate his probable feeling at the lowest possible level. I have nothing authoritative to bring forward, but there is one suggestion which I must insert here in parenthesis. [It is evident that the two friends of the Sonnets had discussed what would happen if either of them should die. We can find the reference to this conversation in Sonnets lxxi, lxxii, lxxxi, and others. Or I shaU Uve your epitaph to make, Or you survive when I in earth am rotten. (Sonnet lxxxi.) If the poet should depart first he begs his friend No longer mourn for me when I am dead, Than you shaU hear the surly suUen beU Give warning to the world that I am fled. . . Do not so much as my poor name rehearse. . . Lest the wise world should look into your moan, And mock you with me after I am gone. (Sonnet lxxi.) The thought runs over to the next Sonnet: O, lest the world should task you to recite What merit Uv'd in me, that you should love After my death — dear love, forget me quite, For you in me can nothing worthy prove; Unless you would devise some virtuous Ue To do more for me than mine own desert, And hang more praise upon deceased I, Than niggard truth would wiUingly impart; O, lest your true love may seem false in this, That you for love speak weU of me untrue, My name be buried as my body is, And Uve no more to shame, nor me nor you. (Sonnet lxxii.) 1 Add. MS. 61 15, f. 886. 382 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Is there not somewhat of a challenge under this protest? Did Southampton altogether forget these old days? Is there anything he could do, anything he did do, to commemorate the friend of his youth ? Shakespeare left no poor orphans to rear, needed no monu ment (though his friends might have chosen a better than they did), required no explanation of his love. But on his grave there was indeed no name, only a threat to those who would not leave his bones alone. There was no name placed upon the monument, until some admirer sent the epitaph. It has often been wondered who had written the lines; not a neighbour certainly, or he would not have spoken as if the body had been placed "within the monu ment" (as was the way with the rich). I only wish to suggest that it is possible, and not even improbable, that the "Lord of his love" may have added a survivor's memorial on the cold stone, and that it ran : Judicio Pylium, Genio Socratem, Arte Maronem Terra tegit, populus maeret, Olympus habet. Stay passenger, why goest thou by so fast ? Read, if thou canst, whom envious Death hath plast Within this monument, Shakspeare, with whome Quick Nature dide; whose name doth decke ys tombe Far more then cost, sith aU yt he hath writt Leaves Uving art, but page, to serve his witt. Obnt Ano dni 1616, Aetatis 53. Die 23. Ap. The suggestion is worth consideration and comparison. It may not have struck everybody that those who love libraries have one link with this Earl who loved literature and libraries. Our great National Library has been built on soil which once was his, and as near as possible to the site of the house in which he dwelt, and to which Shakespeare came when he visited his patron. All the literary world goes to read at the British Museum, some of them to mould out of old thoughts their "inventions new." Those who wish to dig for themselves in the mines of historical research go further, and walk along Oxford Street to Chancery Lane, down which they find the Record Office. Very few may realise that their steps trace their path all the way on land which once was his, granted in 161 7, from Holborn Bars to the Rolls House in Chancery Lane. xxiv] A LONG PROGRESS 383 Another remarkable coincidence may also be noted. There has been no national memorial raised to Shakespeare such as has been done to lesser men. Perhaps men thought he was too great to need it. After three hundred years have passed, however, the national heart has been stirred, and all feel that we must have some important memorial raised to him and his work in London. Already the site has been secured, and that site is also on ground that belonged once to Southampton. These two are thus associated for all time, and, if the Patron did not "write his epitaph," he left the soil on which to build his monument.] A curious notice of Southampton is preserved among the Venetian Papers. "Upon the affairs of the Earl and Countess of Somerset an anonymous letter has been sent to the King from one who makes reproach of the successive greatness and sudden fall of Somerset, adding that it happened in order to satisfy the Earl of ArundeU, head of the Catholics, the Earl of Pembroke, head of the Puritans, and the Earl of Southampton, head of the Mal contents."1 On July nth, 161 6, there was executed a grant to the Earl of Southampton of pardon of a bond of a thousand marks forfeited for non-fulfilment of his pledge to make, and to pay for, a survey of "certain woods belonging to manors in the counties of Somerset, Essex, Suffolk and Wilts, with permission to dispose at pleasure of the aforesaid woods." * On 4th November, 1616, Prince Charles was made Prince of Wales, among rejoicings such as had been made for his brother Henry. Of one honour he was deprived, the Duchy of Cornwall, after the precedent of Henry VIII, who, through the technical reading of the patent as being for "the first-born son" of the reigning King, was denied possession of it, as being the second- born son. After the ceremony the King dined alone, while the Prince feasted the nobility, the Earl of Southampton acting as cup-bearer and the Earl of Dorset as carver. The Earl had a double interest in that feast, because for the first time his son shared the day's honours. Among the Knights of the Bath created in honour ofthe Prince of Wales' creation were: "James, Lord 1 xiv. 245. 2 Sign Manual, vol. vi. No. 25. D.S.S.P. James, lxxxviii. 12. 384 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Maltravors, son and heir to the Earl of Arundel; Algernon, Lord Percy, son and heir to the Earl of Northumberland; James, Lord Wriothesley, son and heir to the Earl of Southampton." Nothing after that was talked of but the King's proposed visit to Scotland, and who was going with him. The Councillors and all his flatterers implored him not to go, but he had made up his mind. He started from Theobalds on 1 4th March, 1 6 1 6-7, and the Queen accompanied him as far as Ware. His chief companions were the Duke of Lennox, Lord Steward; the Earl of Pembroke, Lord Chamberlain; the Earl of Buckingham, Master of the Horse; the Earls of Arundel, Rutland, Southampton, Montgomery, Secretary Lake, and two Bishops. The King meditated reforms in. Scotland. In one good thing he meant to imitate England — in establishing parish registers of births, deaths, and marriages. He also meant to make it statutory to have a parish school in every parish. The matters of the form of religion and the Prayer Book also exercised his mind. Lovelace, writing to Carleton, said: "Sir Walter Raleigh is ready to sail on his expedition."1 Apparently the King had been moved by the representation of the East India Company and the traders in the Mediterranean to try to crush the Algerine pirates, for he seems at once to have written to his Council, while on his journey, on March 20th, 161 7 2; some instructions are given adding that if a fleet were sent out for the purpose, he wished that the Earl of Southampton (who was Vice-Admiral) should be made Admiral of it, seeing the age and illness of Lord Nottingham. A great deal hung on that announcement, more than has yet been discovered In The Times Literary Supplement* Mr G. F. Abbot, criti cizing the late S. R. Gardiner, says: "The one unfortunate operation undertaken by the English Navy in James I's reign was Sir Robert Mansell's unfortunate expedition against Algiers... decided on in 161 7 It did not sail till 1620 People who had contributed to the expenses wanted to know, etc." The writer refers to a letter dated "Whitehall November 12th, 16194, to the 1 D.S.S.P. James, xc. 113. Carew's Letters to Sir Thomas Roe. 2 D.S.S.P. James, xc. 136. 3 October 2nd, 1919. 4 Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. in. p. 346. xxiv] A LONG PROGRESS 385 Mayor of Dartmouth." The Spanish ambassador in London tried to hinder this step1. By 161 8 the Spanish opposition was withdrawn, thus throwing open Gibraltar to their dreaded Allies2. A report on the Navy to Buckingham, March, 161 8, says: His Majesty's ships are often so Ul-manned that they faU ready prizes to any that dare assail them. Commanders & Captains never come on board. If they are on the sea the ships only waste the King's cordage. If they go ashore the mariners scatter, yet charge his Majestie with victuals as if they were aboard, and spend aU in London or at home or anywhere they please. This neglect Mr Abbot thinks was accountable for the delay, and should have been mentioned by Gardiner. But there are also other points to think of. The Venetian ambassador on April 27th, 1617 (N.S.), writes: The absence of the King enfeebles negotiations. The Merchants say his Majesty is bound to protect them against pirates. They are wiUing to bear the bulk of the expenses if the King wUl give them 6 ships, ammunition and other things. The CouncU proposes to offer the Earl of Southampton 40,000 crowns as a gift if he wiU accept the command3 Now, in 1620 the Venetian ambassador again writes on the same subject, and should be cited here to put an end to the question. Three years ago, the King had the idea of uniting his ships with those of the Dutch to send them agamst the pirates, on hearing of the great damage they inflicted on his shipping and subjects and others, with the special object and a weU-concerted plan to go and take Algiers. The merchants were to contribute a large sum of money for the armament, and in various ways; they made great preparation for a powerful and imposing fleet. The Earl of Southampton was designated as the leader of the undertaking and he and his relations were prepared to spend more than .£100,000 sterling for the glory of himself and his country. Two persons of proved experience and courage were sent to reconnoitre Algiers and to plan various methods. Three of the wisest members of his Majesties councU had charge of the affair. Everythkg was ready and almost certain to be carried out when it reached the ears of Lord Digby, the Achilles of the Spaniards at this Court and a man of great ability and sagacity. He began to teU the King that it was not reasonable, that his Majesty, a friend of the Catholic King, should send his fleet to scour the coasts of the dominions of so great a Monarch and for an enterprise so near him, against an enemy who was also his own, without 1 Gardiner's History of James, vol. m. p. 70. 2 Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. xn. Part 1. p. 108. 3 Venetian Papers, vol. xiv. p. 496. s.s. 25 386 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. giving him some share in it, and without joining with him, instead of with the Dutch rebels, formerly his subjects, now his open enemies. By this means and by the efforts of Gondomar the Ambassador, the arrangement with the Dutch feU through, the fabric of aU the exceUent work of the King was destroyed, and the Earl of Southampton's hope for advancement thwarted, his Majesty conceiving a suspicion of his loyalty and his aims, as it would not be safe to place such a large force, so weU armed, in the hands of a subject with such a foUowing, and of such high rank and spirit. Accord ingly nothing was done for aU those years, time being lost over the new negociations. Digby went to Spain.... He represented the King's eagerness for the undertaking. So on this side they gave orders for an armament of the Uke size and number. By various devices time was frittered away, and nothing was done with the armament, through Spanish jealousy1. That provides a view that seems not to have presented itself to Mr Abbot, though probably it did to Mr Gardiner. But this long explanation can hardly be deemed irrelevant here, since the begin ning of the plans were coincident with the King's Scottish Progress. The King took some time to drive through England, as there were many of his subjects who had not seen him since his arrival in the country. The weather was not pleasant. On the 23rd of March Sir Francis Bacon wrote to the King2, with some additional instructions for Sir John Digby, about the union of both Kings to extirpate pirates, the common enemies of mankind. An account of Council business was also forwarded. Sir Thomas Smith, on behalf of the merchants of London, certifies that there will be a contribution for two years of £20,000 a year, and the merchants of the west will come into the circle The discussion of preparation had been referred to the Earl of Suffolk, Lord Carew, and Sir Fulke Greville "who heretofore hath served as Treasurer of the Navy, to confer with Lord Admiral, calling to the conference Sir Robert Mansell and others expert in such service When that is done, his Majesty will be advertised." Not a word about the Earl of Southampton. A curious letter has been preserved, giving a contemporary account of the proceedings on the Northern Progress, somewhat of the nature of Laneham's letter on the Kenilworth festivities, though not so interesting3. It was written by John Crowe the younger, a 1 Venetian Papers, xvi. 291. 2 Bacon's Letters, edition 1824, vol. vi. p. 139. 3 Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. xiv., App. 4. Kenyon MSS. p. 19. xxiv] A LONG PROGRESS 387 Scotchman, to Mr Alden, an Englishman, almost as if it were attempting to counteract the belittling remarks made by their English visitors. It is very long, but there is no other record of Southampton's life at the time, and it must be given here in a shortened form. The King came by Berwick. At the boundary road, which is two mUes from Berwick, he stood with one foot in Scotland and one in England, and was as glad as he could be. He went on by Dunglass, a place of my Lord Home's, where he spent two nights. He was met by my Lord and his gentlemen (aU of one suit and apparel), with the other Earls and Lords of that part of the country with their trains. The King said he had had naughty weather aU the way from London, but since he came to Scotland the heavens smUed upon him. He was very content at Dunglass. "TeU me, my Lords," he said, "did you ever feed so weU since you came from London?" Thence we went to my Lord of Seaton his place, and the King's ships kom Ldth came to wdcome him with shooting of guns. He came by the sea-coast from Seaton to Ldth, and by Leith to Edinburgh. He had always traveUed in his coach until he came to about the middle of the way, then he leapt on a horse and rode in by the West Port. And there was a Scaffold where my Lord Provost and the BaiUies stood aU k thdr vdvet gowns, and when the King came there was an oration made which the King liked weU, and there was presented to him the sceptre of the citie, as also in a sUver bason over gilt with gold, a thousand angeUs in a velvet bag, and the Kkg said, "Leap on, my Lord Provost, upon your horse," and he rode betwixte two Earles and the people shouted for joy. The King refused his own guard, and took the guard of the dty; then he came to the Cross, and Ughted down with great triumph and drew into the High Kirk and heard a sermon by the Archbishop of St Andrews. When the sermon was ended, he made down the street with his nobles in great pomp and came through the Netherbow Port where his picture stands very reallie, and at the end of the Uberty of the city in the Canongate he made the Lord Provost leap off his horse and knighted him, and the BaiUies of the Canongate were his guard untU he came to his own Palace, the Abbey, and ' there after the King had aUghted there. . .kneeled down some thirty young men in gowns of the CoUege of Edinburgh, whereof one of them made an oration in Latin in praise and commendation of the King. In the mean time of the oration, the King was so glad of it that he made the Earls of Pembrugh, Southampton, Montgomerye and the Bishops draw near to hear what was spoken. This I saw with mine eyes. And after the oration was ended, the young student presented a book to the King of verses in Latin, aU of his praise, which he kissed and gave to his Majestie; the King very gladly accepted of the same and so went in with the nobiUtie into his Palace. 25—2 388 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. On the morrow he went forth to his Hawking and Hunting. The second day which was the Sabbath day he stayed in the Chapel Royal for sermons... and upon Monday he went over the water in a barge made by the Citie of Edinburgh for him. Then the Castle shot a royal salute, and his own two ships convoyed him to Burntisland, where he took his breakfast in the Provost's house. Afterwards five hundred gaUant gentlemen of Fife waited on him. Wherever he went was the same rejoicing.. . .At night he came to his Palace of Falkland, a palace which may be very weU seen, and took your nobles and let them see the Park and in it many a troop and company of deers and roes. From Falkland'he went over the water of Tay in a barge and landed at Broughty, and there met him many gentlemen of Angus. The King himself went only into the Constable's house of Dundee which was out of town. Some of his company went to Dundee and were very weU used. Upon the morrow he came to Kinnakd, a place of my Lord Carnegie's 2 miles from Montrose, the sea coming up to it by Montrose. There he stayed sk or eight days, hunting some days upon Muir Mount, and sometimes visiting places round about. One of the days he with his nobles went to the Castle of Brechin1, a place of the Earl of Mar's. The water runneth down by Kinnaird, and there he desired the Earl of Mar to cause some fishers to be brought to fish some salmon. The fishers came, they took a net and went into the water, but by the time they had gone a Uttle way off, the net was so fuU of salmon that they were forced to let a part of the net go, else it had been broken, it was so fuU. As it was there was above a hundred salmon in it cast upon the green grass quick. This is a great matter. Sometimes in summer a man may go over the water nearly dry foot.... About 24 of your countrymen were desirous to see Aberdeen which is 30 miles from Kinnaird. When they went there they were weU accepted, and paid nothing. If it had pleased them to have gone 100 miles beyond Aberdeen they would have found meat and drink also, for many noblemen dweU far beyond Aberdeen. They were also desirous to see Dunottar, an ancient castle of the Earl MarshaU's upon the sea-coast, and as soon as they came to the outer gate thereof, one by one (for no more than one by one can enter, the entry is so strait) their weapons were taken from them, and in sign of welcome the cannons played their part, but they were greatly afraid because of the taking of their weapons. They supposed they were about to do some treason to them. But they found otherwayes before they went, and as soon as they had seen aU, they were brought into the HaU and there dined. But, sayd your men, where is the black stock that we have heard teU of in England? They rose up, and if there was good preparation in the HaU before, there was far better on the Stock. This black stock is of an old oak of great thickness. standing on stumps in a house by itself. The use of the black stock hath 1 Where Southampton must have seen one of the Round Towers (stilt perfect), such as he had seen in Ireland. xxiv] A LONG PROGRESS 389 been that whoever were traveUing by the way, many or few, they were at the Castle and sat down at that black stock and had meat and drink in abun dance and never paid anything for it. Now after there was given such content in the Castle as could be, the Earl took them to his park and desired them to stand at the park dyke. Then he made one of his servants go into the park, and blow on a hunting home, and as soone as the wild beasts heard the blowing of the home, they came skipping over the dyke. After the King had stayed his appointed time at Kinnaird he went into Dundee and was received by the Constable, the BaiUies and Citizens, cannon shooting, and the cross running with wine. The Stairs were covered with tapestry and an oration made. Thek gift gave the King much contentment. After one night at Falkland, again thence to Kinghorn, where his barge was waiting for him, aU his mariners clothed in silk and velvet ; they came to Leith and so to his palace again that night. ...Upon the nth of June, as our usual custom is every year, our weapon schawing was so weU liked of by your countriemen that they thocht they had aU been gentlemen brought out of the countrie, but in truth it was not so. Next came the two parts of the inhabitants of the city youth, it must have been a pleasure to any King in Europe, to see one city yield such a company of brave and gaUant subjects. The King sat in his own Palace window to see them march by.... That night the King went with his court to Dalkeith Castle 4 mUes from Edinburgh, a place of my Lord of Morton's, a Castle for strength and a palace for pleasure. He stayed there three nights, going about hawking and hunting, and visiting places, as my Lord of Cran ston's Dreddin Place, the Castle of RosUn, and the Chapel thereoff of great rarity, also the Park of Newbattle. Handsome maidens brought them milk and confections there.... Upon the 14th of June, the King surprised his foUowers by leaving the Castle of Dalkeith by a secret way, and so got half way home before his men knew he had gone. Upon the 17th June, the first day of the ParUament, the manner of their riding was this : the city being in armour and having the way dear for them, they mounted at the Abbey and rode up along to ParUament House. Half an hour before, the ChanceUor of Scotland, and the Secretary with some other Lords, came in thdr royal red robes and fenced the ParUament, thereafter they passed two and two according to every man's place and degree. First Lords and Commissioners, Barons, Knights, Viscounts, Earls aU in their rich robes, then came the Heralds and the King of Heralds, the Bishops and Archbishops next the Earls that carried the Honours, the Crown, the sword of Honour, the Sceptre. Next unto them the King and on his left hand Lord Buckingham. The Stile by which they go to the ParUament House was kept by the Earl of Errol and his guard, and the entries themselves by the Earl Marshal. Then the RoU was caUed, but there were many absent. Upon the 19th June, his Majesties Birthday, he dined in the Castle of Edinburgh, and the Castle never ceased shooting untU 9 or 10 at night. It is reported there were 40 Knights made. 390 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. About 9 or 10 the King came down from the Castle to the Abbey. Great Bonfires blazed in the streets, and in the outer court of the Abbey a boy of 9 years old made an oration to the King in Greek. This is of truth: he is one Mr John Car his son, minister of Preston Pans. Then from a window in the Palace the King with his nobles saw fireworks, and a play amid the fire works. Two castles were created, the Palace of St Andrew, and the Castle of Envy, played by the young men of Edinburgh, and wonderful devises and more to foUow if the King had only stayed longer.... Upon the 26th day of June there was a banquet given to the King and his nobles by the City of Edinburgh. There was a house built of Timber and glass round about, made of purpose for it, hung with tapestry. Fourscore young men of Edin burgh, aU in gold chains, served. They had such varieties of meats, fish and provision, that one of your countrymen spake this, who was a Master of Household himself in England; says he, "I have been in ItaUe, in Spain, in France, k England, and now come to Scotland, and whereas I thought there would have been nothing here, I have seen here the best both for variety of meats, and also for service.... I speak nothing of the pleasante sortes of melodies, musicks, wines, &c, if so be I would enter a discourse of this matter, it would be too longsome." Upon the 28th day of June1 the last of the ParUament was rode.... As concerning Church government, there is no new Statutes made, praised be God, but the old confirmed, and the old ancient acts of ParUament of the Country concerning the Commons. The 30th June the King bade fareweU to the Abbey. We were aU glad of his coming and sorrowful at his waygoing. . .he is to be God wiUing on the 5th day of August at Carlyle. What he was to do and to see in the interval we are not in formed. It is evident that the Kttle country did its best to welcome its King and his southern nobles. Yet, it is said, they grumbled and sneered at the arrangements, which did not include more masques and devices. It was probably Buckingham who was the caviller. The Scottish men replied that they did not think grown men would have cared for such trifles. But the reproaches wounded sensitive hearts. Probably this letter was written to prove that they had not been neglected. It is possible that James told his English nobles what a fight he had had to support the English players under Laurence Fletcher, and how the people would not find them a playing-place, so that he had had to find wood and workmen to 1 A letter written to Bacon from Edinburgh on June 28th (misdated 1618) states, "The Earl of Southampton, Montgomery and Hay are already gone for England." xxiv] A LONG PROGRESS 391 build them a house in a field; how the preachers warned the people on Sunday that they must not go to such places as a play-house, and how on Monday he issued a proclamation that they were to go if they wanted to please him; how he was not sure that Dun fermline would make his players comfortable, and he sent "twelve feather beds" to be ready for the company; how, doubting that the Aberdonians would even admit them, he had sent a private intimation of his wish that they should be made freemen of the borough (as they were). If his northern subjects felt like that, how could his visitors expect a set of masques? For his part, it had been a relief. He liked to see his country and his people natural. James seemed to have had a romantic and artistic sensibility to the charms of the scenery of his own country. How else could it have entered his head to ask the Venetian ambassador to go and see it, the King paying all expenses? So we may be sure that he urged his courtiers to look well at the landscapes of his land when he took them there. We can well imagine the Earls urged to climb Arthur's Seat at a late sunset in order to see the distant views — to the north west Ben Ledi, Ben Voirlich and the Trossach group rising like moonstones against the golden glory of the setting sun. He would point out the Calton Hill, where the English had set their cannon when they came to court the King's mother for Prince Edward. They would see for themselves the quaint picturesqueness of the tall houses, crowded together for protection, on the long street that ran between the Castle and the Palace. When they crossed the Firth of Forth in his barge, he might remember the play of Macbeth, specially written in his honour by the great dramatist lately dead, and might show Southampton, as likely to be interested, "St Colme's Inch" by Aberdour, and to the north-east of the bay Kincraig that guarded the "Earl's Ferry" — accepting or believing' all the misrepresentations of Scottish history which Shakespeare had immortalised in his wonderful "invention" of the last of the old Scottish kings. The charms of Falkland Palace were self-evident. Further north, they would pass by the red Abbey of Arbroath in its unruined days, by the rugged cliffs that line the shore there (afterwards to be glorified in Scott's Antiquary) up to Stonehaven and the wonderful bold cliff of Dunottar, then 392 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. considered impregnable. It may be noticed that there was a break in the party before reaching that wonderful spot. The King had been expected to go on to Aberdeen, but preferred to remain at Kinnaird; so a party of his courtiers went on to see Aberdeen and Dunottar on their return. One is inclined to believe that Southampton was of that party, for he knew that admiration of his native country always pleased the King. And the adventurers would be rewarded. A city of granite is a sight worth seeing, though its surroundings did not rise to the highest level. But the Castle of Dunottar, once seen, could never be forgotten. It is said that the Privy Councillors went on their knees to pray the King not to go to Scotland; now they were on their knees again to have him back. His holiday caused delay in all transactions; and in his absence all left behind were "overfed on Bacon." It is extraordinary how any sensible man should have assumed so many airs and taken so much pomp on himself. He out-Wolseyed Wolsey; and those around him wrote to the King to come home to fill the throne that Bacon seemed to have come to think his own. But the King did not hurry more than he felt inclined. He had to visit St Andrews, Dunfermline, Stirling, Perth, Glasgow, where a thriving university could rival Edinburgh in orations; and he went on by south-western Scotland, Hamilton, Sanquhar, and Dum fries, to Carlisle. For some reason Southampton and a few other noblemen left the King's party on the 28th of June. Perhaps he wanted to investigate the arrangements made for the fleet and for his projected voyage to Algiers. On 4th December, 16171, Sir Henry Savile recommended to Carleton Sir Thomas Dale, a friend of the Earl of Southampton, who had done good service in the plantation of Virginia. On 6th December2 rumour began to be busy about the coming glories of the great masque in preparation, in which the Prince and Buckingham were to be performers. Some time during that winter Southampton had a new grant. The King instructed Sir Henry Yelverton, Attorney-General, that he had been graciously pleased to confirm to our right trustie and well beloved cousin Henry Earl of Southampton to him and his heirs, all such Liberties, privileges, Royalties, Franchises 1 D.S.S.P. James, xciv. 50. 2 Ibid. 52. xxiv] A LONG PROGRESS 393 as he and his progenitors have had in Southampton... in St Giles in the Countie of Middlesex... in Nettleton in the Countie of Lincoln &c. and that the liberties and boundes of Southampton House in Holborne shall be extended from the Barres there to the Rolls in Chancery Lane1. The King therefore desired Yelverton to prepare a bill for this purpose and to fit it for his signature: this to be his warrant. The King issued a Commission to revise the Statutes of the Garter on 26th April, 161 8, directed to "our right well-beloved cousins and Councillors Charles, Earl of Nottingham, Edward, Earl of Worcester, Henry, Earl of Southampton, and Thomas, Earl of Arundel, also our well-beloved cousins Philip, Earl of Montgomery, Robert, Viscount Lisle, Knights and Companions ofthe Order. Dated from Westminster."2 A letter from the Rev. Thomas Lorkin on 23rd June, 161 8, states that the Lord of Southampton had persuaded Lord Spencer not to accept an Earldom when offered to him. It may be remembered that his daughter, Penelope, married William, the second Lord Spencer. He adds: The Spanish Ambassador has been reporting a very sore complaint against the violent and hostile proceedings of Sir Walter Raldgh, aggravating matters very grievously, and that the Spanish King must repair his honour and losse if satisfaction be not given."3 The King must have been at Southampton's place again that summer, as Buckingham wrote to Lord Chancellor Bacon a message from the King dated from " Bewley the 20th day of August 1618."4 Bacon sends the advice to the King about the form of the trial of Sir Walter Raleigh, on the 18th of October5; that, being already convicted of high treason, he could not rightly be charged with anything less. He suggests two courses. One was that with the warrant for execution delivered to the Lieutenant of the Tower should be published in print a narrative of his late crimes and offences, because they are not yet generally known; the other "to 1 D.S.S.P. James, xciv. 93, Nov. to Dec. 1617. 2 Add. MS. 6297, p. 280. 3 Marquis of Bath's MSS. n. 68. 4 Bacon's Letters (edition 1824), VI. 201. 5 Ibid. 205. 394 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. call together your Council and judges and nobility in the Council Chamber, and declare his acts of hostility, depredation, abuse of your Majesty's Commission, as of your subjects under his charge, impostures, attempt to escape and other misdemeanours." Raleigh had taken advantage of his long reprieve to turn to study and to leisurely literary work, had written many things, sketched more, and completed his ambitious work The History of the World. He won more respect, sympathy, and fame as a prisoner than he had in his free and public life, and his execution on 29th October, 161 8, made many raise him to the level of a martyr. Nemesis, though long delayed, tracked him down at last. She had not forgotten his dealings with the Earl of Essex. Viscount Lisle wrote hastily to his wife on the 27 th July, 161 8: "Lady Lucy (Percy) and Lord Hay are coming to Penshurst presently, but Lord Montgomery goes to his mother, and Lord Southampton to the Spensers."1 There is no clue to the circum stances associated with this entry. One remarkable irregularity in courtly marriage customs roused gossip early that winter. The details are only preserved for us by Thomas Lorkin in a letter written after the New Year, as a postscript to that of 5th January, 1/18-192. He says that at the house of Mr Udall, "Mrs Isabella Rich and the eldest son of Sir Thomas Smith met and liked each other." The Earl of Pembroke, who was present, sent to Baynard's Castle for his Chaplain to make the matter sure by marriage. The Chaplain demurred, as he had no licence; but the masterful Lord Chamber lain said that he would bear the responsibility, and the ceremony was performed. They then conducted the bridal pair to dinner in Lord Southampton's house, and to bed at Lord Bedford's. "The father is a heavy man to have his son bestowed without his privity and consent." The three Earls persuaded Smith to forgive them3. Sir Anthony Weldon's virulent attack upon Scotland and the Scotch, written after the Progress, reflects doubt on his veracity in other satiric descriptions. But one good thing he had to say: "The wonders of their kingdom are these, the Lord Chancellor is believed, the Master of the Rolls well spoken of; and the whole 1 Sidney Papers, a. 350. 2 Add. MS. 4178, 214 b. 3 D.S.S.P. James, cm. no. xxiv] A LONG PROGRESS 395 Councell who are the judges for all causes are free from suspicion and corruption " — a remark which would probably occur to many minds during the course of the next Parliament in London. A quaint volume was published in 161 8 by H. G, called The Mirrour of Majestie. Early in the volume a page is devoted to the Earl of Southampton. His arms are given as four "sea-gulls" set in a cross, no crest, the motto that of the Garter, Honi soit qui mal y pense, and the following verses: No storme of troubles, or cold frosts of friends, Which on free greatnes too too oft attends, Can, (by presumption), threaten your free state; For these presaging sea-birds doe amate Presumptions greatnes; moving the best mindes By thdr approach, to feare the future windes Of aU calamitie, no less than they Portend to sea-men a tempestuous day; Which you fore-seeing, may beforehand crosse As they doe them, and so prevent the losse. The following page presents us with an extraordinary portrait, divided down the middle into two halves. The left hand bears the winged rod of Hermes wreathed with two snakes, a wing on cap and foot, and a sword upon his thigh. The right half is cased in mail and bears a lance and shield. This is enclosed by the motto Perfectus in utraque. These verses follow: What coward Stoicke or blunt Captaine wiU Dislike this union, or not labour still To reconcUe the Arts and Victory ; Since in themselves Arts have this quaUty, To vanquish Errours traine; what other than Should love the Arts, if not a vaUant man? Or how can he resolve to execute That hath not first learned to be resolute? If any shaU oppose this, or dispute, Your great example shaU their spite confute. Bound along with this in the British Museum, undated, is a copy of Minerva Britannica, or a garden of Heroical devises furnished and adorned with Emblemes and Impreses of sundry natures, newly devized moraUzed and pubUshed by Henry Peacham, Mr of Artes. 396 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. xxiv To the right honorable and most noble Lord Henry Earle of Southampton. Three girlondes oure Colonna did devize For his Impresa, each in other joined; The first of OUve, due unto the wise ; The learned know the laurel greene to binde. The oken was his due above the rest Who had deserved in the battle best. His meaning was, his mind he would apply By due desert to chaUenge each his prize And rather choose a thousand times to die Then not be learned vaUant and wise. How few alas, doe now a daies we finde (Great Lord) that bear thy truly noble minde. The reverse contains a framed picture, intended to be the Isle of Wight, and over all the three wreaths intertwined. CHAPTER XXV WORK IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS The Queen was very ill during the Christmas of 1 618-9, an(^ this cast a gloom over King and Court. On the first page of the new Register ofthe Council there is recorded: The 12th day of this instant January, 1618-9, the greate Banqueting House at WhitehaU was by casualty of fire quite burnt to the ground, under which the records of the CounceU were kept, which, being not possible to be aU saved, all the Registers and bookes of CounceU, from part of the year 1601 indusive unto May 1613, were quite consumed. This accident increased the Christmas gloom. On the 30th of January, 1619, Lord Nottingham resigned his office of Lord Admiral. There is no doubt Southampton would have liked to have been promoted to the post, not only for the honour, but that he might thereby have a better chance of chasing the Barbary pirates. But nothing then was too good for the favourite, and the office was granted to the Marquis of Buckingham. It is possible that the King meant to find some consolation for South ampton, for on the 20th of February "he gave the Earl £1200 a year in lieu of the land in the New Forest grown useless by the multitude of deer." The Queen about that time grew suddenly worse, and died of dropsy on the 2nd of March. The Court Letter- writer, Sir Gerard Herbert, wrote: "She has benefited many, and injured none, so that she should be lamented."1 There was a good deal of mild regret (mingled with anxieties about the consequences of Court mourning), but little distress. Eleven days afterwards died Richard Burbage, Shakespeare's great exponent. Poets and pamphleteers were busy expressing the people's sorrow. One long poem says Burbage the Player has vouchsafed to die Therefore in London is not one eye dry... When he expkes, lo ! aU lament the man, But where's the grief should foUow good Queen Anne ? 1 D.S.S.P. James, cv. 120. 398 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. There is no doubt that both of these losses must have affected Southampton deeply. Both Queen and Player were about his own age; the Queen had always been his friend, and he her servant in several offices; the Player had often been his comforter in days of stress and strain as the sympathetic expresser of Shakespeare's philosophy. But we do not know of him what Lord Pembroke records of himself in May, that he could not go to the play, "which I being tender-hearted could not endure to see so soone after the loss of my old acquaintance Burbage."1 The Queen's funeral took place on the 13th of May. Southampton and his family all attended, he among the Earls, his brother-in-law, Thomas Arundel, among the Barons. "The principal mourner was the Countess of Arundel, the Countesses assistant Southampton, Leicester, Pembroke (dowager), Devonshire. Ladies, Lady Anne Wriothesley, Lady Penelope Spencer among them."2 Meanwhile the King had been very ill, so ill that it had been reported he was dead. He thought at one time he was dying, and recommended many of the Lords to the Prince. Sir Gerard Herbert said he never heard such wise or divine speeches as the King made. Chamberlain says they all thanked God for his recovery. It is probable that the King's conscience had troubled him about the repeated slights he had offered to the Earl of South ampton. At any rate, it was during his illness that on April 19th the King announced that he was to be made a Privy Councillor. A Latin letter of congratulation was sent by the Master and Fellows of St John's College, Cambridge, to the Earl of South ampton on his being honoured thus, on 19th May, 16193. They rejoiced at the recognition of his merit, though tardy. The Earl of Southampton wrote to Carleton on 30th April, 1619: Sir I have received your letter wherein you were pleased to express a better opinion of mee than I deserve. It is trew his Majestie hath given mee a place on his Council Board, which preferment I protest by the faith of an 1 See my Burbage, and Shakespeare's Stage, p. 117; also Egerton MS. 3592, 1. 81. 2 Nichols' Prog. in. 538. 3 Register of Letters, 147, p. 154. xxv] WORK IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 399 honest man I expected not, ndther sought directly nor indirectly by myself or any of my friends, yea I may say trewly, nor wished in my heart. His favour I confess to be the greater, and I the more bound to serve him honestly, which by God's grace shaU be the chief marke I wiU ayme att, if I may attayne that end, I shaU account my poor endeavours weU employed, otherwise I had much rather have continued a spectator than become an actor, and I shaU rather performe the office of a CounseUor in keeping than giving counsd, which I am sworn to doe according to my hart and conscience, but I wiU make the same request to you that I have to some other of my good frendes not to expect too much from mee. You know weU how things stand and pass with us, and how Uttle one vulger counciUor is able to effect. AU I can promise is to doe no hurt, which I hope I shaU performe. The Messenger caUs for my letter, which I must conclude soner than I ment. Yett with my best thankes for the testimony you have given me of your good affection which I should be gladd if I could any way merite and will ever remayne your very assured friend to doe you service, H. Southampton1. The Privy Council Register (unpublished) marks the date of his first attendance on 30th April, 161 9 (p. 175): This day the Earle of Southampton was by his Majesty's special com mandment sworne one of his Highness' Privie Councell, sate at the Board, and signed letters as a CounceUor. The record of his later signatures shows fairly regular attend ances, and must be studied in relation to his attendances in the Upper House and at the Virginia Council meetings. The list of the members of the Privy Council in vol. v of their Register has his name struck out — "Mort." The affairs of the Palatinate were disturbing the country. James said he could not rightly understand the political questions involved, and his leaning towards the Spanish interest prevented his taking the trouble to study in order to understand it in time. The Venetian secretary in the Netherlands wrote on November 19th, 16 19, that the English were making arrangements for assist ance under General Cecil and Southampton. The ambassador to England said they were raising men, and designated the Earl of Southampton as commander. On 3rd April, 1620, he tells the Doge that Southampton had offered £40,000 out of his privy purse for Bohemia, and that he will get the command. On the 1 D.S.S.P. James, cxin. 86. 400 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. ioth he explains that the King wishes to be kept out of the responsibility and so refuses to let Southampton go1. On 25th June Southampton was absolutely excluded, and Horace Vere chosen. Parliament opened, after seven years' recess, on January 30th, 1620. James, Lord Wriothesley was elected member for Callington on 27th December, 1620, was admitted to Lincoln's Inn on 27th January, 1620-1, and took his seat at the opening on the 30th — a new link between his father and the Lower House. He had left St John's College, Cambridge, without taking his degree. His attendance there would not have been known but for his payment to the tennis court and an allusion in his mother's letter2. At the opening of Parliament there was a protest made by some of the great Lords against the multiplicity of honours granted, as they detracted from the value of the old titles, but Southampton's name was not affixed to it. Arthur Wilson says of that Parliament: There were some gaUant spirits that aimed at the public liberty more than their own interests, among which the principal were Henry Earl of Southampton, Robert Earl of Essex, Robert Earl of Warwick, The Lord Say, the Lord Sperlcer, and divers others, that supported the old English Honour, and would not let it fall to the ground Southampton, though he were one of the King's Privy Council, yet was he no great Courtier; SaUsbury had kept him at bay, and pinched him so by reason of his relation to old Essex, that he never flourished much in his time, nor was his spirit (after him) so smooth shod as to go always the Court pace, but that now and then he would make a Carrier that was not very acceptable to them, for he carried his business closely and sUly, and was rather an adviser than an actor3. The House of Lords was very jealous of its privilege to keep its debates unprinted; but one set of short notes, taken for private use for a short period, has been preserved at Crowcombe Court. They were edited for the Camden Society by the late Mr S. R. Gardiner, and they give us some notion of the proceedings. In the Preface the Editor says, The voice of the Rex Pacificus alone is heard. . .while the MandeviUes, the Southamptons and the Says are tugging at the oar in silence, content to merge their individuality in the common result. 1 Venetian Papers, xvi. pp. 51, 219, 137, 299. 2 St John's College Books, extracts in The Eagle, vol. xxxvi. p. 66. 3 History of Britain, p. 161. xxv] WORK IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 401 The chief work of the session seems to have been trials for malversation in various ways by public officers, Bacon, Yelverton, Mompesson, Lord Middlesex, all connected by various links which surprise one in studying them. The earliest passages of the draft appear in the Appendix, dating from March 22nd, 1 620-1, till March 26th, 1621. Southampton seems to have been the leader in the Commission appointed to try Bacon1. On the 23rd of March he announces that they had enquired of divers (about the Lord Chancellor's case) and, amongst the rest, of one Sir Ralph Hansby, "who refuses to answer to some particulars touching the Lord Chancellor, for that, as he said, it concerned himself in regard of the giving of money. The Earl of Pembroke desired to know their pleasures, whether he should be pressed to answer to the questions or no. "The Prynce. He should not speak against himself." Others said it was in no ways to accuse the person examined, but to make clear the bribery of the Lord Chancellor. On March 26th the case of Mompesson came forward, and Southampton said, We took care to ease your Lordship Pembroke in our Search, with the healp of 2 gentlemen of the Lower House, who looked over the records and noates and sedules &c. which if your Lordship please may be seen, or else to take it on our credits. The volume itself begins on 17th April, 1621 (the first day after the Easter Recess) : " Message from the King about the Lord Chancellor's case, Committee appointed to proceed in examination." The first name mentioned is that of Southampton. He had ex amined those who had been previously sworn, and some who had not been sworn, wishing them to be careful for that they must be sworn. April 19th: Southampton said he had examined many and given the examinations to Mr Attorney. He also said: We herde pubUquely that the Lord ChanceUor, having ordered matters k Courte, did afterwards alter them upon petition. Wherefore we sent to the Registers to know this; who have found out some, and wyU serch for more, which wiU require time &c.2 Tuesday, 24th April, 1621 : the King's Speech; the Bill against 1 Spedding's Life of Bacon, a. 254. 2 Ibid. p. 128. s.s. 26 402 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. informers is brought in. Southampton, desirous of expediting the cause of the Lord Chancellor, proposed Not to sit tomorrow, being Star-Chamber day, for that there is a great cause on there in the hearing, but to sitt on some other Star-Chamber day, to the ende that it may not be a custome that this house sit not on Star- Chamber Day (agreed). The Lord Chamberlain (Pembroke) asked: ShaU the Great Seale come to the Barr? Fkst send to him and here his answer before he is sent for. Southampton. The charge to be sent to him without perswasion for him to confess; then if he confess we may ground our sentence. Question. Whether the charge s'haU be sent him or no ? The Prince. Whether shaU we be mercifuU or just and rigorous ? Southampton. I wiU deale with the Lord ChanceUor as with my best friend, I wiU not seek to circumvent him. The truth is, our only ayme is that the truth may appeare. The Lord ChanceUor is accused to be a corrupt judge. He deny the deUnquent nothing without which he may pretend he cannot clear himself. Send it to him presently.... Lord Chamberlain, who shaU we send with the charge ? Bacon meantime had sent a submission (April 25th). Southampton. The question now is only how the charge shaU be deUvered, and of coming to the Bar to make his answer. The answer now returned is that he wiU return answer with aU speed. Yf we accept of this we conclude oursdves. My voice is to receive no answer from him but from his own mouth. Let him knowe that wee mislyke his answer that he wiU returne an answer to us. Discussing whether Bacon should be imprisoned, the Bishop of Bangor said : Good bayU is offered. His credit is good, not to be imprisoned. Southamp ton. Ymprisonment may be easier than bayU. On May 2nd the Lord Treasurer reported that the Lord Steward, the Lord Chamberkin, the Earl of Arundd and himself had been sent to the Lord ChanceUor to teU him that the King required of him the Great Seal. The Lord ChanceUor said, " By the King's great favour I received the great seale, by my own great fault I have lost it." The King had sent a message to the House concerning Ydverton. Lord Cham berlain said to settle the business in hand, in order (the Lord ChanceUor's). Southampton. Fytt to be done, but the matter of Ydverton is of such importance as it cannot be passed over. Yf yt be soe, an imputation rests upon the House, yf yt be not soe his Majestie is misinformed. Moved: The speeches of Yelverton to be considered and opinion of House taken. ArundeU xxv] WORK IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 403 conceaved that the other day we agreed that the King should be the best judge &c. Lord A dmyrall (agreed). HisMajestiewyU judge of what concerns him, you my Lords to judge of what concerns us, and not to contradict the King's message. Yelverton's words were supposed to affect the King's Honor. Southampton. Your Lordships to be judges whether I have by my words contradicted the King's Message. I have heard it twice. Yf he that spake yt wiU deny it, I shaU be satisfied. Lord Admyrall. I am redy to give satisfaction &c. Prynce. Yt is left to the King's Censure, because yt was doubtful to the House, which (Southampton) conceaved not to be the reason. Sheffield. The mistake is that some conceaved that the House left the judgment of this to the King. Let us first determine whether it were so con- ctived or no. Prynce. The King hath no U1 opinion of the House. He understood it was referred to him by the House. Oxon. "Understand it" was noe order of the House. Agreed by the Prynce and aU the Lords that it had not been referred to the King to judge of Ydverton. Prynce. If you thinke it doth not concern the King's honour I shaU goe to him with the message. Sheffield. This toucheth deeper unto us than we aU conceave. A delinquent is brought before us, and before yt was determined, resumed into the King's hands; our privUeges are touched. A committee to move the King yt may be returned to us. Southampton. (The same) For the wounde of the privUege of the House, not so greate, as that his Majestie should conceave a suspidon of our Zeale, to his honour, having caUed Ydverton to the barre, herd him and sett down his examination in writing, &c. Business of the ChanceUor to be taken tomorrow. Southampton. The Lord ChanceUor to have notice and warning to be here then to hear his sentence by 9. The Col lection of Charges, Proofs and Confessions to be considered by a Committee. 3rd May: Except the Lord Admiral, all agreed to all the heavy punishments awarded the Lord Chancellor. 8th May: An incidental quarrel between Lord Arundel and Lord Spencer about their ancestors was quieted, as being no part of the business of the house for the time. In the afternoon a conference was to take place, in which the Lord Treasurer, the Lord Chamberlain, and the Earl of South ampton were to lead the debate. For an introduction Southampton said: To let them know that the Precedents shewed us last day give us no satisfaction. To demande of them whether they can deUver anything new more strong on thek part, if they do, to hear them. May 1 2th. Archb. Canterbury. The King declares himself to be touched in his honour, that only is the question. We to hear this first. Southampton. Ad idem. For we cannot revoke censure. Yf we say that 26 2 404 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. this touches the King's honour yt differs not much from treason and soe the censure must be heavy and deepe. I condemne him (Yelverton) of much foUye &c and think him worthy to be censured yf he had spoken anything which doth touch the King in honour; but to consider his words before we say the Kkg's honour is touched. Arundel. The difference between contempt and treason &c. Southampton. The Lord ChanceUor is not yet gone to the Tower. Moveth, that the world may not thynk our sentence is in vayne. Lord Admyrall. The King hath respited his going to the Tower in the tyme of his great sickness. The King had the privilege of mercy, and of the determination of Bacon's imprisonment, so nothing more was said about his case. The heavy fine he did not attempt to pay; it acted as a protection against his other creditors. They allowed him to keep his titles of nobility; he was soon set at liberty, and men noticed he seemed to have no sense of his position. This abstract of the proceedings of the House of Lords breaks off abruptly on 24th May: "Adjourned for Recess — next meeting 2 1 st November, 1621." Then Bishop Williams appears as Lord Keeper. The King was tired of lawyers, and thought him best fitted. Much information concerning these events in a general way may be found in the State Papers1; but it is important to make clear the real position of the Earl of Southampton in the debates of that troubled and troublesome Parliament. The Conferences with the Lower House were not entirely satisfactory. Walter Yonge says in his Diary, 1621 : Presently after ParUament was adjourned, the Earl of Southampton, Sir Edward Coke, Sir Edwin Sands and Wright, the Clerk of the ParUament, and Dr Bayley were imprisoned, Oxford for saying we should aU turn Papists, Southampton for encouraging the Palsgrave in his wars 2. The troubles of the Palatinate referred to above were still moving the feelings of the country, and the King's delay excited much comment. The Venetian ambassador had shown that the point consists in inducing the King to agree to aUow the Earl of Southampton, a leading nobleman, rich, experienced, with considerable influence, to go to the defence of the Palatinate, so that aU those who wish to go may enrol themselves under him.... If Southampton obtained leave, 1 D.S.S.P. James, cxxi. 2, 5, 12, 69, 121. 2 Camden Series, Yonge's Diary, July, 1621. xxv] WORK IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 405 he would have a larger foUowing than any other, and no one but he would achieve much1. The King raised objections privately because of Southampton's independent and anti-Spanish feelings — for the same cause, indeed, as that for which he had already refused him important public charges. Publicly he said that it was not fitting a member of his Privy Council should engage in a matter in which he (the King) did not wish to declare himself. The Levy has finaUy been entrusted to Horace Vere (uncle of that John who served your Serenity [the Doge]) who was asked for, after the Earl of Southampton, in the name of the young King, by his Ambassador Dohna. From the same source2 we hear of Parliamentary news. May 21st, 1621. The Storm has been very severe last few days.. .very angry words passed between the Earl of ArundeU, siding with the favourite, and Lord Sheffidd against him, the Earl of Southampton, with a large party, acting with the latter. The King is very angry. ParUament gives him no money 3. July 2nd, 1 62 1. Great troubles about the Palatinate and Bohemia. The King is much exdted...he would rather die with his son than agree to anythkg not entirely to his honour.... The day before yesterday the Earl of Southampton was put under arrest in a house. He is a leading nobleman, very popular throughout the country, and is considered here to be almost the only person capable of commanding an army. They think he wiU be sent to the Tower, with some members of ParUament also arrested.... They happen to be also the supporters of the King of Bohemia, and those most zealous for the honour, safety, and religion of his Kingdom, in fact, they maktain these alone, whUe they favour the interests of friendly Princes. The Spanish Ambassador, by inspiring and fomenting such serious steps, plays to win at aU hazards 4- The Venetian seems to have been an acute observer. ' Meanwhile the private reason for the public talk was the King's letter of 15th June, 1621 : James R. to the CouncU. Right trustie and right weU-beloved cousins & Councillors, wee greet you weU. Whereas for spetiaU and waighty causes weU knowne unto us, wee have thought fitt to restraine for some tyme the person of the Earle of Southampton; Our wUl and pleasure therefore is 1 Venetian Papers, xvi. 275. 2 Ibid. 291. 3 Ibid. 53. 4 Ibid. xvn. 75 et seq. (These were sometimes entered in New Style dates.) 406 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. that instantly upon sight hereof you do caUe the saide Earle before you and do presently commit him unto the charge of the Dean of Westminster, there to remaine under safe and close custodie untiU we shaU otherwise determine the contrary, not suffering him in the meane tyme, either in the saide place of his confinement or elsewhere, after this our pleasure once signified unto him, to have anie speache or conference, either by word or writing, with any person whomsoever, excepting only with the saide Deane of Westminster, and our trustie and weU-beloved servant Sir Richard Weston, Knight, whom we hereby nominate and appoint to conduct him thether, and there to continue with him, or which other necessary persons of attendance as the said Sir Richard Weston, and the Deane of Westminster, or either of them shaU permitt to come unto him and to speake with him in their hearing, untiU wee signify our further pleasure. Given at our Manor of Greenwich the 15th day of June in the nineteenth year of our raygne over Great Britaine France & Ireland1. On 23rd June Chamberlain wrote to Carleton : The Dean of Westminster made of the CouncU.... On Saturday the Earl of Southampton being newly gone from the CouncU Table, was caUed back, and by a warrant from the King committed to the Deane of Westminster, under the custody of Sir Richard Weston, who getting himself discharged the next day, that charge was imposed upon Sir WiUiam Parkhurst (that was Sir Henry Wotton's secretarie at Venice) who no doubt was glad to have any employment.... Sir Ed Sandys, and Selden, a Lawyer studious of antiquitie, are also committed. A committee appointed to try them. Men busie themselves much about the cause of this committment.... Yt is con fidently given out that it is not for anything said nor done in ParUament.... There are eight Commissioners, Uttle done yet, saving that I hear Southamp ton refused to answer, aUeging that he would give no advantage to be drawn over terms into the Starr-Chamber, but requires to know what he can be charged withaU, and to see his accusers. It is like this refusal wiU do him no good, but give further cause of suspicion and stricter restraint. The late Lord ChanceUor, who has been late at Fulham, has gone to Gorhambury, having, as should seem, no manner of feeUng of his faU, but continuing as vaine and ydle in aU his humours as when he was all-highest, and his fine of £40,000 to the King is so far from hurting him, that it serves for a bulwark and protection against his creditors 2. There are several copies of the examinations of Southampton, and of Sir Edwin Sandys, the Earl of Oxford, and Mr John Selden, touching some proceedings in Parliament, July, 1621 : 1. Whether his own conscience did not accuse him of unfaithfulness to the King in the latter parte of ParUament, which his Majestie had cause to 1 D.S.S.P. James, cxxi. 69. 2 Ibid. 121. xxv] WORK IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 407 doubt both in his owne carriage in the Upper House and by the carriage of those neere to him in the Lower House ? Reply. He protested his conscience was free, and he thought his Majestie too just to charge him with the carriage of any one in the Lower House howsoever neere to him. 2. Whether he was not a partie to a practice about Easter to hinder the Kkg's ends att that meeting, and were there not meetings and consultations hdd to that intent ? Reply. He ndther was partie to any such practice, nor knew of any such thkg, nor of any meetings, nor consultations to any such end, yet he had kquired of it, because he had heard before the end of the ParUament that some such thing was concaved to have been done in that time. 3. Whether in the time of ParUament, some of the Lower House did not usuaUy come upp into the Committee Chamber of the Upper House, or dessyne and plott to receive directions from him what to doe in their own House the same day? Reply. Some of the Lower House came thither every day, some tyme to him sometyme to others, when he went out to speak with them ordinarily and famUiarly, as every one dse did, and divers tymes of what was then dokg in thdr house, and of other ParUament business, but yet he utterly denied that he had any dessdne or plott in their coming thether. 4. Whether after the King had dedared his purpose to adjourn ParUament, he had noe practise with some of the Lower House to crosse the Kkg dther when he would have biUs passe, or afterwards when he would have had BiUs Reply. He knew of noe such practice at dther of these tymes. 5. Whether he had noe practice with some of the other House to worke that some of the Subsidies now granted might have been sent over to the Kkg & Queen of Bohemia by order of the House, without coming att aU into the Exchequer ? Reply. That question was the first word that ever he heard of any such thing. The second tyme examined 1. Whether upon more consideration he found noe cause %to answer otherwise than he had done ? Reply. Upon aU the consideration that might be, he could give no other answer than before. 2. What discontents he had lately received, and how he had expressed them, dther towards the King, Government, or any other person neere them? Reply. None, nor had (that he knew) expressed any towards the King or his government. If there had been any unkimdness between him and any one neere the King, that concerned not his Majestie. 408 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. 3. Whether he had not said things were amisse in the State? Reply. He had spoken freely and ordinarily of aU such things as they were handled in ParUament, as he thought every one else had done, but had not been curious to seek faults. 4. Whether he had not said there would never be a good Reformacion while one did soe whoUy governe the King? Reply. He denyed it. 5. What he meant by a speech he used to the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield by way of discourse, saying he thought that in thdr House he had made unseasonable motions ? Reply. He meant by the motion he made when the controversy was between the Lord Buckingham and him in the House, for he thought his motion would have been more seasonable when the House had decided who was in error. 6. Whether he had said he Uked not to come to the Council table, there were so many boyes and base f eUows there ? Reply. He denyed it. 7. Whether he knew of the business of Ireland before it was moved? Reply. He had heard it spoken of before at his own house by Sir Jo: Jephson. 8. Whether he had heard no motion made to weare swords in the House? Reply. None. But himself and others did observe that swords were stiU worn, and when he saw every one else wear them, he did so too. 9. Whether he did not heare one that sate neere him say he would goe out and put on his sword and returne, and encouraged him so to do ? Reply. He did hear one say that he had left his sword with his boy and he would go and put it on and come again, and he thought (attending to the business of the House) that he said Do so. 10. Whether he did not say they had Uke to come to blowes? Reply. Hee said that he saw that heate in the house, that if the Prince had not been there, they had like to come to blows. The two first examinations. 1. What conference he had att any time, and with whom, touchkg a petition to be made to the King, by the ParUament, for the longer con tinuance thereof, after his Majestie had signified to the House his purpose of adjourning thereof, and where he dyned that day the message was brought ? 2. What Conference he had and with whom, either by word, message or writing, concerning a choyse offered by the King to the Houses by the mouth of the Lord Treasurer, viz. whether they would have a session of it by selecting out some few BiUs to be passed, such as his Majestie should like of, or an adjournment until some other tyme ? He was also examined about the Benevolence he supposed to be given xxv] WORK IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 409 to the Lady Elkabeth; what he said to Baron Dony, and what about the Spanish match &C1 Chamberlain wrote on 14th July: The Earl of Southampton and the rest continue in the same case and place as they were, saving that Sir Edwin Sandys is kept more dose. Yester day the Earl of Oxford was committed to the Custodie of Sir WiUiam Cockak, which I should take for a bad signe but that it is generaUy bruited to be ondy for ydle wonder. There is one Sir John Leeds, Mr Neville and others, said to be restrayned likewise about the same matters *. His next letter states: The Earl of Arundd, being made Earl MarshaU, refused the pension of £2000 the King would have given him, and would only accept the ordinary fee of £20.... On Monday the Marquis of Buckingham came to towne and made many visits. He was with the Earl of Northumberland and Sir Henry Ydverton in the Tower, with the Earl of Southampton two hours together at Westminster, with the Earl of Oxford at Sir WiUiam Cockaine's, with Sir Thomas Lake at his house, in aU which places his coming was taken for a good presage, Uke the appearing of St Elmo after a Tempest, and accordingly on Wednesday morning very early, the Lord Keeper carried the Earl of Southampton to TibaUs, where the King lay (before he began his progress), had long conference with him, none being admitted into the room but the Lord Keeper and the Lord of Buckingham. In conclusion the Lord Keeper brought him home to his owne house in Holbourne, dined with him, and there left him at Libertie. He hath wonne a good deale of goodwiU in deaUng so reaUy and affectionately for him, and bdng reported the chiefe instru ment of his deUveries, and of reconciling and salving aU that was amisse. We cannot ayme at the cause of his restraynt, you may perhaps guesse better on that side, for some think it was for looking so much that way. ...The Earl of Northumberland deUvered, after 15 years, and Oxford & others. Lord Doncaster went that way yesterday towards France, having in his companie the young Lord WriothesUe and the Lord Treasurer's eldest sonne.... The Spanish Ambassador became affable, and went to a Common play at the Fortune m Golden Lane3. Sir Dudley Digges wrote to Carleton on the 28th July: Skce the making of the Lord Keeper (by his plaine deaUng and indevours as it is said) my Lord of Southampton is remitted of his restraynt, yet not without some attendance of intermitting keeper, which I hear my Lord of Southampton wonders at, considering howe fayrly the King did dismisse him4. 1 D.S.S.P. James, cxxi. I36. Egerton MSS. 2651, f. 33. Harl. MS. 161, J- 35- 2 D.S.S.P. James, cxxn. 23. a Ibid. 31. 4 Ibid. 47. 410 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Williams, Bishop of Lincoln, Fellow of St John's, had not for gotten the affection he had borne to the young Earl, an affection united by their co-operation in helping to build and furnish the library of their common College. But the worthy Bishop required more than affection by which to work. He had to be as wise as a serpent in order to be as harmless as a dove. He was naturally faithful to the King, but he knew it was advisable to court the chief courtier. Perhaps he really saw a better side of Buckingham. He also knew how to hasten slowly. On the 18th of July, 1621, the Privy Council record the receipt of a letter stating that, though his Majesty was graciously pleased to enlarge Lord Southampton and set him at liberty, yet he was enjoined tp repair to Titchfield until further order and that Sir William Parkhurst should remain in attendance on him1. The Venetian ambassador in July drew attention to the fresh complaints of the East India Company Merchants of damage done them by the Dutch. The Dutch ambassador Caron fears that if not settled, the King wiU aUow his subjects to make reprisals, which would be playing the Spaniards game.... They aim by the same means to inspire the King and the Prince of Wales with jealousy of the Queen of Bohemia and her children. It seems now that, chiefly on account of such suspicions, the blow has faUen on Southampton. However they have not proceeded against him further than by examination and most secret inquisition, imprisoning three or four others also 2. The Lord Keeper Williams wrote to the Duke of Buckingham : My noble Lord, with my truest affections and thankfulness premised, I do not doubt but his Majestie and your Lordship do now enjoy the general applause of your goodnesse to the Earl of Southampton. Saturday last he came and dined with me, and I find him more cordiaUy affected to the service of the King, and your Lordship's Love and friendship, than ever he was when he ky a prisoner in my house. Yet the Sunshine of his Majesties favour, though most bright upon others (more open offenders), is noted to be somewhat ecUpsed towards him. What direction soever his Majestie gave, the order is somewhat tart upon the Earl. The word of Confinement spread about the City (though I observed not one syUable so quick to faU from his Majestie), his Keeper much wondered at. The act of the Council pubUshed in our names, who were neither present thereat, nor 1 Privy Council Register, v. 102. 2 Venetian Papers, xvn. 80. xxv] WORK IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 411 heard one word of the same: yet, upon my credit, the Earl takes aU things patiently and thankfuUy, though others wonder at the same. Read between the lines, this letter, with others, seems to point to Buckingham's tampering with the King's orders to suit himself1. Then comes a letter from Southampton, at an uncertain date, but it must follow the last and precede the one quoted on the next page. He writes to the Bishop of Lincoln: My Lord, I have found your Lordship already so favourable and affection ate unto me, that I shaU be stiU hereafter desirous to acquaint you with what concerns me, and bold to ask your advice and councel; which makes me to send this bearer to give your Lordship an account of my answer to the Court, which I cannot better do then by sending unto you the answer itseh, which you shaU receive here endosed. Wherein you may see what is expected from me, that I may not onely magnifie his Majesties Gracious deaUng with me, but cause aU my friends to do the Uke, and restrain them from making any extenuation of my errours, which if they be disposed to do, or not to do, is impossible for me to alter, that am not likely for a good time to see any other then mine own fanuly. For myself, I shaU be ever ready (as is fit) to acknowledge his Majesties favour to me, but can hardly perswade myself that any errour by me committed deserved more punish ment then I have had, and hope that his Majestie wiU not expect that I should not confesse myself to have been subject to a Star-chamber sentence, which God forbid I should ever do. I have, and shaU do according to that part of my Lord of Buckingham's advice to speak of it as Uttle as I can, and so shaU I do in other things to meddle as Uttle as I can. I purpose (God willkg) to go to morrow to Tychfield (the place of my confinement) there to stay as long as the King shaU please. Sir WiUiam Parkhurst must go with me, who hoped to have been dis charged at the return of my Messenger from Court, and seemes much troubled, that he is not pretendkg that it is extream inconvenient for him k regard of his own occasions. He is fearful he should be forgotten. If therefore when your Lordship writes to the Court, you would but put my Lord of Buckingham in remembrance of it, you shaU (I think) do him a favour. For my part it is so Uttle trouble to me, and of so smaU moment as I mean to move no more for it. When this bearer returns, I beseech you return by him this inclosed Letter, and beUeve that whatsoever I am I wiU ever be, Your Lordships most assured friend to do you service. H. Southampton, &c.2 To the Right Honourable my very good Lord the Lord Keeper of the Great Seale of England. 1 Cabala, p. 61. 2 Ibid. p. 59- Harl. MS. 7000, f. 88. 412 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. The Lord Keeper's answer to this was dated 2nd August, 1621. My Lord, I have perused your Lordship's Letter, and that enclosed I return back again, and doubt nothing of my Lord Admiral's remembring of you upon the first opportunity. Great works (as I hope this wiU be a perfect reconciUng of his Majestie's affections to you, of your best studies, and endeavours to the service of his Majestie) do require some time: they are but poore actions and of no continuance that are slubbered up in an instance. I know (my Lord) men's tongues are their own, nor Ueth it in your power to prescribe what shaU be spoken for you, or against you. But to avoid that Complacentia (as the Divines caU it), that itching and inviting of any interpretation, which shaU so add to your innocencie as it shaU derogate from the Kings mercie, which (I speak as I would do before God) had a great cloud of jealousies and suspitions to break through before it came to shine upon you : this (I take it) is the effect of my Lord's exhortation, and I know it hath ever been your Lordship's resolution. How far you could be questioned in the Star-Chamber, is an unseasonable time to resolve. The King hath waved off aU judgment, and left nothing for your meditation but love and favour, and the increasing of both these. Yet I know (upon my late occasions to peruse Presidents [precedents] in that Court) that smaU offences have been in that Court (in former times) deeply censured. In the skteenth of Edward the second (for the Court is of great antiquity) Henry Lord Beaumont, running a way of his own about the invading of Scotland and dissenting from the rest of the King's Councel, because of his absenting himself from the Councel Table was fined and imprisoned: though otherwise a most worthy and deserving noble man. But God be thanked your Lordship hath no cause to trouble your head about these meditations. For (if I have any judgment) you are in a way to demean yourself, as you may expect rather more new additions then suspect the least diminution of from his gracious Majestie. For mine own part, assure yourself, I am your true and faithful servant, and shah never cease so to continue, as long as you make good your professions to his Noble Lord, of whose extraordinary goodnesse your Lordship and myseU are remarkable reflections, the one of his sweet- nesse in forgetting of wrongs, and the other of his forwardnesse in conferring of courtesies. With my best respect to your Lordship and my Noble Lady, and my Commendations to Sir WiUiam Parkhurst, I recommend your Lordship, &C.1 The Lord Keeper to the Duke concerning the Earl of South ampton, 2 August, 1 62 1. My most noble Lord, I humbly crave your pardon for often troubUng your Honour with my idle Lines, and beseech you to remember that amongst my many miseries my sudden greatnesse comes accompanied with, this is not 1 Cabala, p. 59. xxv] WORK IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 413 the least, that I can no otherwaies enjoy the happinesse of your presence. God is my witnesse, the Lord Keeper hath often (not without grief of heart) envied the fortunes of a poor Scholar, one Dr Williams, late Dean of West minster, who was so much blessed in the free accesses in that kind, as his Lordship (without a great quantity of goodnesse in yourself) may scarce hope for. This indosed wiU let your Lordship understand that somewhat is to be finished in that exceUent piece of mercy, which his Majestie (your hand guiding the PencU) is about to expresse in the E. of Southampton. It is fuU time his Attendant were revoked, in my poor opinion, and himself left to the custody of his own good Angd. There is no readier way to stop the mouthes of idle men, nor to draw thek eyes from this remainder of an object of Justice, to behold nothing but goodnesse and mercy. And the more breathing time you shaU carve out beween this total enlargement and the next accesse of the ParUament, the better it wiU be for his Majestie's service. Onely remem ber this, that now you are left to be your own Remembrancer. Of aU actions forget not those of mercy and Goodnesse, wherdn men draw nighest to God himself. Nor of aU Persons, prisoners, and afflicted Josephs. Celerity doth redouble an act of mercy. But why do I turn a Preacher of goodnesse unto him, who (in my own particular) hath shewed himself to be composed of nothkg dse? Remember your Noble Self, and forget the aggravations of maUce and envy, and then forget, if you can, the Earl of Southampton. God blesse you, and your royal Guest, and bring you both, after many years yet most happUy run over here upon earth, to be his blessed guests in the King dom of Heaven1. It was on the ist of September, 1621, that the Privy Council recorded that the Earl of Southampton had been restrained until further order, and that As by his Majesties gratious letter of the 30th August last unto Mr Secretarie Calvert his RoyaU Pleasure was signified to discharge the said Sk WUUam Parkhurst from that attendance, and to set the Earl of Southampton at his fuU Ubertie, &c.2 By October 9th it was reported that "the Earl of Southampton, the Lord Coke, Sir Edwin Sands and Mr Noy shall go into Ireland, and by commission examine the matters objected against the Deputy there."3 From Titchfield, on 31st October, Southampton wrote to the Lord Keeper, saying that, having heard nothing of his pension, he knew not what to do. Apparently he had come up to town, 1 Add. MS. 34,727, ff. 40-42. 2 Privy Council Register, v. 127. 3 Walter Yonge's Diary. 414 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. intending to sit in Parliament as usual1. But he had more than a hint that it was advisable he should not do so Chamberlain says: Being rather wished and advised so to do than enjoyned and com manded.... The King not Uke to be here during the Session. The Lord Keeper wrote to the Marquis of Buckingham on 13th November that the Earl of Southampton is ready to follow his Majesty's directions, and wishes a dispensation from his attendance at Parliament2. Sir Simon d'Ewes tells more of the story of Southampton's im prisonment and waxes merry over jokes upon Bacon being made Lord St Alban's, saying he had been called "Penny Lawe," now "All Bones," and his anagram was "Nabal."3 The Venetian ambassador wrote on November 26th, 1621, that the King, besides honouring the Earl of Oxford, will also try to conciliate Southampton and others in various ways4. On December ioth he wrote: ParUament met on 20th November. Now, they think they must arm, but, the King's coffers being empty, they need help for the Palatinate.... The reply has been delayed... chiefly from dissatisfaction that the Earl of South ampton and some others abstained from appearing from fear that they could not express thek opinions safely, according to the Uberty they claim. This has aroused a noisy discussion in the Lower Chamber with the Secretary of State about the prerogatives of the Crown.... Many others advise the King to act in concert with the States. Even in these uncertain times, writers dedicated their works to the Earl, sure of interest. The Passions of the Minde (corrected and enlarged) by Thomas Wright in 1621 was dedicated "To the Right Honourable his very good Lord Henry Earl of South ampton, Governor." Many years agone (Right Honorable) the author of this exceUent work being requested to write a discourse on the Passions of the Mind which he did, but his work suffered Shipwrecke, and he thought of it as rotting at the bottom of the Sea, a favourable power brought it ashore, where being found, it was taken up, entertained and dispersed abroad, which when the author beheld in over-joyed amazement, he corrected and amended it and added to a second edition as much more 1 Fortescue MS. 11. 380. 2 Ibid. 384. 3 Life, pp. 159, 199. * ibid. 174. xxv] WORK IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 415 as the first, all which he most humbly dedicated to the protection of your Honour, both in respect of a conaturaU sympathy betwixt it and your vertues; as also in that UteraU labours of this nature are usually offered to such persons with whom they particularly consort, and how coulde any passions find out a person more proportionate than your noble sdfe. They concern gentlemen and noblemen, soldiers, magis trates... in aU these you have and doe runne such faire courses, that the best in your ranke may be glad to borrow your Imitation, nor ever was Parmenio more matchless for trust and fidelitie about his Alexander than you (at this present) about our dread Soveraigne They come anew to kiss your hand as in former editions1. 1 The first edition appeared in 1601. If there had been a Dedication intended, it was probably suppressed because of Southampton's trouble. The Preface to the Reader calls it "a sort of Moral Philosophy." He wonders why southern nations think the northern nations so simple and easily deceived — "There have been great Scholars, both among the English and the Scotch." To the 1604 edition, dedicated to the Earl of South ampton, Ben Jonson contributes a sonnet. /Wfi Signature to a letter dated "Holborne this 24th of June 1620" and addressed "to my verie lovinge frendes the Provost and Seniors of Kinges College in Cambridge," requesting them to grant three years and three days' leave of absence to Mr [Robert] Peyton, a fellow of their House, who is taking his departure for Venice "uppon some affayres w°» the Lord Embassador hath apoynted him." 'Photographed by the kind permission of the Provost and Fellows of King's College.) CHAPTER XXVI "VIRGINIA BRITANNICA" Difficult of access, the Bermudas, on which Sir George Somers was "fatally" driven by the dramatic storm of William Strachey's prose poem, were protected by their very inaccessibility. No Indians lurked there to murder or to steal, or to divert the supply of food from earth and air and sea. The three men left by Matthew Somers had lived there, and lived well. The islands had never been claimed by Spain. So it is not surprising that schemes for colonizing them, and uniting them to Virginia, should very soon take shape. As early as 12th February, 161 1-12, Chamberlain wrote to Carleton: There is a Lottery in hand for furthering the Virginia voyage, and an under-company erecting for the trade of the Bermudas, which have changed thdr names twice withm this month, being first christened " Virginiola," as a member of that plantation, but now lately resolved to be caUed " Summer's Islands," as weU in respect of the continual temperate air, as in remembrance of Sir George Summers who died there. On the 7 th of March of that year, 161 1-12, there was granted a third patent : A grant unto the adventurers and planters of the first colony m Virginia of enlargement as weU of Territory, in respect of better safety of the said colony, as of Uberties for their better order of government. And also a dis- chardge and freedom of subsidy, customs and imposts inwards and outwards for seven years and the benefit of lotteries... ratified by an Act of the Company and Privy Council1. This grant confirmed Salisbury, Southampton, and the others in all their previous rights. It added new powers and privileges of determining their own actions, by giving up the communal pro prietorship which had proved so disastrous, and substituting private property as the result of personal effort which led the way to com mercial enterprise and prosperity. Robert, Earl of Salisbury died just then, and Southampton was 1 Col. Entry Book, lxxix. 131, 194. Cecil Papers, xu. ch.xxvi] "VIRGINIA BRITANNICA" 417 left senior in the Council of Virginia. A letter was written from that Council to Sir Ralph Winwood, ambassador to the Low Countries, to invite the Englishmen resident there to join their Company. This was signed by Southampton, Montgomery, Thomas Howard, R. Lisle, Thomas Smith, Walter Cope, Edwin Sandys, and Robert Mansell, and dated 22nd June1. William Strachey came home to London in 161 1 and there published a little quarto of The Lawes for the colony in Virginia Britannica through the press of Walter Burre, 161 2. He opens with a sonnet "To the Right Honorable the Lords ofthe Councell of Virginia," calling them the "noblest of men" (so that Southampton shares a little in his flattery); another "to his singular good Lord, the Lord de la Warre of the heroyicke and religious Plantation in 'Virginia Britannica' the sole personall advancer, his Majesties Lord Governor, and Captain General"; another to Sir Thomas Smith; and a prose address to the committees and assistants of the Council of Virginia. In association with this work I made a very interesting little discovery2. The copy at the British Museum, from which the following is quoted, was presented by William Strachey himself to his friend William Crashaw, and on the leaf facing the title page is written in Strachey's hand: To the Reverend and right worthy the title of a Devine, who in so sacred an expedition as is the reduction of Heathen to the Knowledge of the ever- living true God, stands up the only unsatisfyed and firme Friend of aU that possess and sit in so holy a Place, Mr Crashaw, minister in the Middle Temple, William Strachey sometyme a personaU Servant and now a Beadsman for that Christian Colonie settUng in Virginea Brittanica, wisheth fuU accompUshment of aU goodnes, and that Plantation aU happines, and reaU, (and if it may be RoyaU) Freinds. One fact this does make clear is that Southampton was not only drawn to William Crashaw because he was of St John's College, Cambridge, not only because he was the owner of a super abundance of books (which were later "translated" to St John's), but because he was interested in the Plantation of Virginia, which lay so near to Southampton's heart. On 25th July, 1 61 2, Southampton was among those who sent 1 Buccleuch MS. I. 103. 2 British Museum, c. 33; c. 30. s.s. 27 418 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. forth the Discovery in search of the North-West Passage, on behalf of the East India Company. Though baffled oft, they tried again and again1. General interest in the Somers' Islands did not flag. Sir John Digby, our ambassador at Madrid, in September, 1613, warned Sir Ralph Winwood: Spain has lately resolved here, that since our Plantation in Virginia is Ukely to die of itself, to rescue from us the islands of Bermudas, so that, I fear, if fitting preparations be not speedily made, we shaU hear that aU the EngUsh there have their throats cut2. The risk made all those who were concerned bestir themselves. The Colonial State Papers record on 12th May, 1614, the action of Lord Southampton in countenancing measures likely to help Virginia and the Somers' Islands3. The Bermudas Company had taken shape, sent out many expeditions, and left many colonists. They did not seem to suffer so much from "laziness "as the Virginians suffered; but there were many dissensions, much mismanagement, and small returns. Great prudence and special experience, as well as public spirit and up rightness, were needed to face the new conditions. A very fair account of their history is given (in a separate chapter) in Captain John Smith's General History of Virginia. The only Index of the Journal of the House of Commons in the British Museum misses the reigns of Elizabeth and James. It being impossible to go through my task completely without one, I had to content myself with reading through the Journal of the important year 16 14. There are a few headlines of an amusing incident, which it requires imagination to complete. It is not clear whether it was the Virginia Company or the Colony of Virginia which had sent a petition to Parliament for "help" in some way. The management of the presentation of the petition seems to have been committed to the Lords Southampton and Sheffield. The Journal for 17th May, 12 James, runs thus: 1 It was ordered, my Lord of Southampton and my Lord of Sheffield shaU come in to hear the treaty of the Virginia business : that the Lords shaU, for 1 Calendar Colonial Papers, East Indies, bk 11. 616. 2 Winwood, Mem. m. 450. 3 C.S.S.P. West Indies, 1. 33. xxvi] "VIRGINIA BRITANNICA" 419 a time, sit here, and shaU shortly after at Mr Speaker's discretion, be spoken to.... Ordered, there shaU be great Silence in the House at the Lords being here. Mr Martyn, of CounseU with the Company, cometh in before the Lords. The Bar, first down, taken up, at the Lords coming in. The Lords stood bare untU after Mr Martyn had begun. Mr Speaker spake to him to stay; and then in the name of the House, spake to them, signifying to them the Pleasure of the House, that they should sit down and be covered. The speech glorified Elizabeth as the Lady of the Seas, and referred to "the discovery by her subjects of all the seas about the world." Raleigh was remembered, his glory and his fall. The plantation began in 1606. Virginia's bridle for the NeapoUtan Courser, if the youth of England are able to sit him for which they wiU give them golden spurs. It mentioned Sir Thomas Gates and Lord De la Warre. Now a settled plantation, our usage of the Indies merciful and respec tive, objections. What they want is a few honest labourers, burthened with children. The speech seems to have raised great discussion. One member said: The speech of Mr Martyn was the most unfitting ever spoken in the House, and suggested he should be caUed to the Bar. He had committed a very heavy offence to dear the Lords. Great discussion. He had spoken as a school master to teach us. He was to come to the Bar tomorrow and kned there for pardon. The next day, the 18th of May, apparently Mr Martyn did come, offered to kneel, and was excused; and the treaty of Virginia was discussed. Petition of Virginia, order for Counsel, those that be there for Counsel appeared, with divers Lords. That at first prepared to hear him with aU respect and Love. The remembrances of the Plantation weU accepted, and looked upon with the eyes of our Love. That after unfortunately dispersed. It has not proved possible to trace what their "love" impelled them to do for Virginia or the Lords. However, on 29th June, 1615, a Charter was secured for the Bermudas. Grant to Henry Earl of Southampton, Lucy Countess of Bedford, WiUiam Earl of Pembroke, WiUiam Lord Paget, WiUiam Lord Cavendish, Sir Ralph 27 — 2 420 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Winwood, Sir Robert Rich, Sir Thomas Smith and others, for the Somer's Islands, with fuU power to make Lawes according to the Lawes of England, and govern thereby1. The next step was to parcel out the land in the Islands, and give each parcel to a group of men called "The Tribes," after the names of various members of the Company. Captain John Smith slightly varies the names, giving in all only eight, in order of their lands : ist Tribe Marquis Hambleton, 2nd Sir Thomas Smith, 3rd Lord Caven dish, now Lord Devonshire, 4th Lord Paget, 5th Earl Pembroke, 6th Lord Mansfield, now caUed The Warwick Tribe, 7th Earl of Southampton, now caUed Southampton Tribe, 8th Sir Edwin Sands, between which and South ampton Tribe there lyeth the portion of Surplusage Land.... The Eastward of the Island is made general Land, on which standeth the Town of St George, the fortifications against the Kings Castle and the flanker Rocks. On these is Southampton Fort where are mounted 5 pieces of ordnance, between which and the Castle passeth in the Channel which leadeth into the Harbour.... On the north side of St George's Island is erected upon a rock the smaU fort of St Katharines, in guard of a certaine sandy bay; being the same thereon the first that ever landed in these parts set their feet *. The Charts still mark Sea Venture Flats, but this is the first identification of them. In reading the various accounts, the most romantic passages are found to concern Pocahontas, the favourite daughter of the great Powhatan, who saved the life of Captain John Smith (and of his followers) when entrapped by her father and about to be slain. She constantly aided the colonists in every way open to her. So it seems to us a rather unworthy ruse of Captain Argall, in return for her trust and generosity, to inveigle her on board his boat and make her prisoner. Of course, he kept her in due respect and honour, and she was not in the least afraid. It proved, however, of great advantage to the settlers, as Powhatan, for her sake, released all the English prisoners he held, provided the colony with great stores of food, and made a treaty meant to be permanent. Not long afterwards the news spread that Mr John Rolfe, an estimable young man of good birth, had been so struck with admi ration for her that he paid his addresses in such good earnest that 1 Col. Entry Book, Patents, vol. ix. 1615. 2 Captain John Smith's Bermuda, pp. 106, 107. xxvi] "VIRGINIA BRITANNICA" 421 she accepted them, married him, and finally came over with him to England. Sir Thomas Dale's letter to Winwood of 3rd June, 1616, states that having set Virginia in order, he comes home, bringing ten or 12 from that country. This Princess was the chief of the party, and with her came maiden attendants, and her uncle guardian. On the 22nd of June Chamber lain wrote about "that most remarkable person, Pocahontas, married to one Rolfe, an Englishman." Captain John Smith was unable to reach London in time to meet her on her arrival, and she was much hurt about what she thought to be his neglect; but he wrote letters to the Queen on her behalf, and in time made it up with the young lady. There is no doubt that Southampton, from his position in the Company and his friendly relations with Sir Thomas Dale, was among those who received her, and that he and his wife led the nobles who made life pleasant for her at Court. Ere long the daughter of the New World became at home in the Old. Brown gives a portrait of her in fashionable garments1. James recognised her as the daughter of a King, and there were good seats kept for her and her uncle at his masques and plays. The Bishop of London paid more attention to her than to any of the Court ladies, preparing for her great feasts in his own house. He was anxious that her mind should be made clear in regard to religious matters, and she presented to him an interesting and new field of psychological study. Ere long she was baptized under the name of the Lady Rebecca, and it became the fashion to receive her every where. Though she had an allowance made to her, her husband could not afford to keep her at Court; interest had been made for him, and he was appointed Secretary for Virginia. So in the following year she had to start with him on his return to duty. She was very unwilling to go. She had discovered her new world for herself, where she had seen only the glittering surface of things, and she did not want to leave it. She had only reached Gravesend on her journey when she died. No information has come to us of the nature of her disease. It may only have been some commonplace illness, but on the other hand it may have been that the swelling 1 Brown, Genesis of the United States, a 422 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. i emotions of her great heart proved too rifuch for her system, and that she died from what has been called a broken heart. There is no doubt that she could not look forward with equanimity to going back to the petty routine of colonial life, and she could only regard with horror the alternative of returning to share the barbarous customs of her still savage father. Professing her full faith in Christ Jesus as her only Saviour from her sins, she passed away alone over the greater ocean to a better country. She was buried in Gravesend > Parish Church on the 2ist March, 1616-7, "leaving behind her a precious memory." Her little son was left in England in the care of Mr Rolfe's brother, to be brought up as an Englishman. It would have been well for the colony had she lived a little longer1. It is interesting to read even the lists of the shareholders in the Company, fluctuating as they are at times. They teach us something. For instance, in 161 6: £25 was credited to John Tredescant (the famous collector of Plants, etc.). On December 17th, 161 7, Sir Fulke Greville was admitted; on June ioth, 1618, Sir Richard Tufton; on the 17th of that month Sir Henry Raynesford (the husband of Drayton's Idea). On May 28th, 161 9, the Earl of Salisbury passed his shares to Mr Brett; on June 26th, 1620, the Earl of South ampton passed five of his personal shares to MrThomas Wriothesley (a distant relative, apparently acting as his secretary), two to Mr Porter [Endymion?], and one to Mr Philip Gifford; on April 30th, 1 621, Francis Carter passed five personal shares to Sir Henry Raynesford; on May 2nd, Sir Edwin Sandys had given Sir Henry Raynesford twenty shares; on July 3rd, 1622, Sir Edward Conway was admitted; on April 2nd, 1623, Sir Walter Raleigh's son2. After the return home of Sir Thomas Dale in 161 6, leaving everything in a promising condition, Captain Argall succeeded him as interim Governor and gained the benefit of the colony's pros perity. Unfortunately he had a very different disposition; lax and autocratic by turns, he was always uncertain, except in self-seeking. Southampton was at that time the leader in the Upper House of what was called "the Country Party," as opposed to "the Court 1 D.S.S.P. James, lxvii. 17..., xc. 2 Colonial Entry Book, v. 33, P.R.O.; also C.S.S.P. I. p. 19. xxvi] "VIRGINIA BRITANNICA" 423 Party," as Sir Edwin Sandys was in the Lower House, both trying to preserve the privileges ofthe subject from the encroachments of the royal prerogative. The fortunes of both were affected by what passed in the Company meetings, of which very bald extracts are preserved in the certified copy of the Court-books of their special period1. It begins abruptly: Court held for Virginia at Sir Thomas Smith's House at Philpot Lane, 28th April, 1619. Present, Rt Hon. Earls of Southampton, Warwick, Cavendish, Lord Paget, General Cecil, Sir Thomas Smith, Sir Edwin Sandys. Sir Thomas Smith said that he had given his labour willingly to the Company for 1 2 years, but now, being appointed by the King's Commissioners of the Royal Navy, he could not give as good attendance as he desired, and he asked them to elect another. He asked two favours: that they would give a good report of him, and that they would audit his books and grant him his quietus est without delay. They nominated Sandys, Wolstenholme, and Alderman Johnson; the first had a large majority. Johnson was again nominated as Deputy, but John Ferrar was chosen. Sir Edwin proposed thanks to Sir Thomas Smith, with a grant of twenty great shares. Court, May 12th, 161 9, at Mr Ferrar's in St Swithin's Lane. Present, the Earls of Southampton and Warwick, Sir Ed. Sandys, John Ferrar. Mr Treasurer, Sir Edwin Sandys, proposed to form a Committee for constituting the laws and government of Virginia. Sir Thomas Smith had said there was a balance of £4000 in cash, but there was only ,£1000 in cash, the rest in tied stock; out of that there were to pay debts of £3700, old debts of £1 148 and £700. Sir Thomas very importunate to have his quietus, and he asked special extra auditors. Captain Brewster appealed against the action of Sir Samuel Argall. Court, May 26th, 161 9, at Sir Edwin Sandys'. Mr Brewster complains against Argall as Governor. The King has allowed a general Church collection for Virginia. Though 1 1 auditors had been employed, they could not make Sir Thomas Smith's books harmonise. June 7th. Brewster brought a case against Captain Argall. 1 Miss Kingsbury's Records of fhe Virginia Company of London, vol. I. 424 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. June 14th. The Lawes of Virginia revised1. Oct. 20th. The King wants to send some dissolute persons to Virginia2. Court, November 3rd, 1619. Present, Earl of Warwick, General Cecil, Sir. Edwin Sandys. A desire expressed to enlarge the popula tion, to send out young maids to be wives for the men, and cattle necessary for the welfare of the colony. Sandys reported that, the Council sitting that morning at Southampton House, there were some motions made against planting tobacco here, which would hinder the Colony. Other staples should be fostered — silk, corn, vines, etc. He added : and although the Company is aUready exceedingly beholding to my Lord of Southampton for his many noble favours and noble countenancing them in aU their business, especially such as is of the greatest importance, yet notwithstanding the Court are most humble Suitors unto his Lord ship that he would please also in these businesses of so great importance, and which have been the only cause of distraccion and discention in the Company, to vouchsafe his presence at that meeting of the CounseU, that by his Lordships and their authority those differences might be con cluded, the Company satisfied in their right, and aU occasion of con tinuing jealousies and displeasures be removed; which resolution moved, was unanimously confirmed. Notice is given of a special meeting to be held at Sir Edwin Sandys' house to choose a coat of arms for Virginia and a legal seal. Court Preparative, November 15th, 1619, at Mr Ferrar's house. Present, Lords Southampton, Cavendish, and Paget. Mr Treasurer announced that he had already paid .£2000 of the debt left him by Sir Thomas Smith. Certain propositions believed to be beneficial and advantageous to the Colony, which had been proposed to the Council meeting at Southampton House, had been read last meeting, and they might now be discussed preparatory to the full debate at Quarter Court. For the order of the Magazine account, my Lord of Southampton was humbly desired to lend his presence for the concluding of it. A great and general Quarter Court for Virginia November 1 7th. 1 This year the first General Assembly of the Colonists was held in Virginia to confirm these laws. 2 Many shiploads of prisoners were sent over about that time by royal permission. xxvi] "VIRGINIA BRITANNICA" 425 Present, Lords Southampton, Warwick, Cavendish, Sheffield, Paget, Sir Edwin Sandys, 159 members1. List of Counsellors of Virginia read, 100 in all. The Treasurer read the report. Since the time of Sir Thomas Dale the provisions have been laid waste, the setders need new supplies and an increase of new settlers; they need land to be apportioned for corn-growing and for cattle. They felt all this would require £5000, but he would not leave the com pany in debt. He suggested that the Bermudas Company should join them. December ist, 161 9. There was a dispute about the right of fishing with the Northern Colony. Settled, that the Council of both colonies should examine the letters patent at my Lord of Southampton's to-morrow afternoon to determine the difference. They were beholden to the Lord Bishop of London for having sent in a collection of fully ^1000. Court, January 1 2th. Mr Treasurer said that, for the expediting of Sir Thomas Smith's account, they had promised Lord South ampton to send for a list of Adventurers by Alphabet, but they could not, because Mr Markham still held the Alphabet Book. Court Extraordinary, held at Sir Edwin Sandys' house, 3rd April, 1620. 8th April, another at Sir Edwin Sandys', to note that Mr Nicholas Ferrar the elder, being translated from this life into a better, had left £300 towards the converting of Infidels' children in Virginia. Quarter Court, 17th May,- 1620, held at Mr Ferrar's house. Present, Lords Southampton, Warwick, Devonshire, Doncaster, both forenoon and afternoon. Indentures signed by Sir Thomas Smith, willing to part with his shares for money. They altered the name ofthe land to Southampton Hundred.... They proceeded to election. They had intended to re-elect Sir Edwin Sandys, but the King had sent a message (not entered in the Court Book). (Brown2 says that the King had nominated either Sir Thomas Smith, Sir Thomas Roe, Mr Alderman Johnston, or Mr Maurice Abbot, and no other. The Earls of Southampton and Pembroke said that that was a move against the Company's freedom.) Sandys withdrew. 1 p. 285, Miss Kingsbury's Records. 1 Brown's English Politics in early Colonies. (Gossip added the King's remark, "He would as soon have the devil as Edwin Sandys.") 426 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. They said that the King had been misinformed, and they humbly asked the nobles and some others to meet at Southampton House on 29th May to determine of a humble answer to the King, showing him a true information of the latter year's business and of this, also of their privilege. They decided to postpone the election to the next Quarter Court. Sir Edwin Sandys resumed his seat, but refused to receive the seals. Court, 26th June. Present, Lords Southampton and Sheffield. Southampton had sent 10 men with Lord De la Warre, and was now allowed 50 acres apiece for them which he surrendered at once, 4 of them to Mr Thomas Wriothesley, 2 to Mr Porter, 2 to Mr Gilford, and 2 to William Smith1, who was admitted to be of the Company. Court, 28th June, 1620. Great general Quarterly Court at Mr Ferrar's house. Present, Lords Southampton, Dorset, War wick, Devonshire, Cavendish, Sheffield, Paget. The Charter was read. The Earl of Southampton said that he and the other Lords had presented their humble desires to his Majesty for a free election, and he had graciously agreed, saying there had been a mistake by the messenger; he had not meant to will them to choose one of the four men he had noted, and no other; he only recommended them to the Court. The Court desired to return thanks to the King. Mr Herbert said that through some dissensions in the Company, seeing they could not have their late Treasurer again, they should choose one able to resort personally to the King, one of the nobles. They should nominate the Earl of Southampton. Mr Herbert's motion being exceedingly approved, the whole Court with much joy and applause nominated the Earle of Southampton; with much earnestness beseeching his Lordship that for the redeeming of this noble plantation and Company from the ruines that seemed to hang over it hee would vouchsafe to accept of the place of Treasurer; which it pleased him, after some private pause, in fine to doe, in very noble manner out of the worthie love and affecion that he bare to the plantation; and the Court in testimonial of their bounden thankfulness, and of the great honour and respect they ought him, did resolve to surcease the baUoting box, and without 1 Was this the William Smith who helped the Burbages in their suit against Giles Alleyn about the Theatre ? (My Burbage, and Shakespeare's Stage, p. 70.) xxvi] "VIRGINIA BRITANNICA" 427 nomination of any other by ereccion of hands, his Lordship was chosen Treasurer and took the oath. Which done, his Lordship desyred the Com pany that they would aU putt on the same mynd with which he had accepted the place. Then very heavy business followed in an attempt to cure the late distractions of the Company by partialities and factions. The chief seemed to be the difficulty of following Sir Thomas Smith's accounts and Captain Argall's business. Many Committees were fbrmed to deal with special questions. On this follow what seems to be the heads of a long speech by the Earl as to their needs and duties. Court, 1 2th July, 1620, afternoon. Present, Southampton, Cavendish, Sheffield, Lord Haughton. Sir Edwin Sandys gave notice that Lord Southampton was upon some special occasion with the Lords ofthe Council, but would be present here at 3 o'clock; so they did their lighter business till he arrived. Court, 4th November, 1 620. Present, Lords Southampton and Cavendish, Sir Edwin Sandys. My Lord of Southampton signified that for many important occasions his own leisure served him not until now to keep Court; he was sure that the Committees had done their duty, chiefly about shipping out young colonists. Southampton was specially anxious to secure good government, and discouraged excessive planting of tobacco. Preparative Court, 13th November. Present, Southampton, Cavendish, Paget. Sir Thomas Smith's receipts a most intricate and difficult piece of work. His own books disagreed with each other, and some were lost. Southampton encouraged the auditors to pro ceed even yet. Quarter Court, 15th November. Present, Lords Southampton, Cavendish, and Paget. A stranger stepped in and presented Sir Walter Raleigh's History of Guiana, with a map, and four great books for the College. Southampton thanked him. He spoke about the silkworms. Other things prospered. 13th December, 1620, afternoon. Southampton could not be present, but had all the morning been busy with their affairs, as should be declared later. General Quarter Court, 31st January, 1620- 1. Present, Southampton, Dorset, Devonshire, Paget. My Lord Southampton 428 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. signified that he had that morning been with my Lord of Don- caster to know what the King thought of their letter, which he had presented. The King had said there was nothing in the letter that could not with reason be granted. Sir Edwin Sandys signified that the Earl of Southampton, being one of the greatest and most andent adventurers, having now a desire with the helpe and assistance of some of his friends to undertake and advance a particular Plantation in Virginia to the number of 300 shares, moved that a Patent might be granted his Lordship, and order taken for some preparation in the meantime, for the better encouragement of the Adventurers and setting forward of so noble a designe, which might draw on others with Uke resolution to advance more particular plantations in Virginia. Court, 1 2th April, 1621. Present, the Earls of Huntingdon and Southampton. Discussion of patents, and of a treatise laid before them on "Defence, Plenty, Health, Trade and Manners." South ampton proposed that Mr George Sandys might be sent out as Governor. Sir Edwin proposed that the Governor of Virginia should be held responsible to this Court, liable to be questioned and fined, if he neglected his duty. Mr Smith also moved that the memory of great men who had helped Virginia should be remembered, and some living men also, as Sir Thomas Gates, to make a History of the Colony. Applause. Great and general Quarter Court, 2nd May, 1621. Present, Southampton, Cavendish, Paget. Southampton delayed by the Lords' business in Parliament. Both he and Sandys excused. They went on with what they could, and they re-elected Southampton Treasurer. When he did arrive, he delivered his books to the Court. Preparative Court, 1 ith June, 1621. Sir Edwin Sandys brought an excuse from Southampton for absence, being held by extra ordinary business, but he had had on Saturday a long conference with the Lords ofthe Council, who met at his house to discuss for many hours the affairs of Virginia. Great general Quarter Court, 13th June, 1621. Present, Earls of Huntingdon, Southampton, Warwick, Cavendish, Lord Paget. They had to remember that the Plantation had been prosecuted by the Adventurers at a cost of £100,000 out of their own pockets. , Court, 24th July. Mr Deputy said he had presented to Lord Southampton 4 Rolls of Parliament, wherein divers had testified xxvi] "VIRGINIA BRITANNICA" 429 their zeal and constant resolution to advance the Plantation, notwithstanding the many discouragements they had received, and 5 Rolls for sending out skilled workmen and material; and his Lordship was so pleased to subscribe for his own part £200 for so good a cause. Court, 30th January, 1 621-2. Sir Edwin Sandys discusses Southampton Hundred and Southampton Plantation. A stranger again stepped in and presented more books for the College. Sir Edwin Sandys reported that Sir Thomas Smith's books were at such variance with each other they could not be reconciled. (Several Courts being held without their Treasurer, we are obliged to look back to the Journals of the House of Lords, to follow Southampton's action in Parliament, his imprisonment, and finally his confinement in his own house at Titchfield, preventing his action in Court and Council.) Court Preparative, 20th May, 1 622. Present, Lord Cavendish, Sir Edwin Sandys. Mr Deputy reminded them of the election of officers due next meeting. He was generally answered by the Company that they hoped they should humbly entreat the Lord of Southampton once more to vouchsafe to hold the place of Treasurer this third year, under whom God had so much blessed the business to their general joy and comfort. General Quarter Court, 22nd May, 1622. Present, Sir E. Sandys. Report made of the state of Southampton's books approved by the auditors, also of the great sums of money spent in the pay ment of old debts of Sir T. Smith. Great and general Quarter Court on the same day, afternoon. Present, Lords Cavendish, Paget, Haughton. Mr Alderman Hamersley and Mr Bell said they had been sent by the King to say that it would be pleasing to him if one ofthe gentlemen he named should be elected Treasurer and Deputy, ten names being sent this , time, though the King did not wish to infringe their rights. It was proposed that two of them should be nominated with Lord Southampton. In the ballot Southampton had 117, Mr Cletheroe 13, and Mr Hamford 7. Mr Nicholas Ferrar for Deputy had 103 votes, as against 10 and 5. Sir Edwin Sandys was appointed Auditor. The Company asked the Lords to present their humble thanks to the King for his gracious message, but they had previ- 430 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. ously nominated Lord Southampton at the Preparative Court... having found the Plantation to prosper every of these last years, more than in ten before, and found more to have been done with ten thousand pounds than formerly with fourscore thousand. General Court, 5th June, 1 622. Present, Southampton, Caven dish, Sandys. Southampton said he was willing to undertake the duty and do his best, if they would excuse his absence on the King's business or his own. They agreed, thanking him for his noble favour and affection to the Plantation, which it had pleased God to prosper. Lord Cavendish told the Company of his conference with the King. His Majesty seemed not well satisfied that out of so many by him recommended they had not made any choice, his Majesty conceiving that merchants were fittest for the governance of that Plantation — Sir Thomas Smith set up many staple com modities. But he had assured the King that he had been mis informed. Since Sir Thomas Smith's time the Colonies had grown into as many thousands as he had left hundreds. Most of the King's candidates acknowledged they knew nothing of the business. Another discussion about tobacco and the charges against Captain Argall. A letter from the King should be inserted here: His Majesties gradous letter to the Earle of South-hampton, Treasurer, and to the CounseU and Company of Vkginia here : commanding the present setting up of Silke workes, and planting of Vines in Virginia. Right trusty and wdlbeloved, We greete you weU: Whereas We understand that the Soyle in Virginia naturaUy yeeldeth store of exceUent Mulberry trees, We have taken into Our Princely consideration the great benefit that may grow to the Adventurers and Planters by the breede of Silkewormes and setting up of Silke workes in those parts. And therefore of Our gracious IncUnation to a designe of so much honour and advantage to the publike, We have thought good, as at sundry other times, so now more particularly to recommend it to your spedaU care, hereby charging and requiring you to take speedy order, that our people there use aU possible diligence in breeding silkewormes, and erecting silkeworkes, and that they rather bestow their traveU in compassing this rich and solid Commodity, then in that of Tobacco; which besides much unnecessary expence, brings with it many disorders and inconveniences. And for as much as Our servant, John BonneUs, hath taken paines in setting downe the true use of the Silkworme, together with the Art of SUkemaking, and of pkiiting Vines, and that his experience and abiUties may much conduce to the advancement. of this businesse; We xxvi] "VIRGINIA BRITANNICA" 431 doe hereby likewise require you to cause his directions, both for the said Silkeworkes and Vineyards, to be carefully put in practice thorowout our Plantations there, that so the worke may goe on cheerefuUy, and receive no more interruptions nor delayes. To Our right trusty and right wdbdoved Cousin and CounceUour, Henry, Earle of South-hampton, Treasurer of our Plantation in Virginia, and to Our trusty and welbdoved the Deputy and others over Our said Plantation1. The following was the consequence of the King's letter: The Treasurour, CounseU and Company of Vkginia, to the Governour and CounseU of State in Virginia residing. After our very harty commendations: His Sacred Majesty, out of his high wisedome and care of the noble Plantation of Virginia, hath beene graciously pleased to direct his Letters to us here in England, thereby commanding us to advance the setting up of silkworkes, and planting of Vineyards; as by the Copy herewith sent you may percdve. The ktimations of his Majesties pleasure we conceive to be a motive sufficient to induce you to imploy aU your indevors to the setting forward those two staple Commodities of Silke and Wine; which brought to their perfection, wiU infinitdy redound to the honour, benefit, and comfort of the Colony, and of this whole Kingdome : yet we, in discharge of our duties, doe againe renew our often and iterated Instructions, and invite you cheere fuUy to faU upon these two so rich and necessary Commodities. And if you shaU finde any person, dther through negUgence or wilfulnesse, to omit the planting of Vmes, and Mulberry trees, in orderly and husbandly manner, as by the Booke is prescribed, or the providing of convenient roomes for the breedkg of Wormes ; we desire they may by severe censures and punishment, be compeUed thereunto. And on the contrary, that aU favour and possible assistance be given to such as yielde wiUing obedience to his Highnesse Com mands therein. The breach or performance whereof, as we are bound to give a strict account, so wiU it also be required of you the Governour and CounseU especiaUy. Herdn there can be no Plea, either of difficulty or impossibiUty; but aU the contrary appeares, by the naturaU abundance of those two ex- ceUent Plants afore-named everywhere in Virginia : neither wiU such excuses be admitted, nor any other pretences serve, whereby the businesse be at all delayed. And as wee formerly sent at our great charge the French Vignerons to you, to teach you their Art; so for the same purpose we now commend this Booke unto you, to serve as an Instructour to every one, and send you store of them to be dispersed over the whole Colony, to every Master of a FamUy one. Silk-seede you shaU receive also by this ship, sufficient to store every man: so that there wants nothing but industry in the Planter sud- 1 Purchas, xix. 154. 432 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. denly to bring the making of Silke to its perfection: which either for their owne benefit (we hope) they wiU wiUingly indevour, or by a wholesome and necessary severity they must be inforced. This particular advice we thought necessary to give you, lest that if it should have come to you mingled with others, you would have interpreted it as a common Instruction, or a businesse that was not taken so to heart, as this [is] by us, and we hope wiU be by you in humble obedience to his Sacred Majesties RoyaU Instructions. The paines and industry of the Authour for the benefit of the Plantations (being a member of our Company) are sufficient arguments of his good affection to the Action, and they both deserve your best acceptance and ours, that others may thereby be invited to impart their knowledge in businesse of this and the Uke nature; whereby the Colony may not onely be supported for the present, but brought to that perfection, that may redound to the glory of God, the honour of his Majestie, and the inestimable benefit of his noble Kingdomes; which, as they are the true aime and end the Adventurers and Planters have proposed unto themselves, so ought they to be stiU the honorable seedes to put others also forward in this action. We commend this business again to your speciaU care. And so we commit you aU, and your waighty affaires to the protection of the Almighty. Henry Southampton 1. Prosperity at last seemed secured to the colonists, but they, lulled into a sense of security from treaties and custom, had forgotten the nature and thoughts of their still savage neighbours. The heroic Pocahontas was buried in England; her far-seeing father had passed away from his kingdom. New kings had taken lines of their own. They combined for a general massacre of all white men on March 22nd, 1622. This would have been entirely successful, but for a timely warning, by which thousands were able to save themselves. As it was, however, three hundred colonists in the outlying settle ments were caught unawares and murdered. When the news spread to England, the distress was universal, and we may conceive what the Treasurer of the Company felt for his beloved colony. It was not only a murder, but also a set-back. After that, Sir George Yeardley had to use men, who would have been useful as culti vators, for the purposes of protection, and of exacting retribution. Court at Mr Ferrar's house, nth December, 1622. Information had been laid before him since he had been in the country touching Mr Wrote, who had offered them a treatise. In the discussion of it Mr Wrote had used violent and injudicious words; now he 1 Purchas, xix. 155. xxvi] "VIRGINIA BRITANNICA" 433 charged the Court Records with falsehood in reporting them, and said that he was not fairly treated. Mr Wrote hereupon dashed out of Court saying that he had not come there to hear ill words of himself. It was held that Mr Wrote had committed contempt, and that he should be suspended from coming to Council. Court, Friday, 31st January, 1622-3. Present, Southampton, Cavendish, Danvers, Edwin Sandys. To complete the business which had been hindered by Mr Wrote, who now sent in new charges of ill-usages. He said that Mr Wither had said abroad that my Lord of Southampton, as a Privy Councillor, might commit him, and protested that under that fear he dared not speak freely. The Earl of Southampton answered that he need not fear any such thing from him, for whatever respects and additions he had, he left them all when he came to that place, and came there only as their Treasurer. The Court, being wearied with Wrote's interruptions, desired his Lordship to hold to the business they came for. Sir Edwin Sandys' speech was again interrupted by Mr Wrote. Lord Southampton said that, had Mr Wrote carried himself so in any other place than this, he would not have endured, it, and sharply willed him to behave himself in a better manner... it was no other than a kind of swaggering. Lord Cavendish objecting to what Mr Wrote said of him, Wrote replied that he had no intent directly or indirectly to "pestring " the actions of the Council, or of his Lordship, or of Lord Southampton, but only of what was done when they were out of town. Court, Monday, 3rd February, 1622-3, forenoon. Present, Southampton, Cavendish, Sandys. Prepared to go through the amendments to the records. Mr Wrote said that he had appealed to the King. Southampton said that notwithstanding they would go on with what they came for. Court Preparative, afternoon of the same day. Present, South ampton, Cavendish. Sir Henry Mildmay said that in conversation the King had said he had taken note ofthe differences, and willed that ' every one should have the right of free speech. Sir Edwin Sandys in his speech said that there had been some discussion about salaries ; there should be none against his — he surrendered it with goodwill. Great and general Quarter Court for Virginia and Somers Islands Company, Wednesday, 6th February, 1622-3. Present, 28 s.s. 434 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Southampton, Warwick, St John, Cavendish, De la Warre, Danvers, Sandys. Lord Southampton asked a report to be read alike of Mr Wrote's project, and of his behaviour. Both were utterly rejected by the Company. Southampton said the report of Mr Wrote's dissensions caused him to come up from the country to provide a remedy. Mr Wrote did not appear. Christopher Brooke1 suggested that a precedent is better than a precept; for Mr Wrote's contempt he should for ever be put out of the Council and suspended from attendance at the Court meetings until he acknowledged his error. He had been guilty of mutiny. Court for Virginia and S. I., afternoon, 5th March. 1622-3. Present, Cavendish, Sir Edwin Sandys, "Dr Dun."2 Mr Deputysaid that he had to say two things of great joy : the first was a most honour able testimony given by the Lord Treasurer ofthe good proceedings and carriage of the business of the Plantation these four years, so, as his Lordship said, they had thereby thriven and prospered beyond belief, almost miraculously. Lord Cavendish said it had been carried lewdly in other men's hands before. He then read a letter from the Colony to Southampton and the Council, supporting their action and enclosing a petition to the King. Court Extraordinary, 12th April, Virginia and S. I. Present, Cavendish, De la Warre. Lord Cavendish said that Alderman Johnson had made a complaint to the King of the last four years, comparing them with those before them, ist: before they were mild and moderate, now severe and oppressive and injurious both to adventurers and planters. 2nd: before things had been carried quietly, now there was nothing but contention. 3rd: that formerly many excellent commodities were shipped over, now nothing but smoke and tobacco. " A Declaration of the State of Virginia now comparative to former times" had been drawn up by order of Lord Southampton at Christmas last, and was now read, weighed, and confirmed. Another, which Lord Cavendish had drawn up, against the imputations cast on the Virginia and Somers Islands Company, was in the form of a petition to the King. Court Extraordinary, Virginia, 17th April, 1623. Present, Warwick, Cavendish, Edwin Sandys. Lord Cavendish said that both petition and declaration had been presented to the King, and 1 The poet. 2 Dr Donne. xxvi] "VIRGINIA BRITANNICA" 435 he asked all, on their allegiance, not to write to the colonies about any contentions at home. They hear there is to be a free importation of foreign tobacco. Court held for Virginia, afternoon, 23rd April, 1623. Present, Lords Dorset, Cavendish, De la Warre, Sandys. They discussed Alderman Johnson's petition against them and an Information by Captain Butler called "The unmasked face ofthe Colony of Vir ginia." They had to defend themselves. Court, 30th April. The Deputy said that divers ancient planters, masters of ships, and others had made answer for them to Captain Butler's Information. Court for Virginia and Somers Islands, 7th May, 1623. Present, Southampton, Dorset, Cavendish, Danvers, Paget, "Doctor Dun." They spoke of the trouble given them by Alderman Johnson and Captain Butler. Mr John Smith was present, and supported the Company. Sir Edward Sackville was to present their petition. Court, 24th May, 1623. The King had sent them a letter ¦foreseeing the pernicious consequences of sundry disorders and abuses which have crept in of late into the Court, commanding no unqualified members to be present at such Courts, and that no com plaints be brought against any man in the name of the Council. If any man have any complaints, to bring them in writing, signed with his name, to the King. They agreed to keep no more Courts until they understood the King's will. Court, 23rd June, 1623, Present, Cavendish, Sackville. Mr Sack ville moved that Lord Southampton might have his quietus est for three years' accounts, which had been found correct. They had had calamities that year among the people. Quarter Court, 25th June, 1623. Present, Cavendish, De la Warre. (Southampton, Sandys, and the Deputy absent; John Ferrar alone of the party present.) The King's letter read that they in tended an election, but he commanded them to forbear for a fort night, and let those that were in office continue till a new choice should be made. They decided that the present officers should hold office until next Quarter Court, as the King's Charter only gave them power to elect in Quarter Courts. Sir Francis Wyat, Governor of the Colony, had written that he had lost heavily, and desired to te released. 28 — 2 436 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Court, ist July. Present, Sackville, Danvers, Nicholas Ferrar. The Deputy said the Lords of the Council had written to him to say that he must come to confer with them; they had had letters from the Colony that his Majesty's subjects were starving. He had gone. Now the Company drafted their answers. Court, Wednesday, 15th October, 1623. Present, John Dan vers, Nicholas Ferrar. The Deputy reported that he had been sent for to the Privy Council, questioned, and given orders. He had asked the Lords to draw these up on paper, which they had done, and he read it. The King, considering the distressed state of the Colony, caused, as it seemed, by miscarriage in the government of the Company, would take it over to himself. The Company could send him three names, of which he would elect one as Treasurer, and fixed the Court for Wednesday next. There was a long silence. Then Mr Deputy asked what they would answer, and read the letters patent, the King proposing a new Charter. They said they were not able so suddenly to pass away their interests, so few present were deeply concerned. Eight men agreed to surrender the Charter. The others petitioned for postponement till next Quarter Day, 19th November. Court Extraordinary, 20th October. Mr Ferrar said it had been summoned because the Lords of the Council did not like their answer and bade him put it again in this new Court. Only nine hands went up to agree to surrender the Charter. Court Virginia, 22nd October, 1623. Mr Deputy said that since their last answer to the Lords of the Council on the 20th he had received from them an order that it be published, so that "they say that many adventurers had been discouraged, but that there is no intention of doing more than the reforming and change of the present government, whereof his Majesty hath seen so many bad effects as will be to the endangering of the whole Plantation. No man shall have any prejudice, but shall have his estate fully and wholely conserved." The King commanded the ships to go at once to the relief of the Colony. So the Court rose. Court, 1 2th November. Present, Lord De la Warre, the two Ferrars, Mr Wriothesley. Mr Deputy acquainted them that good news had come. The Colony had recovered its health, a plentiful harvest was promised, and they had slain the king who led the xxvi] "VIRGINIA BRITANNICA" 437 massacre and many of his chiefs. They had had many other good fortunes, for which they praised God. Mr Deputy then said that he had been served with a Quo Warranto, asking by what right they called themselves a Company. (They sadly began to wind up their affairs and face the terrible expenses of the action.) Court Preparative, Monday afternoon, 17th November. Lord Paget, the two Ferrars, and Mr Wriothesley1 were present. They were allowed by the Commissioners to read the general letter from Virginia, which was very cheerful, addressed to the Earl of Southampton and the Council for Virginia. They had defeated the savages, strengthened their own defences, improved their health. Now they only wanted more people well provided for. But the Commissioners had kept back another letter they wanted to hear. Then it was moved : Whereas the Companie heretofore in a thankful acknowledgement of the great and extraordinary pames that the Right Hon. The Earl of Southampton and Sir Edwin Sandys have taken for the good of the company and advance ment of the Plantation did give unto each of them twenty shares of old adventure, these may be secured unto them with the Company's seal2- Passed with applause. Quarter Court, Virginia, afternoon, 19th November, 1623. Present, the Ferrars, Mr Wriothesley. The other letter read, Mr Deputy read the general letter and moved other business. Then he presented four drafts which the last Court had appointed to be drawn up for confirmation by the Company — to Lord South ampton, Sir Edwin Sandys, and John Ferrar, and to Nicholas Ferrar a grant allowing him for his disbursement. The confirmation of twenty shares to the Right Hon. the Earl of South ampton the Company in a thankful acknowledgement of hi^ noble Desserts, and Meritts both from themselves and the Plantacion, (they having no other meanes to express their love) have given unto his Lordship This Indenture 19th November 1623. ...Between ye Treasurer and Company of Adventurers and planters of the City of London for the first Colony of Virginia on the one part, and the Right Hon. Henry Earl of Southampton on the other part, witnesseth that whereas... he... hath ever since the 28th day of June 1620 until this present performed the place of Treasurer of this company with smgular wisdome, providence and care and much noble paines and industrie 1 This name is mis-spelt in various ways. 2 The original is still at Welbeck Abbey. 438 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. and with unquestionable integritie, to the advancement of the Plantacion and fuU satisfaction of the Company: Now know ye aU...that we the said Treasurer and Company in testimony of our due thankfukess and approba tion of his noble deserts and meritts from us the Company here and from the Plantation in Virginia, having no greater meanes to express it, doe by these presents give and grant to ye said Henry Earl of Southampton, his heirs, and' assigns for ever Twenty shares of land in Old Adventure in Virginia, to be taken in such place as no others right being prejudiced, and at such times as hee or they shaU think fitt: To be held by him or them with aU those privi- ledges, freedomes and immunities which belong to Shares of Old Adventure for which Twelve pound ten hath been paid. In witnesse whereof, the said Treasurer and Company to one part of this Indenture have set their legal and common seale; And to the other part of this the Right Hon. Henry Earl of Southampton hath set his hand and seale given in a great & general Quarter Court of the said Treasurer and Company the day and year above written, which being approved was ordered to be sealed. A similar grant was given to Sir Edwin Sandys, and another to John Ferrar, and to Nicholas Ferrar a grant for all that he had disbursed for the company as their Executor. "Next to the Question." The Company had answered the Council, pleading for delay in sur rendering the Charter, and the Council, dissatisfied, had instituted Quo Warranto; was this meeting willing to support the action of previous meetings or not? It was put to the vote. There were only seven dissentients; the rest held up for not surrendering the Charter. This was a weighty matter; a Committee was appointed to see to it, and a motion was made that the Lords might be petitioned for their books and writings that had been taken from them, that they might be able properly to prepare their defence. Then Mr Deputy reminded them that, in obedience to His Majesty, they had forborne to elect at last Quarter Court; and now, should there be an election or not? It was considered better that all the present officers be kept until a new election at a Quarter Court. Court, afternoon, 14th January, 1623-4. Present, Sir John Danvers, John Ferrar. Mr Wrote appears among the quibblers again. Mr Deputy read a letter written to him as Deputy by the Lords of the Council, that a ship had lately come in, and he was to seize on all the letters, private as well as public, and send them all unopened to them at the Council Hall. Court Preparative, afternoon, 2nd February, 1 623-4. Present, Sir John Danvers, Wriothesley, Mr Deputy, John Ferrar. That an xxvi] "VIRGINIA BRITANNICA" 439 omission had been made from the minutes; that there were still £800 deficit in Sir Thomas Smith's account, and he should pay that, so that Mr Deputy Ferrar might have his quietus est. Court Virginia, 2 ist April, 1624. Present, Lords Southampton, Cavendish, Paget, Sir Edwin Sandys, Sir John Danvers, the Ferrars. Mr Deputy had received a packet of letters in a box directed "to the Earl of Southampton, Treasurer," which had been sent to his Lordship and returned after having been read ; but no Courts had been held, in regard of this busy time of Parliament, so the letter was dated 29th January, urging the support of an army for the defence of the Colony. That a petition from the poor planters of Virginia had been sent up for the abatement of the impost, as they had suffered much through the effects of the massacre. Some of the charges against the Governor of Virginia were libellous, such as that about grievous oppressions. The com plaint was as absurd as it was unjust. Court Preparative, 20th April, 1624, afternoon, on Quarter day. Lord Cavendish was able to come ; Lord Southampton was out of town. It was held that he had been Treasurer nearly four years, so it was against the Laws of the Company to choose him again ; and yet the necessities and occasions of the Company were such as no other fit choice could be made. Wherefore the Court thought fit to be humble suitors to his Lordship that "out of that extraordinarie hote zeale which he had with so much trouble and paynes demonstrated," he would be pleased to accept over again of the place ofthe Treasurer and they would alter the Law to remove the obstacle ; which they did. Quarter Court, forenoon, 28th April, 1624. They proceeded to nominate and put Lord Southampton to election with Lord Caven dish. The Earl of Southampton had 69 balls, Lord Cavendish 5. No negatives. They put in Alderman Johnson and Nicholas Ferrar as Deputy, and Ferrar had 64 balls and Johnson 1 o. They re-elected Sir Francis Wyat as Governor of Virginia. Court, 7th June, 1624. Present, Dorset, Cavendish, Sir Edwin Sandys, Ferrar. A petition to his Majesty that Alderman Johnson should pay what was due to the Magazine; The Record here ends abruptly. There is a memorandum that Edward Collingwood, Secretary, 440 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. and Thomas Collet of the Middle Temple had examined the transcript and found it correct. Nicholas Ferrar, foreseeing the likelihood of seizure, had had the Court-Book copied by various hands, it is said in the house of Sir John Danvers. One or two points may be noted in this valuable document. One is that the absences of Southampton and Sandys, and often even ofthe Ferrars, from the critical final Courts suggests that more than Parliamentary or even Privy Council ties kept them away, and that the King sometimes laid his veto on their appearance, or even im prisoned them, as it is rumoured, to simplify his agents' work. For, it may have been noticed, the party of noises and hindrance was a very small one. Its largest numerical proportion was io per cent.; it was generally represented only by 2 or 5 per cent. But one noisy member can hinder much good work. Their recognition of this the large majority effectually showed in the honours they paid at the last to Southampton, with whom they were perfectly satisfied, in despite ofthe King's opinion of "pernicious government." Fortune was against him in this matter also. Troubles not of his making had temporarily beset the colony, which were magnified by his enemies and termed evil results from his mismanagement. To save space, the above abstracts have been given consecutively; but some things happened during the period of the Court Book, and some things were written, which are essential to the history of the times. All know of the voyage of the Mayflower to the Northern Colony for the sake of freedom in religion in 1620; but we must not dwell on it. In that year also, on November 3rd, a patent was granted for the Incorporation of a Council for managing the affairs ofthe Plantation ofthe Second Colony of New England, and among its members was Henry, Earl of Southampton. His name is also mentioned in the notes on Canada or Acadia1. "A note of the shipping, men and provisions sent and provided for Virginia by the Earl of Southampton and the Company and other private adventurers in 1621"2 included 24 ships with 500 mariners ; experts to teach men how to utilise the produce of the 1 Colonial Entry Book, xvn. 1-41. 2 Purchas, xix. 143; also Duke of Manchester's Papers, 8th Rep. App. 11. p. 291, March: "among them the name of The Mayflower." xxvi] "VIRGINIA BRITANNICA" 441 Plantations ; French vine-dressers to cultivate vines and mulberries, to make wine; others to teach them how to make glass for them selves and beads for the savages; fur-traders, metallurgists, builders; with plans for a church, a college, and a house of entertainment for newcomers. In regard to the various "dissensions," of which so much was made by the King and his party, there are some important papers among the Manchester MSS. July 8th, 16191, is the date of a copy of Minutes of Censure passed upon Alderman Johnson by a Committee of the Council of Virginia for having, in open Court, used intemperate language against the Governor, Sir Edwin Sandys. Members present: The Earls of Southampton and Warwick, Sir John Danvers, Sir Thomas Gates, Sir Nathaniel Rich, Mr John Wroth, Mr Thorpe and Mr John Ferrar; at Southampton House. There is also a statement, possibly prepared for a speech before the Virginia Company by Nathaniel Rich, in defence of the Earl of Warwick, against whom Sir Edwin Sandys is accused of entertaining some ill-feeling. A ship of Warwick's was supposed by Captain Yeardley to have gone to the West Indies, with the intention of robbing the Spaniards. Sandys, havkg blotted out the name of the Earl of Warwick from the dispatch, laid it before Privy CouncU. This was not considered sufficient. It was therefore arranged, in accordance with the wishes of the Earl, that the Earl of Southampton should be present when Sandys opened the matter before the CouncU and should use his influence to quiet any further search or stir in the business2. This he had done, and the business was dismissed without pre judice to any, the Earl of Warwick having used his influence on behalf of the captain of the ship, Captain Argall. But, shortly afterwards there arrived a second letter and report of Governor Yeardley. Two of the men who had been on board that ship came back to the colony, and confessed they had robbed a Spanish colony. Sir Edwin Sandys had laid this before the Public Council of the Virginia Company, and had acquainted the Lords of the Privy Council and the Spanish Ambassador, which led to the con fiscation of Lord Warwick's ship. Some further points concerning the events may also be gleaned 1 Number 250. 2 Ibid. 279. 442 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. from the Lives of the Ferrars1- The Court Books they drew up were very reticent in regard to unpleasant things ; but their private diaries told more. For instance, it was the Company's intention to re-elect Sir Edwin Sandys Treasurer in 1620, but the King's message came: "That it was not the King's pleasure Sir Edwin Sandys should be chosen." He had nominated three to choose from. A deep sUence of amazement foUowed this violent invasion of their rights and breach of their Charter. This was broken by one at the end of the haU rising to ask if the Courtiers who had decUned their message could now withdraw until the Company resolved what to do. The Earl of Southampton said "For my part, gentlemen, I Uke not this motion. Let the noble gentle men keep their places and hear the opinions of the Company, so that they may be witnesses of our actions and words, and may truly influence his Majesty of our fair and justifyable proceedings both in his behalf and the Company. In respect of his Majesty, whom we know to be so just a King, that he may understand what privileges he hath granted us by his Letters Patent under the great seal of England, on the credit and authority of which letters we have advanced and adventured one hundred thousand pounds of our own estates; and in respect of the Company, who have gained so hopeful a country, which they have bought, and compounded for with the natives, and which, when once weU peopled by EngUsh Colonies, wiU find fuU employment for aU needy people in this land, who now begin to swarm in this blessed time of peace under his Majesties happy reign; wiU provide estates Ukewise for aU the younger brothers, gentlemen of this Kingdom, and also a ready and lasting supply to this Nation of those commodities which in our present condition we are fain to fetch from foreign nations, from doubtfuU friends, yea from heathen princes. These circumstances, I say, fakly considered, make this business of so great concernment, that it never can be too solemnly, too thoroughly, or too pubUckly examined." Lord Southampton sat down, and Sir Laurence Hyde, the learned Lawyer, next rose, and said that he agreed with the motion of the noble Earl, and entreated these worthy messengers of the King to remain, and he asked that the Patent be produced and read. AU called out for the patent, and it was read. Sir Laurence Hyde pointed out that the choice of a governor was left to their own free choice, they therefore would proceed to election; but as the late governor, Sir Edwin Sandys, asks you to forbear putting up his name in opposition to the King's wish, Sir Laurence suggested they would put up two of the King's choice and one of their own, whereupon the whole Court at once cried " Southamp ton, Southampton." At which my Lord of Southampton rose up to speak, excuskg himself, but they again cried out "The time is almost past, we must humbly beseech your Lordship not to interrupt our proceedings." The 1 Peckard's edition. xxvi] "VIRGINIA BRITANNICA" 443 King's messengers agreed they had acted wisely. One of the King's nominees had one baU, and another had two baUs (in the baUot), and Southampton had aU the rest. He then took the chair, and proceeded to elect the deputy, Mr John Ferrar. The Earl of Southampton had a particular friendship for Sir Edwin Sandys, and said he took the office on one condition, that Sandys should advise and assist him1. This meeting had been postponed from the Easter Quarter Court, when the election should have taken place, because the King had then interfered. The Earls of Pembroke and Southampton said that it was a move against the freedom of the Company, and they held a meet ing at Southampton House on 29th May to draw up a reply. The great troubles in 1622 also have some light shed on them in various quarters. The Venetian ambassador writes on 15th July, 1622: When the Virginia Company here met to elect, the King sent a note of some whom he wished to be chosen, but the choice Ughted upon men of the party and of the opinions diametricaUy opposed to those whom his Majesty desired. The Earl of Southampton is now governor, the only one whom the generaUty of the people resolutely designated, but whom the King regards with suspidon, as a plant higher than the rest, which must be abased *. On 1 6th November, 1622, Chamberlain said to Carleton: On Wednesday night the Virginia Company had a feast at Merchant TaUors' HaU, whither many of the nobiUty and Council were invited, but few came. There were three or four hundred at three shillings a head. Dr Donne preached. He does not say whether Southampton was one of the "few." He again writes on April 19th, 1623: There is a great faction faUen out in the Virginia Company. The heads of the one side are the Earl of Southampton, the Lord Cavendish, Sir Edmund SackvUle, Sir John Ogle and Sir Edwin Sandys. On the other side are the Earl of Warwick, Sir Thomas Smith, Sk Nathaniel Rich, Sir Henry Mildmay, Alderman Johnson. James appointed a Commission. On Monday they were before the Kkg with their accusations and aUega- ubns, when Sackville carried himself so insolently that the King was fain to take him down soundly and roundly. But I hear he made his peace the next day, by means of the Lord Treasurer3. The Court party sided with the Earl of Warwick. 1 Peckard's edition, p. 106. 2 Venetian Papers, xvn. 372. 3 Birch's James I, p. 389. C.S.S.P. 1613-80, p. 44. Acts Privy Council, Colonies, pp. 64, 66. 444 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. On 13th May, 1623, there was an Order of Privy Council upon complaint of the Earl of Warwick and others, ...who were directed to attend the Commissioners for an examination of grievances and abuse of government, against an impertinent declaration containing bitter invectives and aspersions upon the Earl of Warwick and others, styled his instruments and agents. Lord Cavendish, Sir Edwin Sandys, Nicholas and John Ferrar, the chief actors in the inditing and penning thereof, to be confined to their houses until further order as gmlty of Contempt of the Commands of the Council Table. The Council had asked both sides to set down in writing their charges and complaints, and to go directly to the matter, and make no personal invectives, but these gave a long and impertinent dedaration of bitter and unnecessary invectives 1. Meanwhile a letter had been written by the Governor of Vir ginia to Southampton2 on 3rd April, reporting the restoration of twenty of the settlers supposed to have been massacred, chief of whom was "Mrs Boys, apparelled like an Indian Queen." On 14th May Secretary Calvert wrote to Southampton3 to forbear to proceed to the election of any new officers until his Majesty's pleasure be further known. On 22nd May, 1623, came a repetition of a former order of the Privy Council that all papers concerning Virginia should be brought in4. The Venetian ambassador, with his usual acuteness, reports on 2nd June, 1623: A great discord has arisen among the merchants of the West India Com pany trading in Virginia.... The origin of the dispute is supposed to be due to the King's arts, either because he hates aU assembUes and this one in particular, composed of good EngUshmen, foes to the Spaniards and con sequently Uttle to the liking of the present government; or possibly from a desire to please the Spaniards who persecute the Company, owing among other things to the dominion which they claim over aU the Indies to the exclusion of all others. The dissolution of the Company is feared, and that would be a great blow, both on account of trade and for reasons of State, as the Company has an island caUed Bermuda, which would be a post weU adapted to harass the Plate Fleet with a few ships 5. Southampton was also at the time writing to Conway about 1 Colonial Entry Book, ixxix. 205. s Colonial Corr. a. 22. 3 Ibid. 11. 29; also D.S.S.P. James, cxliv. 45. 4 Colonial Entry Book, lxxix. 206. 5 Venetian Papers, xvm. 28. xxvi] "VIRGINIA BRITANNICA" 445 the Dutch pirates, prisoners in Cowes Castle, where the Captain objected to keep them any longer at his own expense1. On 2 1 st November, 16232, the Privy Council asked certain questions of the Company regarding their past government, to be answered before Christmas. They said they could not make perfect answers, because their papers had been confiscated. They had them returned for a time, and by great efforts and division of labour the Ferrars had the answers completed in time, a feat which the Privy Council thought to be impossible. These answers cleared everything, except to prejudiced minds. Gondomar, the Spanish ambassador, and the King had agreed as to the destruction of Virginia. Notice of their intentions was conveyed to the Earl of Southampton by the Marquis of Hamilton and the Earl of Pembroke, and this gave him more care. In Parlia ment, Sandys and Selden were committed to the Sheriff of London3. A tumult arose in Parliament about this on 26th June, 1623, but they told their fellow members it was not for Parliamentary causes. The Marquis of Hamilton and the Earl of Pembroke told South ampton that they had heard Gondomar say to the King that it was time to look to the Virginia Courts held at the Ferrars' house, where too many of the nobility and gentry resorted to accompany the popular Lord Southampton and the dangerous Sandys... it would prove but a seminary for a seditious Parliament. The King granted a Commission to their known enemies, who had drawn up a list of scandalous charges; but Nicholas Ferrar's answer, drawn up from their returned books, confuted them all. The Company would not give up their patent, and the Privy Council confined South ampton to his house, so that he could not come to their Courts, and they also confined Sandys ; but Nicholas Ferrar answered for all. Some informant said that inflammatory letters and speeches were entered in their Court Books, and next day they were forcibly seized and read before the Privy Council. There was not one word proved wrong. Their enemies then said these were not the books — there were others. One of the Clerks of the Privy Council came that night to Southampton House and said that his deputy had gained a complete victory. But Southampton told the Lords and 1 D.S.S.P. James, cxlvi. ii. 2 Col. Entry Book, a. 207. 8 Lives ofthe Ferrars, p. 115. 446 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. xxvi the Council that their Company would be dissolved. The Earls of Dorset and Devonshire, Lord Danvers, Lord Paget, and Sir Edwin Sandys helped him all they could. New accusations were raised, and Nicholas Ferrar with an army of helpers wrote an answer. They never heard more of the charge. About a year before the final dissolution, on 15th June, 1624, Nicholas Ferrar had become suspicious ofthe tactics ofthe Court party, and had the Court Books and Records copied and attested. When their muniments were taken from them, Ferrar carried his copy to Southampton to keep. The Earl, cordiaUy embracing him, said "You stiU more and more engage me to love and honour you. I accept of this your present as of a treasure. I shaU value it more than the evidences of my property, because this contains the evidences of my honour and my reputation, which are more to me than wealth or life itsdf. They are also the testimonials of aU our upright deaUngs in the business of the Company and the Plantation. I cannot express how much I feel obUged to you for this kstance of your care and foresight." Southampton was advised not to keep them in his own house. He therefore gave them to Sir M. Killigrew. When he died, they were handed to Sir Edward Sackville, afterwards Earl of Dorset. The original papers all disappeared. Ferrar's copy is preserved as the greatest treasure of America. Thus James crushed Southampton out of the Colony in the last year of both their lives. But the Spanish marriage failed. The Colony was able to stand alone. John Ferrar had been introduced by Southampton to Cecil in 1603 and he and his brother had proved faithful friends throughout their lives. ' [I had not read until after completing my work Professor Gayley's interesting book, Shakespeare and the Founders of Liberty in America. The present is not the place to discuss it. This has been well done by Sir A. W. Ward, Master of Peterhouse, in his Shakespearean Address to the British Academy, July, 19 19, in eloquent recognition and keen criticism. Mr Gayley points out the influence of Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity on Edwin Sandys and Southampton in their political action.] CHAPTER XXVII THE FIFTY-SECOND YEAR There was cold weather in the winter of 1622, and "the King was very nearly drowned in the ice at Theobalds" in January1. In February there was invited a "benevolence towards the recovery of the Palatinate. It is said those who refuse shall either be sent to Ireland, or as soldiers to the Palatinate."2 By June the same writer tells us: "The Earl of Southampton is put from his Lieu tenancy of the Isle of Wight, and the Lord ArundeU placed in his room."3 This did not, of course, affect Southampton's governor ship, which he held for life. The Earl of Southampton wrote to the Council from Titchfield on 5th May, 1522, that he had taken much trouble about the constitution, but neither the sums raised nor the number of recruits was satisfactory4. The Privy Council sent an acknowledgement of his efforts, encouraging him to do more, in a letter dated 14th May, 1622 (not entered in the Index). We have noted above5 the circumstances of the great massacre of the Virginia settlers this year, and the terror and distress it caused. Dr John Donne, who had always been interested in the Colonies, wrote to Sir Thomas Roe6 that he had been preaching a sermon on December ist, 1622, before the King and the Virginia Company. This probably was intended as a memorial service of the event. In February, 1623, the Prince and Buckingham started on their voyage of incognito courtship to Spain. Full accounts of the events are given by Nichols in his Royal Progresses, including the private letters to the King from his Baby Charles and Dog Steenie. The affectionate father missed them sorely, and after a time his patience gave way, and he implored his "sweet boys" to come 1 Yonge's Diary. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. • D.S.S.P. James, cxxx. 19, cxxxn. 98. 5 Stith's Virginia; see also ante, p. 432. 6 D.S.S.P. James, cxxxiv. 58. 448 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. home and embrace him before he died. He fully expected at first that Prince Charles would bring home his Spanish bride, and gave orders for a great review of the ships appointed to welcome them. He was down at Beaulieu for the review. He saw the ships, but not the bridal party. The Venetian ambassador had likewise seen the ships. He says on 13th June: The Ships are aU at sea in the Downs.... In the matter of equipment and every exceUence they are incomparably finer than any vessels which plough the seas. The King has told the Earl of Southampton that he shaU have the honour of first seeing and receiving the Prince and the Infanta, because of their landing in the County of Southampton. These courteous words have been the more remarked, because the Earl was not always in favour with his Majesty1. Southampton's eldest son was now eighteen years of age, and the father was bringing him out. He wrote to Conway from Beaulieu on 14th August, asking for "a pass for his son to go into the Low Countries with Sir Horace Vere, with four servants, and four horses, and that he may take leave ofthe King."2 A little bit of gossip, conveyed by Sir John Ripsley to the Duke of Buckingham on ist September, 1623, runs: My Lord of Southampton hath offered his son to marrie with the Lord Treasurer's daughter and tells him this reason, that now is the time he may have need of friends, but it is refused as yet, the event I know not what that wiU be3. Possibly to console his son, he seems to have let him pay a visit to the Queen of Bohemia's Court at the Hague. Francis Wrenham writes to Lady Vere: "My Lord and Lord Wriothesley are lodged together in the Foreholt, near the Court. October 21-31, 1623. The Hague."4 The errant Prince came home on the 5th of October, with a new view of affairs. The Venetian envoy soon discovered this. On 15th December, 1623, he wrote: The Prince has reconcUed Buckingham to some gentlemen, and especiaUy with the Lord Chamberlain, with whom he had a quarrel. He is very 1 Venetian Papers, xviii. 40, 41. 2 D.S.S.P. James, ci. 104. 3 Cabala, p. 316, B.M. Copy, 595, f. 5. 4 Portland MS. 11 113. PLATE VIII THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON (At St John's College, Cambridge) xxvn] THE FIFTY-SECOND YEAR 449 gradous to the Earl of Southampton, who was out of favour with the King, although even he now regards the Earl with a much more friendly eye. The opinions of the King, the Prince, and Buckingham have been irreconcile- able1. The Earl of Southampton writes: To my very assured frend Sir Thomas Roe. You must not impute it to neglect that I have not written unto you since I saw you. I have been wholy a country man, and seldome seene either the Court or London, and you know that between Tichfidd and Constantinople there is no ordinary correspondence. In this Ufe I have found so much quiet and content, that I thinke I should hardly ever brooke any other; sure I am I envy none, and shaU unwiUingly leave this if any occasion shaU draw mee from it. This last terme going to London about some business I mett with a letter from you which I was glad of, because it brought mee the newes of your weU-bemge. I stayed there tiU the weeke before Christmas, when I came home to keep that time with my wife and children. I wiU write no newes, because of thkges past you cannot want notice, and of any future, which wee can know only by coniecture, there is no certaynty ; yet this I wUl say, I thinke the time is neare wherein we shaU see the crysis of our affaires. When I came from London, the opinion was wee should have a ParUament very shortly. I have not yett heard that the day is appointed, but I beleeve it wiU sone bee. God send the Lower House may be composed of discreet and honest men, else aU may bee naught, but I hope the best and persuade myseUe I have reason to doe so. I have no more to say, but that you may bee out of doute that I wish you as weU as any of your servantes, and am and wiU < be your very assured friend. H. Southampton2. Tichfidd the 24th December (1623). When this letter is read in the light of after events, it becomes very touching. His last Christmas was spent in peace and in happiness with his wife and children. He had no wish to leave home again; but the occasion did arise which drew him from it. The Parliament he expected was summoned, and he had to obey the call. The Prince and Buckingham had returned from their masquerade in Spain, the latter highly incensed with slights on his own dignity. James, Lord Wriothesley, was elected member for Winchester on 29th January, 1623-4. 1 Venetian Papers, xviii. 169. 2 D.S.S.P. James, clv. 77. s.s. 29 450 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. The Earl of St Albans had written on 31st January, 1623-4: To the Right Honourable his very good Lordship the Earl of Southampton. My good Lord. It pleased your Lordship when we met last, and did not think I dare say that a ParUament would have been so soon, to assure me of your love and favour, and it is true that out of that which I have heard and observed of your noble nature, I have a great affiance in your Lordship, I would be glad to receive my writ this ParUament, that since the root of my dignity is saved to me, it might also bear fruit and that I might not die in dishonour. But it is far from me to desire this, except it may be with the love and consent of the Lords; if their Lordships shaU vouchsafe to think me worthy of their company or fit to do them service, or to have suffered sufficiently whereby I may now be, after three years, a subject of their grace, as I was before a subject of thdr justice. In this matter I hold your Lordship's favour so essential, as if God shah put it into your heart to give me your favour and furtherance, I wiU apply my industry and other friends to co-operate with your Lordship. Otherwise I shaU give over to think of it, and yet can rest Your Lordship's affectionate and humble servant, Fr. St Albans. Parliament met on 16th February, 1623-4, but was prorogued until the 19th to hear the King's speech. On Monday, February 23rd, it began its real work. The Prince moved a message to the House of Commons1 asking for a conference on February the 27th, about the Duke of Buckingham's speech in regard to the King of Spain. Southampton said that Buckingham was quite right in "being full." The meeting agreed. The Queen of Bohemia wrote to Sir Thomas Roe, from The Hagh, 1st March the day of good St David 1623 — 4. Since my deare brother's return into England, all is changed from being Spanish, in which I assure you that Buckingham doth most nobly and faithfuUy for me; worthie Southampton is much in favour, and all those that are not Spanish.... Your verie affectionate friend, Elizabeth 2. Southampton was put on various Committees in the new Parlia ment. On the ist of March Southampton proposed the Survey of 1 Camden, Series, Lords Journal. Also Lords Journal, in. 237, 258, 293, 1046, 1062. a Sir Thomas Roe's Negotiations, p. 222. xxvn] THE FIFTY-SECOND YEAR 451 Munition and the Stay of Shipping1. The Stay of Shipping was agreed to, and he moved the Survey of Munition too, "whereof there is but one magazine, that in the Tower. All other places have but their proportion." He moved that Lord Carew, the Master of Ordnance, should give an account of what was there. The Lord Carew agreed to do this on the morrow. The next day, March 2nd, he spoke evidently in great excitement. We can read between the lines of the dry rare notes taken down, the fervour of the oratory that discussed Spanish proceedings, and the need of a conference with the Lower House. The heads of Southampton's speech are as follows: What to doe nowe? What at the Conference? The omission to be remedied, such other letters as have been read here and not with the Commons, to be read to them. To let them knowe that, upon relation to both Houses and what since, etc., we are of opinion that the whole proceeding hath been to delude. We find noe grounde by the last to thynke that hereafter they wiU proceede with more integrity. Therefore of opinion not to rely upon any further treaties, etc. Yf the Lower House agree with us in thdr opinion, then a conclusion. Then not amisse that a Committee of both Houses may conferr, and set down reasons for the opinion. Yf his Majesty should demand any, they may be ready to satisfy him. A course to be taken to deliver this to the King with aU expedition. The haste. Delay dangerous. To-night if possible, that impossible, to-morrow, or as soon as it is possible. Lord Sheffield, who always supported Southampton, suggested to add that the King cannot hold to the treaty any longer, neither with his honour nor the safety of the state, nor of religion. After this expression of urgency, all needed time to breathe. The King had labelled himself Rex Pacificus, and he was being hurried on by the flood tide to war; the Treasury was always empty. There was nothing done next day, except privately. Carew had probably inspected the Tower reserves. On March 4th South ampton announced : What was moved is now grown to a resolution of both Houses. This the King may appomt: to be deUvered to his Majesty, moved that his Majestie will receive it gradously but consider of it, and yt may be wiU say you know what depends on it. 1 Camden ed. Kennet, n. 656. Tyrwhitt's Journal House Commons, Appendix. 29 — 2 452 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Hope of the Palatinate gone, the care of the rest to be recovered by warre, your assistance m yt. Moved yf such an occasion be offered, then those that deUver this advyse 'may have power to add, that if the (Spaniard?) breakes off the treaty, his Majesty need not doubte but wee wyU be readie with our persons and our estates to be assistant and with the uttmost of, etc. Then, while things of such great moment were being discussed in private, the Lords found time to proceed with the trial of the Earl of Middlesex, Lord Treasurer, for defalcations in his office. The Earl of Southampton thought his fault was worse than that of the Lord St Albans, but recommended the House to send a physician to him to see if he were fit to be examined. Parliament was prorogued on 29th May, 1624. Then began musters of men, collection of money, aids, benevolences, selection of leaders. The Venetian ambassador writes: Scotland means also to help the Dutch and sends a regiment. The char acter of the Colonels has a great effect upon the enlisting, and I gather that the Prince desires the Earl of Southampton himself to have the Colonelship, otherwise he may give it to others. They feel sure that the Drum wiU be beaten next week. 31st May 1624 1. On the 7th of June his next report says: The King has not yet signed the article of the Dutch League. The Spaniards comfort themselves that most of the men wiU die in the first few weeks.... The Spaniards also say that the Kingdom wiU get rid of three of the greatest enemies they have, the Earls of Oxford, Southampton and Essex. It is certain that where Southampton desked the post for his son, when it was refused, he had to receive it himself2. June 21st, 1624. The League with the Dutch has been signed.. ..It is stUl defensive, but they added that it has for its object the recovery of the Paktinate....Four Colonels nominated3. June 28th. The patents of the Colonels signed by the Dutch.... They have to decide the claim of precedence between Oxford and Southampton and one hears laments about the dignity of an Earl being so abased.... Dday for lack of money. July 5th. The difference between Oxford and Southampton is not yet arranged, and aU men avoid the task of deciding it. . . .The differences between Oxford and Southampton have proved quite mild so far, God grant that the King may not desire to inflame them 4. 1 Venetian Papers, xviii. 325. 2 Ibid. xvm. 353. 3 Ibid, xviii. 374. * Ibid. xvm. 415. xxvn] THE FIFTY-SECOND YEAR 453 August 14th, 1624. Contrary winds detain them.... The dispute between the Earls of Oxford and Southampton has been settled by the King passing sentence in favour of the latter, as the older Soldier, who has abeady acted as Genera] 1. These notes give a rough sketch ofthe situation; but there is a mass of home correspondence at that time. The Lieutenants of the shires were instructed to allow the Colonels to levy forces in other shires than their own — also to raise funds2. It is probable that on that occasion the Earl of Southampton compounded with John Hall for the long lease (for 99 years) of the Manor House of Michddevor, with its great farm and the warren of conies and game there, which was the subject of a long law-suit in the son's time3. It is evident that Southampton had set his heart on giving his son a chance in life, and suggested that the four leaders should be the Earls of Oxford and Essex, the Lords Wriothesley and Wil loughby. His son was refused on account of inexperience; therefore the father took his place, arranging for his son to accompany him. Then arose the difficulty about precedence. In June (probably the 13th) Buckingham wrote to Secretary Conway4, saying that he was too ill to compose the difference between the Earls of Oxford and Southampton, and requesting Conway to do so, before the King or the Prince got to know of it. The Earl of Oxford's reasons are strong. Buckingham urges Conway to be careful lest Southampton's enemies prejudice his Majesty against him. Secretary Conway replied on the 14th5 that the Earl of Oxford would yield precedence to Southampton as the elder general, if their regiments were "general," but being "divided," he refuses it. Nethersole, on the 25th, adds: "The States' levies are hindered by disputes about providing ammunition. The colonels are displeased that almost all their inferior officers are appointed for them besides this question of precedency."6 On July 2nd Secretary Conway reminded the Colonels of the care necessary in providing the soldiers with provisions on the landing, and the inconvenience of being supplied by the States. Money would come through Burlamachi and a Deputy Paymaster. 1 The treaty was signed on 5th June. a Loseley Papers. 3 Chancery Proceedings, Car. 1. 17. 24th July. ' D.S.S.P. James, clxvii. 58. 6 Ibid, clxvii. 59. 6 Ibid, clxvii. 40. 454 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. On the 3rd Sir Francis Nethersole writes that, as the Council of War is accountable to Parliament, they are frugal in their allowance for clothes. The forms of their proclamations for raising their voluntaries were not considered satisfactory, and they were asked to show them to the King. The Earl of Oxford replied on July 6th: My Lord Southampton and I recdved your letter1 this morning in the garden at WhitehaU, where we were attending the Council of Warr, hence delay in sending on proclamation, which contained nothing offensive, as the Infanta's Ambassador pretends. He enclosed his own, which merely invited any gentleman or soldier who wished to serve under him to repair to Captain Signalphus BeU in the Strand 2. On the same day Southampton wrote a similar reply3. He had been attending the Council of War about army clothing; the letter was directed to the four Colonels, and he had kept it until he saw the Earl of Oxford, who opened it. He also sends on his form of Proclamation. On July 1 1 th Southampton wrote to Conway : Sir, you may remember that you told me yesterday that on Tuesday morning you would bee with the rest of the Council of Warr, and I con ceived that at that time the difference between me and the Earl of Oxford should be determined. Now this day, dining where my Lord of Oxford did, hee told mee that he would go to Court tomorrow and not be here on Tuesday, which I thought fitt to let you know. The Kkg and Prince beeinge to goe away this weeke, before which time, if the business bee not settled, wee must skrach for it, which I would bee sory for. I pray you think of it, and take some care that it may not be deferred.... P.S. I spake nothing to my Lord of Oxford of this particukr, but told him of other business that wee should that day attend the Council of Warr, which hee desired mee to take care of, for he could not bee there4. Nethersole said, on the 1 3th, that the dispute had been referred by the Council to the Earl Marshal. Southampton wrote to Conway on the 15th : I know your care to dispache business is such that you need not a remem brance, yett give me leave to say that I also know that business is many times so delayed, that when I thinke that it is now but two dayes to the beginning of the Progress I must needes desier you to be a Uttle more then 1 D.S.S.P. James, clxix. 21. 2 Ibid, clxix. 20. 8 Ibid, clxix. 22. * Ibid, clxix. 36. xxvn] THE FIFTY-SECOND YEAR 455 ordkarie carduU that this business between my Lord of Oxford and myself may not be left undone. Hee is att Court, and I purpose, God wiUing, to be there on Thursday morning. If his Majestie please to end it himself I shall be gladdest, if he please to command any other way I shaU be content, for I cannot feare the iugement of any rationaU man, aU that I desier is that it may bee no longer ddayed, but ended. Excuse me for being thus trouble some unto you, if it lay in my power to doe you any service you might be bolder withal, Your assured friend to doe you service, H. Southampton \ The Council of War communicated on the 1 7th of July to the King: In humble obedience to your Majesties commandment, we have required the Earles of Oxford and Southampton to be present with us, and to deUver their several pretences for the precedence of their regiments and persons in their marches, quarterings and other miUtarie duties and accidents. Their Lordships have to declare both their pretences, which, of the Earl of Oxford's part, were the Antiquitie of his Earldom, the dignitie of his Office of Great Chamberlain, his Commission of AdmiraU at sea, and his being Captain in the Paktinate. The Earle of Southampton's were that he is a peere of the same rancke of honour, questioning not precedence in that point of his person, but yielded it. Hee did chaUenge precedence as hee had been GeneraU of the Horse k Ireland, and soe commanding above ColoneUs. But passages, exceptions and answers that were produced on both sides wee forbeare for your Majesties ease, and humbly lay before you our opinion. That the Earl of Oxford ought of right to have the honour of precedence in Court and in aU civU entertainments and passages. And that it is the right ofthe Earle of Southampton k respect of his former Commands in the Wars, in aU the Accons, charges and commands as ColoneU, to have the like honor [of precedence, and that according to the customs, Institutions and practyces of Nations and Armes, which we do in aU humbleness submit to your Majestie's supreme judgment. A. Grandison. Arthur Chichester. Edward Conway. July i7th, 1624. Jh.Ogle*. The King was glad to be saved the trouble of further thinking about this, and agreed with the Lords of the Council of War. Conway sent each ofthe rivals a copy of their report and the King's declaration, and there was an end of the matter. As soon as he 1 D.S.S.P. James, clxx. i. 2 Ibid. clxx. 13. 456 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. had delivered his claims to the War Council, Southampton wrote to Cambridge. His letter explains itself. Mr Doctor Gwyn Having occasion at this time to use a Chapleyne to attend me abrode, and finding much willingness in Mr Lane to undertake that employment, I pray you let me intreate you and ye reste of ye seniors of your house, to further that intention of his, and grant (dayes ?) convenient for the voyage as also the profitt of his place during the time of his absence according to ye custome of the House in the like case. I assure mysdfe I shaU not neede to presse it further writinge to you in his behalfe. I therefore recommand myself to you and reste Your very loving friend, H. Southampton1. From my house in Holburne, 18th July, 1624. In answer to this letter, the Master and Seniors granted Mr Lane three years and days of absence if he should continue so long in that employment, "moreover the allowance of his fellowship, as others have had." Southampton wrote to Conway, thanking him for the Report and Declaration, on the 25th of July: I shaU as punctuaUy observe it as I may, as also what is intimated in the conclusion, as weU as I can understand it. Wee have been this day, I meane my Lord of "Oxford, my Lord WiUoughby and myself, with the CounseU of Warr, to let them know that, many of our men and much of our bagage being on ship-board in this river of Thames, the Skippers dare not goe forth for fear of the Dunkirkers, who are, they say, very busy in the mouth of the river and have of late rifled many passen gers cominge from the Lowe Countries, and taken from them what they had. Their Lordships have appointed some course for the security of the passage, though at the present the wind is fuU against us, but I assure myself that the whole six thousand men are either landed on the other side, or on the water. I have no more to say, but to acknowledge myself much obUged to you for mayny favours.... London. 25th July 1624. Conway wishes a good passage to Sir Edward Conway Junior2, and is sorry there should be any cavils about the King's decision for the Earl of Southampton, which was not to give him any command, but only precedence as the eldest Colonel. 1 Register Book, St John's Coll. 201. 78. 2 D.S.S.P. James, clxx. i, 5. xxvn] THE FIFTY-SECOND YEAR 457 A similar dispute between the Earl of Essex and Lord Willough by1 was settled in a similar way. On July 28th Southampton asked Conway 2 for a warrant to Lord Carew to give him arms out of the Tower for his men. Conway replied, asking him not to expect arms out of the Tower, but from the armourers. A good deal of correspondence had been carried on between him and Conway over the case ofthe Dutch prisoners in Cowes Castle, charged with being pirates. At 12 o'clock on Sunday, August 7th, 1624, Southampton wrote to Mr Coke from Holborn: I hear my Lord of Oxford and his Lady are gone in the Seven Stars. I will not now trouble the Kings ship, whose pilots are not so weU acquainted with the Maese as the Dutchmen, who wiU, God wiUing, carry us to Rotter dam3. On the same date Thomas Wilbraham4 was ordered to wait for the Earl of Southampton at the Ship in Gravesend. The Venetian ambassador to the States now takes up the story. On August 26th, 1624. AU the 6000 EngUsh of the new levies have arrived. ...The four Colonds are here at the Hague. The troops are in good order and veiy fine 5. September 2nd6- Last Sunday the EngUsh Ambassador (Carleton) intro duced k the Assembly of the States General the four EngUsh Colonels and other Officers, who solemnly took the oath of fealty as provided by the Treaty. A wonderfully interesting print of the two chief Colonels has been introduced into Mr R. Goulding's Portraits ofthe Wriothesleys. Both Earls are on horseback on a low hill, with the plains in the background, Oxford, with his plump healthy face, nearest the spectator, Southampton with his keen experienced eyes looking towards his rival, a world of pathos in his expression. A little volume by Gervase Markham (who had been entangled in the Raleigh-Grey case) was written to celebrate the honour and glory of the four Colonels in this adventure. It was not published until after Southampton's death, and hence became more especially identified with his name. It reflects back his glory 1 D.S.S.P. James, clxxx. 92. 2 Ibid. clxx. 73. 3 Ibid. clxx. 78. 4 Earl Cowper's MSS. 1. 168. 6 Venetian Papers, xvm. 422. 6 Ibid, xviii. 429. 458 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. upon his ancestors — on Thomas, the founder of the family title and possessions, and upon Henry his son, of whom his con temporaries took little notice. Honour in his perfection, or a Treatise in Commendation of the vertues and renowned vertuous undertakings of the iUustrious and heroycaU Princes, Henry Earle of Oxenford, Henry Earle of Southampton, Robert Earl of Essex, Lord Willoughby d'Eresby. After discoursing on the older house of Oxford, Markham begins: Next (O Britania) reade unto thy softer nobUitie the Storie of the noble House of Southampton: That shaU bring new fier to their blouds, and make of the Uttle sparkes of Honour great flames of ExceUency. He praises the first Earl as a soldier, a scholar, a Justice, a Chancellor. Then he goes on to describe his son Henry as "of no less vertue, prowesse, and wisdom, ever beloved and favoured of his Prince" which seems hardly true to history. Markham, how ever, chiefly dwells on the magnificence of his attendants. "Hee ever had a world of testimonies about him." Of his son, now living, Markham bid's himself beware of flattery: but shaU I that ever loved this Earle; that Uved many yeares where I daily saw this Earle; that knew him before the warres, in the warres, and since the warres; shaU I that have seene him indure the worst maUice or vengeance that the sea Tempests or Thunder could utter, that have seene him undergo aU the extremities of warre, that have seen him serve in person on the enemy, and against the enemy, shaU I that have seene him receive the reward of a Souldier (before the face of the enemie) for the best act of a souldier (done upon the Enemie) shaU I be scarred with Shadowes? This Earle, spending his younger time in the Studie of good Letters (to which the Universitie of Cambridge is a witnesse), after confirmed that Studie with travel and forraigne observation. Markham here gives proof, if that were still wanted, that Southampton did not join the 1596 voyage of Essex, since he makes no allusion to it. He was made Commander of The Garland, one of Queen EUzabeth (of famous memory) her best ships, and was Vice- Admiral of the first Squadron. In his first putting out to sea, he saw aU the Terrours and evils which the Sea had power to shew to mortaUtie, insomuch that the GeneraU and the whole Fleete (except some few shippes of which this Earle's was one) were xxvn] THE FIFTY-SECOND YEAR 459 driven back into PUmouth, but this Earle in spight of stormes held out his course, made the Coast of Spaine, and after upon an Advise returned. Markham here describes the triumphs of the Fleet, as led by Essex against the Islands ; then, it pleased the generaU to divide it, and he went himselfe on the one side of Gratiosa, and the Earle of Southampton, with some three more of the Queene's ships and a few smaU marchant Ships, sailed on the other, when early k a mormng by spring of day, this brave Southampton lighted upon the King of Spaine's Indian fleete, laden with Treasure, bekg about four and thktie saUe, and most of them great warlike GaUions ; they had aU the advantages that sea, winde, number of sliips or strength could give them, yet, Uke a fearfuU heard, they fled from the fury of our Earle; who notwith standing gave them chase with aU his canvasse; one he tooke and sunke her, divers he dispierst, which were taken after, and the rest he drave into the Iland of Tercera, which was then unassailable. . After this he joyned with the GeneraU agak and came to the Island of Saint Michaels, where they took and spoUed the town of ViUa Franca, and at Porte Algado made a Charrackt [sic] run aground and spUt herself, after being ready to depart, the enemie takkg advantage of our rising, and finding that most of our men were gone aboard and but only the General, Sir Francis Vere, and some few others were left on shore, they came with their utmost power upon them, but were received with so hot an encounter, that many of the Spaniards were put to the sword, and the rest enforced to runne away; and in this skirmish, no man had advantage of safetie, for the number was (on our part) so few, that every man had his hands imployment; and here the Earle of Southampton, ere he could dry the sweat from his browes, or put his sword up k the scabard, received from the noble GeneraU Robert Earle of Essex, the order of Knighthood. Markham explains that he did not rest on his laurels then, but, as soon as Essex was chosen for the Irish Wars, he tendered his service, and was at once made Lieutenant-General of Horse, and helped Essex much in his work. He was "a principall instrument, and calming all the turmoiles and seditions in Munster reduced that fruitfull and peopled province to their ancient and true obedience." Was this the end of his progress in the wars?, asks Markham, and answers that the death of Elizabeth gave the succession to the kcomparable King James; he enters not with an OUve branch in his hand, but with a whole Forrest of Olives round about him, for he brought not 460 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. xxvii Peace to this kingdom alone, but almost to aU the Christian Kingdomes of Europe. Southampton was found fit for either peace or war, and King James made him a Councillor. Now at last, when Mischief e and Policie went about by deUcate and in- chanting poisons not only to stifle our Peace, but to murther and confound aU our lovinge neighbours, which guard us; and that Charitie hersdfe com plained how our Almes were much too penurious, who is one of the first which rises up to this labour of amendment; but our Southampton, he [for] whom the privilege of white haires, the testimonie of his former action, and the necessitie of his employment in the present state, might have pleaded many unrefeUable excuses; yet he is the sonne of Honour, and with her he wiU Uve and die in aU occasions, hence he embarks himself into this present action. Be thou the eies and Conduct to leade to the Restitution of the lost Palatinate, for therein consists my prophesie. Unfortunately Markham's prophecy was not fulfilled. He gives us a list of the officers who served under Southampton as Colonel : "Sir John Barlacy, Lieut.-Colonel; Sir Jarrot Ashley, Sergeant- Major; Lord Wriothesley, Lord Montjoy, Sir Thomas Middle- ton, Captains; Henry Barkley, Crumwell, Hibbert, James Jucks, Goring, Coniers." Southampton never seems to have had any chance there of shewing the value of his experience in a fair field. This point a contemporary might have noted, in the manner of his times, in a sonnet such as the following: To Henry Earl of Southampton, dead in the Low Countries. He met a greater foe than Spain. When thy good Stars met in thy natal hour, An evU Planet sUpped into their Field To thwart their purpose, and frustrate thy power To make thy labours their fuU harvest yield. Yet, from benign aspect, they moved thy soul, Made it a treasure-house of vertues rare, Courage and Wisdom, Truth, and Self-control, Clean-handed Rectitude beyond compare. Lov'd by the nobler spirits of thy time, Blest by thy constant, most devoted wife, Prais'd by thy grateful Poet in his Rhyme, Thy Country, all the better for thy Life! CaU him not Death to whom thy spirit yields, But Life, that heralds thee to fairer fields. CHAPTER XXVIII "HENCE THESE TEARS" The weather in the Low Countries was trying, and there had been a great pestilence among the soldiers in Grave Maurice's Camp, and at Bergen op Zoom and other towns adjoining1. To this pestilence the brave hearts and high hopes of the two Wriothesleys were sacrificed. As Wilson says: This wkter quarter at Rosendale was also fatal to the Earl of Southampton, and the Lord Wriothesley his son. Being both sick there together of burning feaver, the violence of which distemper wrought most vigourously upon the heat of youth, overcoming the son first, and the drooping father, having overcome the feaver, departed from Rosendale with an intention to bring his son's body kto Engknd, but at Bergen op Zoom he died of a Lethargy, k the view and presence of the relator, and were both in one smaU bark brought to Southampton2. (The one died on the 5th, the other on the ioth of November, 1624.) The last thoughts of this great-hearted, proud-spirited man, religious though he was, must have been bitter. So long as his son lived, there seemed hope for both. When the youth died, his father's exhausted energies braced themselves together to take his body home to his mother. But the effort was too great to last, and he was struck down by what he would feel to be a death of shame. The loving wife and mother, who already was looking out eastward over the sea, dreaming of the speedy and triumphant return of her warriors, had her life darkened by the sight of a small bark with its colours half-mast high. The death of Southampton and his son, under the tragic circum stances, came as a shock to the whole civilised world. 1 Walter Yonge's Diary. 2 Arthur Wilson's History of Britain, p. 284. 462 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. The Bishop of Lincoln wrote at once to the Duke of Bucking ham: Maye it please your Grace. I knowe how fewe arguments I need to use, to persuade your Grace to a worke of Nobleness and Charity. Your fashion hath beene, ever sithence my happiness of dependant upon you, to outrunne and prevent aU petitions in this Kynde. Yet, pardon my boldness to be an humble suytor unto your Grace to goe on, as I knowe you have akeadie begunne, in extending your grace and goodness towards the most distressed widow and chUdren of my Lord of Southampton. Your Grace cannot doe any worke of charity more approved of by God, more acceptable unto men, and that shaU more recommend the memorye of your nobleness to future posteritye. Sir WiUiam Spencer (the only soUicitor the sorrowful widow hath now to imploye) wiU present some particulars unto your Grace, whom God ever preserve in all health and happiness.... Jo. Lincoln. Southampton House, 7th November 16241. The Countess, in those days of royal wardship, was left guardian of her son. But this seems to be accounted for by the letter of the Queen of Bohemia to the young Earl of Essex, November 15-25, 1624, from the Hague: You very weU conceive that the death of the worthy Earl of Southampton did trouble me, which I cannot think of but with grief. I have lost in him a most true and faithfuU frend, both in him and his sonne. I have written to my brother to the same effect as you desire by my Lord Mountjoye and to the Duke of Buckingham, to whom, if I had not written, he might have crossed aU. I have entreated my brother to get the wardship of this young Lord for his mother, and if it be possible, he might enjoye his father's pensions. I doubt not but my brother wiU doe his best for him ; for me, I shaU ever be readie to doe him aU the good I can. I give you manie thankes for your answer concerning your Liftenant CoUonel's place. The men are akeadie a-levying, I pray God send them good luck 2. The Queen of Bohemia wrote also to Sir Thomas Roe: I am sure you have akeadie heard the infinite losse we have aU had of the brave worthie Earle of Southampton and his sonne the Lord WriothesUe; you know how true a friend I have lost in them both, and may imagine easiUe how much my grief is for them. The Hagh. 27th December 16243. 1 Harl. MS. 7000. Cabala, p. 299. 2 Marquis of Bath's MSS. vol. 11. p. 73. 8 Sir Thomas Roe's Negotiations, p. 325. xxvm] "HENCE THESE TEARS" 463 Sir Thomas Roe replied to this on 24th February, 1624-5, from Constantinople: It is the last office that a poor man can doe to a greater, to mourne for him. I know not what private loss I have had in the death of the most worthy Earl of Southampton; but I am sure it is an honor to him to have it trudy sayd, England and the pubUque hath the greater loss. Good men are sometymes taken away in merde to prevent their eviU, but God worketh all things to the best; therefore wee must not grudge too much, though my heart bleedeth in sorrow for him; and I feare he dyed of the same death, of a bleedkg hart. This remembrance I did owe him, and I could not utter yt k any pkce so honorable as before your Majestie, who, because I knowe you loved him, you wiU please to pardon me this unseasonable ryme — If Death had had more hands, he had strooke aU : His maUce only against Virtue rages; By justice, or by Vice ten thousands faU, But such a triumph not in many ages; Thy right the father slew, thy left the sonne, Whereby they happy are, and wee undonne 1. The Venetian ambassador at the Hague reports on November 25th: The Earl of Southampton, a leading EngUsh nobleman of the Order of the Garter, who came here k command of a regiment of the last levies, has died after a few days' iUness, as weU as his son, a youth of 20 years of age. The loss is acutdy fdt at this Court. 15 — 25 November 16242. The Venetian envoy in England wrote to the Doge on the 29th : The Earl of Southampton has died in HoUand, one of the Colonels of the English Troops. Thus Engknd has lost one of the bravest and noblest of her CavaUers, and a garter is vacant 3. The Countess thought that no one had ever had sorrow such as hers. The Duchess of Richmond, who had also been bereaved, thought her own sorrow greater. The newswriter, Chamberlain, told Carleton about the event on December 18th of that year, and tells the story : The Duchess of Richmond assembled aU her acquaintance to receive them in state.... In conversing of Lady Southampton's great grief on the 1 Marquis of Bath's MSS. vol. 11. ; for verses see p. 353, ccliii. The Queen of Bohemia on 26th July, 1625, wrote to Sir Thomas Roe, then in the East, to thank him for the verses upon the death of the worthy Earl of Southampton, "whose losse I am still sad for." Negotiations, p. 397. 2 S.P. Foreign, Holland. » Venetian Papers, viii. 501. 464 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. death of her husband, the Duchess, as an argument that hers was stiU greater, said "I blasphemed," meaning that hers was greater, a witticism worth inserting in Lord St Albans "Apopthegmis" [sic] newly come out, though with Uttle applause. He grows holy towards his end, and has versified some of the Psalms x. Sir John Fynett, writing to Carleton on December 24th, 1 624, said: The Countess of Southampton deeply mourns her husband and son, and has been prayed for, at her own request, in divers Churches 2. There is no record preserved of the expenses of the third Earl's funeral, as there is of his father's. It is probable that a mournful procession of town and county friends would meet and follow the two dead bodies thus returning home to Southampton harbour, and would see them deposited in their chapel with hasty preparations for their lying in state. Mr C. E. Matthews3 draws attention to the fact that, on the South WaU of the South Chapel may be seen, suspended over the Uttle monument of the Lady Mary, the helmet made, not for use, but for the Ceremonial of lying in state of nobiUty. The Bull crest surmounting the helmet is carried on an iron spike, six inches high, fastened through the cone. It is of carved wood painted black, the crown, horns, eyes, hoofs, and tail having been gilt, as well as the chain. The helmet has a plume-carrier riveted to the back, but the plumes have long since disappeared. The Officers of Arms charged for the " Helmet of Steale gylt, with a crest carved in wood, 25 shillings."* That would serve again restored. Lord Wriothesley, having predeceased his father, never was an earl. But the distinctions would be duly noted in palls and banners and scutcheons. The family vault received both father and son; but the family monument did not lend itself to the addition of other figures. The Church Register has the entry: December 1624. The Right Honourable Henry Earle of Southampton, Knight of the most noble Order of the Garter, and one of his Majesties most Honourable Privy CouncU, was buried the 28th day of this moneth. 1 D.S.S.P. James, clxxvi. 65. 2 Ibid, clxxvi. 12. 3 Notes on Titchfield Church, p. 17. 4 Bodleian- Ashmol. MS. 836. f. 395 and 427 (at his father's funeral). xxvm] "HENCE THESE TEARS" 465 The Honourable Lord James Wryoseley, the ddest sonne of the sayd Earle, was buried the same 28th day of this month December 1624. On his grandfather's tomb were engraved the family arms, derived from and given to the College of Heralds, in a shield of eight quartered. His father had glorified the Wriothesley Arms by impaling the coat of his wife, Mary Browne, with 22 quarterings. Apparently the third Earl somewhat simplified his coat of arms. His seal, as we have seen, bore only the four falcons and the cross ofthe Wriothesley Arms. There are many drafts of the Wriothesley Arms among the MSS. of the British Museum. The most beautiful, as a drawing, is that in Cooke's Baronage, MS. 5504, f. 92, 17, with the lion and the chained bull as supporters and the motto: "Ung par tout, tout par ung." Mr B. W. Greenfield1 represents his father's tomb and arms, and gives a full description of the church and family. The third Earl's Arms are emblazoned on the west (oriel) window of St John's College Library, Cambridge. Baker records these in his Book of Memorials* : (Quarterly) 1. Azure a cross or between 4 Falcons close ar. 2. Ar. a fret gu. on a canton of the 2nd a Lion passant or within a border indented sa. 3. Ar. 5 fusUs barwise conjoked in pale gu. with a border or bezantee. 4. Per pale kdented gu. and az. a Lion ramp. or. AU surrounded by garter. Crest. A Bull passant Sa. crowned and enguled or, in the nose an Annulet a chak dependkg therefrom or, reflexed over the back. Supporters. Dext. a BuU Sa. as k Crest. Sinister a Lion Rampant or langued and armed az. the shoulder fretty or. The Motto Ung par tout, tout par ung. The quarterings were those of his grandmother Cheney, his mother Browne, his wife Vernon. One little irritation, of which Southampton was spared the experience, is noted about this date in the Diary of Sir John Oglander: It was one of the beste thinges for ye Isknders ye selling of ye Kinges landes in fee farme. Itt hath much abated ye greatness of ye Captain, and 1 Hants Field Club, vol. 1. p. 65. 2 Memorials, 4th vol. 1. 11. s. s. 30 466 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. was hmdered by ye Earl of Southampton what he could, but he goinge a ColoneU k ye Lowe Countries, in his absence it was granted1. The Earl of Pembroke2 had a grant of the Wardenship of the New Forest, but only during the minority of the heir. When the young Earl should come of age, he was to receive it with all the privileges of his late father. (December 30th, 1624.) The year of 1624 thus closed in gloom for all related to the Wriothesleys. Perhaps it would be wise here to refer to a painful rumour, which certainly was stirring by that time. If it reached the ears of the widowed Countess, it must have much increased her sorrow and distress. It was the rumour that the Earl of South ampton had been poisoned by the machinations of Buckingham. There are other less reputable sources, but the most sweeping charges came direct from Dr Eglisham, one of the King's Scottish physicians, who was specially attached to the Marquis of Hamilton and deeply distressed at his death. He was not afraid to say that Buckingham had prepared a list of those he wished removed, among whom were the Duke of Richmond, the Earl of Southampton, the Marquis of Hamilton, and Dr Eglisham (the writer). He addressed one petition to King Charles and another to the Houses of Parlia ment, on the danger of favourites, advising the King to beware, or he would be served as his father had been. He scrupled not to give the reasons for his charges, and only escaped by keeping out of the way. These petitions, sent in after the death of Buckingham, seem to have been printed, and reprinted in 1642. They are now pre served in the Harleian Miscellany, n. 69-80. The forerunner of Revenge; Being two petitions, the one to the King's most exceUent Majesty, the other to the moste honourable Houses of ParUa ment, wherein are expressed divers Actions of the late Earl of Buckingham, espedaUy concerning the Death of King James and the Marquis of Hamilton, supposed by poison. Also may be observed the inconveniences befaUing a state, when the noble disposition of the Prince is misled by a favourite. By George EgUsham, Doctor of Physick, and one of the physicians to King James of Happy Memorie for his Majesty's person above ten years space. He states that the above-mentioned persons had all been poisoned. The charges should be read before being criticised. Another entry may be recorded, in case there should prove to 1 Diary, p. 22. 2 D.S.S.P. James, clxxvii. 45. xxvni] "HENCE THESE TEARS" 467 be any connection between it and this rumour. Going through the Titchfield Register, I was struck with the words, and puzzled why they should be recorded there. In the space for burials, August, 1628, it is stated: The Lord Duke of Buckingham was slayne at Portsmouth the 23 daie of August being Sattersday, generaU of aU the fleete by sea and land, whose name was George VilUers, Right Honorable. One voice at least of mourning for Southampton came from the Court. Upon the death of the most noble Lord Henry, Earl of Southampton1 1624 My verses are not for the present age: For what man hues, or breathes on England's stage, That knew not braue Southampton, in whose sight Most pkc'd their day, and in his absence night ? In what estate shaU I him first expresse, In youth, or age, in ioy, or in distresse? When he was young, no ornament of youth Was wanting in him, acting that in truth Which Cyrus did in shadow, and to men Appear'd Uke Peleus' sonne, from Chiron's den ; WhUe through this Uand Fame his praise reports, As best k martiaU deedes and courtly sports. When riper age with winged feete repakes, Graue care adornes his head with sUuer hakes; His vaUant feruour was not then decaide, But ioyn'd with counseU, as a further aide. Behold his constant and undaunted eye, In greatest danger when condemn'd to dye, He scornes th' ksulting aduersarie's breath, And wul admit no feare, though neere to Death. . But when our gracious soueraigne had regain'd This Ught, with clouds obscur'd, k waUs detain'd, And by his fauour pkc'd this starre on high, Fkt in the garter, Engknd's azure skie; When he was caU'd to sit, by Ioue's command, Among the demigods, that rule this Land, No pow'r, no strong perswasion could him draw From that which he conceiu'd as right and law. 1 Poems by Sir John Beaumont. 30—2 468 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. When shaU we in this realme a father finde So truly sweet, or husband halfe so kinde? Thus he enioyde the best contents of Ufe, Obedient children, and a louing wife. These were his parts in Peace; but O how farre This noble soule exceU'd it selfe in Warre : He was directed by a nat'rall vaine, True honour by this painefuU way to gaine. Let Ireland witnesse, where he first appeares, And to the sight his warlike ensignes beares. And thou, O Belgia, wert in hope to see The trophees of his conquests wrought in thee, But Death, who durst not meet him in the field, In priuate by close trech'ry made him yeeld. I keepe that glory last, which is the best; The loue of learning, which he oft exprest By conuersation, and respect to those Who had a name in artes, in verse or prose: ...Admir'd by aU, as aU did him admire. There was at least one other elegy written on the Earl in London, though no copy now survives. Richard Brathwait, in re-dedicating to the Countess of Southampton his Survey of History, writes praises of the Earl and adds a note: A funeraU Elegy to his precious memory was long since extant, being annexed to my "Britaines Bath, Anno 1625." The following tribute is too long to allow more of it to be quoted than the dedication. A TREATISE of Patience in Tribulation First Preached before the Right Honourable the Countesse of South ampton in her great heavkes for the death of her most worthy Husband and Sonne....By WiUiam Iones B.D. and P. of Arraton in the Isle of Wight. . . .The meanest seruant of the greatest Lord, the glory of his Countrey, and your Ladyships wonderfuU ioy and Honour, out of a strange amazement, begins now to looke up.... This is my comfort, that such is your noble dis position, that you wiU not dispise the hearty endeauer of the poorest weU- wUler of your Honorable Family. It was no smaU ioy unto me for diuers yeares to come in my course, and stand in presence of that mirrour of NobiUty, xxvm] "HENCE THESE TEARS" 469 that I might heare his wisdome, and behold his gracious conuersation: Many a storme haue I indured both by Sea and Land; but when I saw his face, his gracious countenance dispeUed aU iU weather, and made mee as resolute to returne the next time as euer. I should willingly haue spent my daies k his seruice; yea, I haue often wished that my Ufe had been sacrificed for his, that your Honour and this Land might haue stiU enioyed such a compleate ornament and pUlar, so wise at home, so valourous abroad.... As for your selfe, Madame, who haue mightily rent your heart already with fasting and weeping and bitter lamentation ; I pray God to giue you patience and comfort; and in plaine sort, I labour to perswade your Ladyship thereunto in this sermon, which I humbly commend vnto your Honours perusd the rather because you told me it did you good..,. I beseech your Honour to take to heart the goodness of the Lord towardes you in those that still remain. Your Ladyship hath two louing and most worthy daughters, married to godly, wise, vertuous personages; you have also another hopefuU young Lady. And your Honour hath a Sonne who gives great hope that he wiU tread k his noble Father's steps, and be hdre of his Vertues. AU these thkges are worthy to be remembered dayly, with praises, which I doubt not but your Ladyship doth.... W. Jones. The title page has a model of a tomb, with anagrams of the names Henry James Wriothesley — "Here I see many worthies lye." The same block appears on another little volume also edited by W. Jones. The verses, if not always perfect as poems, shew affectionate appreciation of those who have been so suddenly lost. THE TEARES OF THE Isle of Wight, shed on the Tombe of thek most Noble, valorous, and louing Captake and Gouernour, the right honourable Henrie, Earle of South ampton: who dyed k the Netherlands, Nouemb ^% at Bergen vp Zom As also the true Image of his person and Vertues, Lames, the Lord Wrio thesley, Knight of the Bath, and Baron of Titchfield; who dyed Nouemb. T^ at Rosendaell. And were both buried in the Sepulcher of their Fathers, at Tichfield, on Innocents day 1624 They were huely and pleasant in their Hues; and in their death they were not diuided. 2 Sam I. 23. Quis taliafando Temperet d lachrymis Honoris, Amoris, Doloris Ergo. 470 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Another piece is too long to give in full, yet it has some good lines. The writer wishes that he and his friends had known earlier, that they might have prayed for their lives. An Elegie upon the death of Henry Earl of Southampton and his son. . . .Methinks it never should be writt, nor read, Nor ought I teU the world Southampton's dead : A man above aU praise; the richest soile Of witt or art is but his lustre's foile, Falls short of what he was, and serv'd alone To set forth as it can so rich a stone, Which in itself is richer, of more worth Than any witt or art can blazon forth In peace, in warr; in the Country, in the Court; In favour, in disgrace, earnest and sport.. . . Great benefits are known and valued most By their great wants. We never knew to prke Southampton right until Southampton dyes. Alas, what have great Henries merited That they by death should thus be summoned? Henrie the Great of France; and Henrie then Of Wales the greater, Cynosure of men; And now Southampton's Henrie, great in fame, But greater far in goodness than in name. You promised more at your departure hence Than to returne with your deere Uves' expence Defaced and canceUed, you most glorious Starres, Great ornaments both of our peace and Warres. . . Ar. Price. An Episode upon the Death of the right noble and Honourable Lord Henry Earle of Southampton, Baron of Titchfield, Knight of the most Honor able Order of the Garter, Captain of the Isle of Wight. Mors ultima Unea rerum : Quis est homo qui vivet at non videbit mortem ? Yee famous Poets of this Southern Isle, Strain forth the Raptures of your Tragick Muse, And with your Laureate pens come and compUe The praises due to this great Lord : peruse His Globe of Worth, and eke his Vertues brave Like learned Maroes at Mecenas' grave. Valour and Wisdom were in thee confin'd The Gemini of thy perfection, And aU the Graces were in thee combin'd, The rich man's joy, and poores refection. xxvm] "HENCE THESE TEARS" 471 I can noe more in this lugubrious verse ; Reader, depart and look on Sidney's Herse. Fra. Beale, Esq. W. Pettie writes a sort of sequence of sonnets, not all worthy of note. Certam touches upon the Life and Death of the Right Honourable Henrie Earl of Southampton, and his true Image, James Lord Wriothesley. In each right noble weU-deserving spirit To honour vertue, and commend true merit.... Pettie had evidently resided for twelve years in the Isle of Wight as a clergyman, And sitting there, in sunshine of his glory, Saw his fair vertues, read his Life's true story.... I must lament and sigh and write and speake, Lest, wliile I hold my tongue, my heart should breake. But, deare Southampton, since deserved praise Came thronging on thee faster than thy dayes ; Since thy immortal vertues then were seene (When thy grave head was graye) to be most greene, We fooles began to hope that thy Ufe's date, Was not confined to our common fate, But that thou stiU should'st keep the world's faire Stage Acting aU parts of goodnesse; that each Age Succeeding ours, might in thy action see What vertue (in them dead) did Uve in Thee ! To the young lord he dedicates several stanzas, and there follows an address "To the Right Honourable Elizabeth Countess of Southampton," ending thus: Yet may it give your grieved heart some ease To saU with company in Sorrow's seas ; To think in them you are not tost alone, But have the Kingdome partner in your moan. Ung par tout, tout par ung. Shakespeare did not live Southampton's "epitaph to make"; but his foresight had, before his own death, thus immortalised his friend : Not marble, nor the gilded monuments Of Princes, shaU outlive this powerful rhyme, But you shall shine more bright in these contents Than unswept stone, besmeared with sluttish Time. 472 THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. xxviii When wasteful war shaU statues overturn And broUs root out the work of masonry, Nor Mars his sword, nor war's quick fire shaU burn The Uving record of your memory. 'Gainst death and aU-obUvious enmity ShaU you pace forth; your praise shaU stiU find room Even in the eyes of aU posterity, That wear this world out to the ending doom. So, tiU the judgment that yourself arise You Uve in this, and dweU in Lovers' eyes1. ¦ Or I shaU Uve your epitaph to make Or you survive when I in earth am rotten, From hence your memory death cannot take Although in me each part wiU be forgotten. Your name from hence immortal Ufe shaU have Though I, once gone, to aU the world must die; The earth can yield me but a common grave When you entombed in men's eyes shaU Ue. Your monument shaU be my gentle verse, Which eyes not yet created shaU o'er read; And tongues to be, your being shall rehearse When aU the breathers of this world are dead; You stiU shaU Uve (such virtue hath my pen) Where breath most breathes, even in the mouths of men 2. But were some chUd of yours aUve that time You should Uve twice; in it, and in my rhyme3. In these self-depreciatory verses Shakespeare has emptied the urn of his prophetic soul to the memory of Southampton. His words have been fulfilled. It is through Shakespeare's introduction that all Shakespeareans turn so eagerly to make the acquaintance of his friend, to peer into the puzzling problems of his life, to read between the lines of his records and in his actions, to find the reason why the greatest poet accorded him this glory of his friendship. There was no statue or memorial of his life added to the family tomb of his father. Neither his widow nor his son thought this necessary. But they might have engraved on some solid slab, the crowning record: Here lies the only man of Shakespeare's time Whom our great poet ever said he loved*. 1 Sonnet lv. 2 Sonnet lxxxi. 3 Sonnet xvn. 11. 13-14. 4 "The Love I dedicate to your Lordship is without end." (Ded. Rape of Lucrece.) CHAPTER XXIX THE HEIR OF ALL The Earl of Southampton left one son (Thomas, born 1607, at Shelford, Cambs.), and three daughters (Penelope, born 1598, who married Sir William, afterwards Lord, Spencer of Wormleighton; Anne, goddaughter to the late Queen, born 1604, who married Robert Wallop; Elizabeth, born probablv 1609, who married Sir Thomas Estcourt). The Earl had not made a will, whether inten tionally refraining from doing so, through sad experience of the troubles laid on so many by his father's will, whether postponing it till the majority of his son James, or merely forgetting it, does not seem clear. The Queen of Bohemia's influence seems to have been effectual in securing for his mother the guardianship of the minor, and she was also appointed administratrix of her husband's effects. All that is stated at Somerset House is : Henry Wriothesley, kte Earl of Southampton, deceased 1624. Power to administer his property and goods granted to EUzabeth, Countess of South ampton, Arthur Bromfield of Titchfield, Thomas Wriothesley of Chdtwood co. Bucks, Armiger, 2nd June 1625 1. On the margin is written: "Winton. Filis 1626 Blasii, 1627." The warrant to the Escheators went out in due course, on the 3rd of December, 16242. The Inquisition post mortem began on 1 2th January, 22 James I. It fills three large pages and would have given us much valuable information; but the first and third pages are nearly all illegible, apparently from damp. The second page, which is quite clear, unfortunately contains nothing but the wills of the ancestors. The officials at the Record Office kindly treated the faded ink at the beginning and the end, to help to make it clearer; but all that could be distinguished were the dates given above, and, 1 Admor Book, 1625, No. 169. 2 Inq. P.M. 22 James I, Hants 404/141. 474 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. at the end, the facts that Lord Wriothesley predeceased his father on the 5 th November, while Henry, Earl of Southampton, died on the ioth November, 1624. The age ofthe heir is given as 16 years and 8 months. The first Dedication to the young Earl had been by W. Jones, one of his father's chaplains; editing The Teares of the Isle of Wight, 1624 (quoted in the last chapter), he says: To The Right Honourable Thomas Earle of Southampton. AU Peace and Happinesse, my very Honourable good Lord. It hath pleased God to make your Lordship heire unto your most noble Father, and therefore I think you have most right to these Teares which were shed for him, and your renowned elder brother. If I did not know by mine own observation that your Lordship was a diligent observer of aU your father's vertues (touching which also you have a daily remembrance) I would exhort you to behold the shadow of them deUneated here by those which much admired him Uving, and shaU never cease to honour his memory and love those that do any honour unto him. The Lord increase the Honour of your House and rejoyce over you to doe you good, until He have crowned you with immortaUtie Your Lordship's to command, W. Jones. We have no information as to King James' feelings concerning the death of his loyal but troublesome subject, the third Earl of Southampton. The King survived him very few months, and his only son reigned in his stead, from March 27th, 1625. Charles found his kingdom in anything but a settled condition, and unfor tunately, his eyes being blinded even more than those of his father, he retained in power the prime cause of much of the trouble, Lord Buckingham. Within a few months Charles married the French Princess, Henrietta Maria. The weather was very bad, the plague was spreading, the First Parliament, summoned to consider supplies, proved ungracious, and after a short recess and an adjourn ment to Oxford, it was dissolved. The Coronation could not be per formed under such unpromising conditions. Apparently the un crowned King and Queen went on a country Progress. It is known that they visited the young Earl at Titchfield, but the full circum stances do not seem to be generally known. The Register of Titchfield records: xxix] THE HEIR OF ALL 475 August 1625. King Charles and Queen Mary came to Titchfield Place the 20th day of this month, and the Queen stayed there five weeks and three dayes. Under what circumstances the King left his bride there to the kind care of the widowed Countess, we have no information. But the entries in the Burial Register offer a sombre suggestion. September 1625. Buried John Burome, servant to the Court, the 24th day. Henry Tymberlake gent, the great traviUer, was buried in the Chancel of Tichefidd the nth day of September 1625. Jan Mdborne, a servant to the Queen's Court, the 25th day. ...John Polter the 26th day, a foUower to ye Court. And then, apparently, the Court moved on. It is probable that the Royal visit delayed the young Earl's preparations for Cam bridge. Lodge says in his Illustrations of History that the fourth Earl of Southampton was educated at Eton and at Oxford, and started for his travels abroad from Oxford. I have been unable to find the records concerning his education. But it is quite clear that he studied at Cambridge, at least for a year. He did not matriculate, but records prove that he was in residence at St John's College, Cambridge. In the Michaelmas Term of 1625 he paid for the use of the tennis court. He was certainly over the usual age for undergraduates, and he did not take his degree. The following letters explain some points about his arrange ments: Sir After so long speech of my Lord of Southampton's coming to St John's, my Lady his mother is now resolved to send him unto you presently, and to that purpose hath commanded me to send you the enclosed from my Lord Maltravers, entreating your favour for those lodgings for her sonne, and according as her Ladyship heares from you, she is minded immediately to send his stufe, and to have them made ready. To noe place can he come with more affection, either of her Ladyships, or his owne, desiring to succeed his noble father and brother as in other things soe in that kind respect they did both beare unto, and find agayne ever from that worthy society. I shaU not neede further to trouble you at this present when I have remembered their loves and my very affectionate service unto you, only I beseech you, 476 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. bestow me as near his Lordship as you may, they wUl take it for a favour and you shah stiU increase my obUgation ever to remayne, Your Worships ever to be commanded W. Beeston. Horsley1, September 20, 1625. To the right worshipfuU and my much honoured friend Mr Dr Gwyn Master of St John's CoUege in Cambridge *. In this letter of the young Earl's tutor or guardian was enclosed the following: Good Mr Doctor Gwyn I understand by my Lady of Southampton that my Lord of South ampton is to goe to Cambridge shortly, and that you make some scruple of letting him have those lodgings which I had at St John's CoUege. I am much bound unto my Lady for her respecte, as likewise unto you for your care, but if I were to come to Cambridge never so soone, as I am yet uncertake of, I would not by any meanes but that you should let him have those rooms with aU possible respect in aU other things, for hee is one whome I do much honour, so not doubting but that you wiU shew yourselfe in this, as you have done in aU your former courtesyes, I wiU ever rest Your most affectionate frind, West Horsdey3 Hen. Matravers. Aug 28th 1625. The following year the Countess herself wrote: Mr Doctor Gwyn The great love and affection that my dearest Lord, now with God, did ever beare unto the honour and good of that worthy Society of yours, and that respecte and honour which hath reflected from you aU againe, both towardes himself and his house, doe obUge me also by what meanes I may to endeavour that his name and memory may forever Uve and be fresh amongst you. And to that purpose, having found that in his Ufe tyme, and of his own noble incUnation, he had desined certaine bookes unto the new Ubrary of your house, which have bene aU this tyme carefuUy by me preserved 1 Horsley had been the residence of Katharine, daughter of the first Earl of Southampton, and widow of Sir Thomas Cornwallis. She died in 1625, leaving it to her grandnephew Thomas, who conveyed it in 1629 to Carew Raleigh. 2 From The Eagle, vol. xxxvi. No. 166, March, 1915. 8 This house was built by the second Sir Anthony Browne for his second wife, Elizabeth, the "fair Geraldine" of Surrey's sonnets. She afterwards married the Earl of Lincoln, but lived much at West Horsley. It came back to her stepson, the third Sir Anthony Browne, Viscount Montague, thence to his grandson. I do not know whether he had sold it or not by that time. xxix] THE HEIR OF ALL 477 entire I hope in number (for Cathalogue is with you and not with mee) and safe from harme. Now soe soone as notice could be taken that the place grew to a readkess to receive them, I have herewithaU sent them unto you as a testimony of the good wiU and affection borne unto the house from hence. For heere I must needes take notice of the great honour and respect done to my sonne at his late being with you, who, as I hope he wiU therein also imitate his noble father in his love to learning and to you. Soe for present I cannot but, with many thankes for the same, be sensible of the noble usage he found amongst you. And thus wishing upon your studies God's blessing, with much happiness unto you aU, I rest your very loveing freind E. Southampton. Southampton House k Holburne. August 1626 \ The College duly replied in the following month : Madame This Monument of Love prepared before by our most noble Lord, deceased, and now erected by your kynd hand, we receive from you and embrace with the best acknowledgments that canne proceed from your devoted servants. The guyft designed expresseth the Bounty of an Honour able Donor, and your Ladyshipp, by your manner of accompUshing it, hath added no smaU lustre to it. Your dextrous speed anticipating our expecta tion, your care that they should come free to us, without any the least charge, are thkgs that few could have thought of besydes your noble selfe; whereby as you have reared upp as ksting Statue to the memory of your ever-to-be- honoured Lord, so have you withal gyven just occasion that your blessed name maye for ever lyve in us with His. And indeed you have so wrought it that whUe we enioy your happy lyfe we shaU not seeme to have altogether lost him, whom we shaU fynd lyving in your gracious affection towards us. Yet farther, as if that noble family contended stUl more to endeere us to them, it pleaseth your Ladyshipp to interpret the smaU expression of that Love and Duty which we shaU ever acknowledge due from us to that House as an Honour and extraordkary Respect done to your Noble sonne Uving with us. We ingenuously confesse it was some griefe to vs to parte so soone with Him, whose demeanour was so faire and noble amongst us, that our best usage of him came farr shorte of his deservings. But it pleaseth your Goodnes to looke uppon our actions through a multiplying glasse that presents everythkg to the eye far greater than indeed it is. So while we endeavour to pay some part of the debt we owe through your more than courteous acceptance we shaU runne in to further bonds. As if your Lady shipp had resolved (as was once said of a right noble person) to be rich in nothkg but ObUgation. 1 Register of letters in St John's College Treasury, p. 267 ; printed in The Eagle, vol. xxxvt. No. 166, March, 1915, by Mr R. F. Scott, Master of St John's. 478 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. Not to be further troublesome to your Honour: Gyve us leave in the name of the whole Socyetye to present our humble Duty and Thanks to your Noble Self and that Honourable family. And so we take leave and rest Your Ladyshipp's to be commanded The President and Seniors. St Johns in Cambridge Sept 18th 1626. To the most Honourable and vertuous Lady, the Lady EUzabeth Countesse of Southampton. Among the College Expenses in 1626 is entered: "For enter- tayning the Countess of Southampton's man, and unloading the bookes 17/6."1 Elsewhere is noted a gift of money, "given to the Countess of Southampton's man, when he brought the books."2 The Baker MSS. also note the letters: "My Lord of Southampton was sent to the College by my Lady his mother in 1625, wherein he is said to succeed his father and brother in ye respect they bore the College." Again, her letter of August, 1626, is noted as to her wish to send "the books intended for the college by her Lord."3 The position must not be forgotten, that, though all the books had been delayed in delivery, from causes which may be explained, only some of them seem to have been sent even then. There was a delay in the delivery of the remainder, which remains unaccounted for. But an event happened which apparently had something to do with it. The fourth Earl seemed to be determined not to lose his chance of foreign travel by delaying, as his father had done, so he went abroad straight from College. He stayed abroad over eight years, during which time he met his first wife, Rachel, daughter of Daniel de Massue, Seigneur de Ruvigny, a French Protestant. He married her in August, 1634, and seems to have brought her almost directly home to England. Then the whole remainder of the books promised by his father were sent to the College Library at St John's by his mother, as his father's administratrix. She evidently wrote a letter accompanying them, which is not preserved; but the reply from the Master and Seniors has been copied into the College Register. Madame, Having received your most noble gifts of Manuscripts which are akeady imprinted in our hearts, wee desire now to testifie our due thank- 1 Baker MSS. B.M. vol. xx. p. 247 a. 2 Ex. Lib. Fines, xix. 276 a. 3 Baker, Harl. MS. 7046. xxix] THE HEIR OF ALL 479 fukes in this short Manuscript, not as if our hearts did presume to be soe ambitious as to correspond with your bountifuU favours. But that in your Bookes wee might learne the Alphabet of your most Honourable disposition to usward we confesse yt your favours have been legible unto us in a faire and grand character of an higher nature, yet in the interim, wee wiU reade to studie your Bookes, yf wee may deserve the perpetuity of your Favours. And soe humbly presenting our duety and thankes unto your noble self and your Honorable FamiUe, wee take our leave, desiring to rest, as we are and ever wUl be Your most devoted servants The Mr and Seniors 1. April 1635. The Baker MSS.2 show that "There is a letter of thanks to this Thomas Earl of Southampton for ye MSS given by him to the college dated April 1635," and a record, "Thomas Earl of South ampton most of those MSS which it is possessed of, viz MSS. gn. Fol. 85 gn. 4th and 8th MSS. 77. A Catalogue whereof is among the MSS." There is further entered: "Henricus Wriothesley comes South- amptoniensis Baro de Wriothesley et Titchfield3, &c. . .trecentos et Sexaginta libros ad Instruendum Bibliothecam desideratissimis libris impendit." A careful study of William Crashaw's letters of 1615, and a comparison of the number of books and manuscripts there offered with those actually received, can lead only to one conclusion, that the whole grant to the library was that of Henry, the third Earl; that by some mistake of the heir (through his father leaving no will) he assumed these to have become his property, and signed his name on them (or allowed others to do so for him), so that he seems to take rank as the chief donor. It is only another example of the third Earl losing the full credit he deserved. The main point, however, was achieved; the Library of St John's College was enriched. The printed books have naturally become merged into the Common Library, but most of them can be distinguished. The Earl had a son born at Holborn, but he did not live long4. 1 College Register, p. 342. * Baker MSS. xix. 276 a et seq. 3 E Libro Memoriali in Bibliotheca Reposito, p. 339, 10. A descriptive Calendar of MSS. by Dr Montague Rhodes James. 1 Duke of Portland's MS. 11. 127. 480 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. He had a daughter, Elizabeth, also born at Holborn, but the famous daughter, Rachel, was baptised at Titchfield — "September 19th, 1637, Rachel, daughter to the Right Honourable Thomas Earle of Southampton." Another daughter was born to them, and then the Countess died. "The Lady Rachell, Countis to the Right Honourable Thomas Earle of Southampton was buried the 26th day of February 1639-40." This must have affected the future career of the Earl consider ably. He apparently left his mother in charge at Titchfield of his three infant daughters, Elizabeth, Rachel, and Magdalene1. The dowager was not young ; she had, on 25th February, 1 636-7, per mission from Archbishop Laud to eat flesh in Lent, on account of her age and her frequent infirmities2. But she seems to have been able to perform her domestic duties and to bring up her grand children in the way they should go. The third Countess was not altogether forgotten in the literary world. In 1638 Richard Brathwait, having re-written, enlarged, and improved his Scholar's Medley, republished it under the new name of A survey of History, a nursery for Gentry. He reprints the original dedication to the Earl of Southampton, to which he adds the following dedication to the widowed Countess : To the right honourable Elkabeth, Dowager Countesse of Southampton, the fruition of her divinest wishes. From the sacred Ashes of your ever-honour'd Lord, whose Memory Uves in the hearts of Men, while his better part shines in the Courts of Heaven, is the Breath and Birth of this Worke derived. At first addressed it was unto him Uving; and now presented to yourself e the Vertuous Survivour of Him. Nor can it expect ought lesse from you then a New Life, who so constantly retakes in you the memory of his Love. Jewels are valued by their Lustre; Labours of this nature by the Test and approvement of the Reader. Deagne, Madam, to accept it, for his Sake, who did so kghly prize it; So shaU your Honour ever obUge him, whose vowed zeale hath reaUy confirm'd him Your Ladiships in aU humble Observance Ri. Brathwaite. This Historical Survey was formerly addressed in this dedicatory Epistle 1 "Dec. 1643, buried The Lady Maudlin, d. to the Right Honorable Thomas Earl of Southampton, the 7th day." 2 The original grant is preserved at Welbeck Abbey. xxk] THE HEIR OF ALL 481 to his Honour, whose living memory shaU ever breath to posterity a sweet smelling Odour, And whose unexpiring Fame hath begot a noble emulation in his hopeful successor1. At first the Earl of Southampton stood for constitutional rights against the abuse of the Royal Prerogative; he sided with the Earl of Essex in supporting the House of Commons in their demand for redress of grievances, before granting supplies. But when he found that the Parliament was, in his opinion, going too far, he finally and permanently joined the King's party. He thought even a faulty Royalty better for his country than an unstable Republic. Henceforth he takes part with the history-makers of the period. ¦* Southampton's influence was exerted on both sides, always in favour of peace. Both parties respected him, but neither followed his advice. He was appointed one of the King's Bedchamber in 1641, and ofthe Privy Council on 3rd January, 1 641-2. WhitehaU. This day Thomas Earl of Southampton was sworne of his Majesty's most Honorable Privy CounseU, by bis Majesties Command, sitting k CounseU, and tooke his place and signed with other of the Lords. On January 27th of that year Sir John Coke writes: "Hertford, Seymour, Southampton, Falkland and Culpeper are the chief councillors"; and on March 27th, 1642: The Earl of Southampton is, with leave asked of the Lords' House, gone down to the Kkg at York.... Marquis Hertford, Earls Southampton and Newcastle, and the Lord Strange, are to be there instaUed Knights of the Garter. In 1642 he became High Steward of the University of Cam bridge2. On December the 3rd, 1 644, The Commissioners of the Kingdom of Scotland were at London, to bring back an answer to the propositions presented to his Majestie for a safe and weU-grounded peace3. Dugdale enters in his Diary: "Dec 13. The Duke of Rich mond and ye Earl of Southampton went from Oxford towards London about a treaty. ... Dec. 25.... They returned to Oxford this evening." 4 1 Marginal note to the reprint of the first Dedication. 2 Doyle's Official Baronage. 3 Reg. Privy Council, vol. xviii. 5th Dec. 1644. 4 p. 76. s.s. 3i 482 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON [ch. The Parliament seemed determined to pay the King's Envoys every respect. Somerset House was dismantled, at least as a resi dence, and they bought two gorgeous beds1, with suitable furniture and plate, for the two noblemen. But the negotiations were not successful. Henceforth followed a series of royal disasters. South ampton was one of the four noblemen who offered themselves to take the place of the King, as they said they had advised him to take the steps he did. When Charles escaped from Hampton Court in November, 16472, he fled to Titchfield to take refuge with the Countess of Southampton, "well knowing her to be a Lady of that Honour and spirit that she was superior to all kinds of temptations." He hoped to stay there until he could get a ship to flee to France ; but Colonel Hammond followed him, secured him, and took him to Carisbrooke Castle. The Dowager Countess was still alive in the following year. We get a glimpse of the family from a letter of Henry Tubbe3, godson of the third Earl. He had been paying a visit to the fourth Earl at Titchfield, and afterwards wrote to "Thomas Risley," the Steward, about the delights of the country. Bee pleased to present my humble service to her whose very age requires a profession of reverence and duty... to my very gracious Lord the Earle of Southampton and his noble consorte, and the young Ladies. This is the last notice of Elizabeth Vernon ; the date of her death is not to be found. One of the young ladies was Rachel, afterwards Lady Russell. The "noble consorte" was Elizabeth Leigh, daughter of Sir Francis Leigh, Lord Dunmore (who became Earl of Chichester in 1644). On the 28th of September, 1648, the House of Commons fixed the fine of the fourth Earl of Southampton for delinquency at £3466; besides £250 to be annually paid in support of the new ministers, his own clergymen and chaplains being sequestered4. Southampton was faithful to the King unto the last, and was 1 Expenses Commonwealth. 2 Clarendon's Rebellion, ed. 1707, in. 59. 3 Life of Henry Tubbe, by Prof. Moore-Smith. 4 R. W. Goulding, Wriothesley Portraits, p. 20. xxix] THE HEIR OF ALL 483 one of those permitted the last melancholy duty of burying his body at Windsor on 8th February, 16491. In 1653 ne became Earl of Chichester2 on the death of his father-in-law, Francis Leigh, Earl of Chichester, by a special clause in the grant. Southampton instituted proceedings in Chancery on 14th June, 1 654s, in the name of his wife Elizabeth, and his daughters the Ladies Awdry, Elizabeth, and Penelope, for certain money which Lord Dunmore had left them chargeable on his lands. The Lady Penelope died in the following year and was buried at Titchfield on the 8th of May, 1655. The Lady Awdrey was about to be married to Lord Joscelyn Percy, son and heir of the Earl of Northumberland, but she died. The Titchfield Register has it: "October, 1660. The Lady Ordery dyed at London ye 1 2th of this moneth, and was buried ye 1 7 day ofthe same in Titchfield." On December 23rd, 1662, her in tended bridegroom married her younger sister, Elizabeth. On the Restoration, the Earl of Southampton was welcomed at Court, and was made Lord High Treasurer. He did not approve of some of the ways at Court. He lived a noble life, and died with clean hands and a pure heart, dividing his property among his three daughters. "On June 18th, 1667, there was buried Thomas Rayothisthley [sic] Earl of Southampton High Treasurer of England to Charles the 2nd," in Titchfield Church. Clarendon, Evelyn, Pepys, and many others record his virtues in prose and poetry. "When the family Tomb was repaired in 1904, under the direc tion of Louis Ambler, Esq, F.R.I. B.A., it was found that a very large proportion of present Peers, including seventeen Dukes, were descended from these Earls."4 It must be a pleasant thought to all of these to know that they inherit Shakespeare's blessing. The Duke of Portland and Lord Beaulieu are the heads of the two branches of direct descendants now. 1 Clarendon's Rebellion, 1707, 11. 152-3 and in. 201. 2 Goulding's Wriothesley Portraits, p. 22. 3 Chanc. Proc. Reynardson's Division 238/218. 4 Notes on Titchfield Church, Rev. C. E. Matthews, p. 9. 3i- ADDENDA I. THE PATERNAL ANCESTORS The fanuly profession of the Wriothesleys was a highly coloured one, that of offickl herddry, the language by which was expressed the pomp and power of kkgs and thek retinue. John Wroth, Writh, or Wrythe, as he was generaUy caUed, was Faucon Herdd to Henry VI, became Norroy King of Arms, and then Garter King of Anns, the thkd holder of that office. He was knighted, to increase his dignity, and as he had no arms he formed a Coat of Azure, a Cross or between four fdcons ar., in remembrance of his havkg been Faucon Herald. He was at the head of the CoUege of Heralds when it was incorporated, and on that account the CoUege borrowed bis arms, varying them only in colours. He had two sons, WiUiam, who became York Herald, and Thomas, who began as WalUngford Poursuivant. This younger son was the more capable of the two, or, at least, the better appreciated, and on the death of his father, on 26th January 1504-5, he was immediatdy promoted to his office over the heads of severd expectant suitors. Thomas was knighted at Nuremberg by the Archduke of Austria, when he was sent to carry that prince the order of the Garter. His last pubhc work was to superintend the gorgeous ceremonial of the coronation of Anne Boleyn. Sir Thomas was a great coUector of heraldic antiquities, and was the first to vary his name to Wriothesley, beUevkg he had found a precedent for it, in which change he was foUowed by his brother William and his descendants. His fourth son, Charles, was created Rouge-Croix Poursuivant, and became Wkdsor Herdd in 1534, the year his father died. He was the anonymous author of that careful contemporary history since caUed Wriothesley' 's Chronicle. Camden was his special friend, in whose house he dwdt and died. If Thomas, the first Wriothesley, had somewhat outshone his elder brother William, their rdative positions were reversed by their descendants. The eldest son of WiUiam was Thomas, the first Wriothesley to raise himsdf to the peerage. From the first he was ambitious, aiming at levds above the Herald's office. Providence had been kkd to him in the matter of brains. He was born k Garter Court in the Barbican on December 21st, 1505, one of a large family. His mother Agnes was the daughter of James Drayton of London, whose notes Of his own and his grandcluldren's birthdays1 have been preserved. We have no knowledge of his early trainkg, and would not have known of his coUege Ufe but for Leland, who says he was at Canibridge, where, however, he did not take a degree. Ascham's letter to him in later years in the name of the University gives him an academical status not re vealed by its books. His name first appears in court records as "servant" or 1 B.M.Add. Charters 16,194. 486 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON clerk of Sir Edmund Peckham, Cofferer of the Household in 1529. Wriothes ley must have done something acceptable in high quarters, because he was appokted Clerk of the Signet in 1 5 30. Then he mysteriously went abroad on some secret service for CromweU, probably about the divorce. It is not clear when he entered the service of Cromwell, who acknowledged him as "kinsman" — many students have been misled in dates by Brewer in his Calendar having frequently referred to the endorsements of his letters as if they were of the same date as the document itself. He began to buUd himself a house at Micheldever in 1534, on his return from abroad. He must have been married by that time. His wife was Jane, daughter and co-heir of WiUiam Cheney, of Chesham Bois, and sister to Sk Edmund Peckham's wife. This marriage certainly helped him much in his early career. It be comes interesting to us in two ways that he should have become brother-in- law of Sir Edmund Peckham. His nephew George married Susan Webbe, sole daughter of Henry Webbe (a servant of Queen Katharine), who had the grant of the HolyweU Priory buildings, on which Burbage's Theatre after wards stood. This George was the man who helped Sir Humphrey Gilbert in his schemes, and took over from Sk PhUip Sidney 30,000 acres of the great stretches he had been granted, in lands "yet to be discovered." He after wards sank into great poverty, entreating Burleigh to lend him some of the houses of the young Earl of Southampton, Burleigh's ward, and "my near kinsman." It is not clear whether he was aUowed a residence. Later, we find him in difficulty to keep out of prison for debt, and beggkg cast-clothes from Robert, Earl of Essex, to keep him warm1. The career of Thomas Wriothesley is a part of pubhc history and is too weU known to need repetition here — how, thanks to his careful and methodical ways, he was able to do the work that CromweU had left, and to step into his shoes; how, bigoted CathoUc as he was, he became the greedy grasper of the CathoUc monasteries as they feU ; how, by his slavish obedience to the king, he became an evil influence in relation to aU the wives of Henry VIII, Katharine Parr only saving herself through her acuteness; how he rose from dignity to dignity, became Lord ChanceUor, Lord Wriothesley of Titchfield, and was left one of Henry VIII's executors and one of the guardians of the young king. Then, when those left in power used it to aggrandise each other, he became the Earl of Southampton, for which there was some reason, as he was Constable of the Castle, and the town lay near Titchfield, where he had made his chief dwelling pkce out of the ruined abbey. Thereafter the other CounciUors resolved to get rid of Wriothesley, and found information of his having aUowed the Great Seal to be used by deputy. So he was removed from that high and lucrative office. Shortly after, fearing greater indignities, he died in his Holborn house (formerly caUed the Bishop of Lincoln's House, then Warwick House, afterwards Southampton House) and was buried in the Church of St Andrew, Holborn, in 1550. He had had three sons, two of 1 This story is incorporated in full in my Burbage, and Shakespeare's Stage, pp. 166, 211, but it is mentioned here, as it is not generally known. ADDENDA 487 whom had died early; the third had been greatly honoured at his christening —his godfathers were King Henry VIII and his brother-in-law, the Duke of Suffolk, his godmother, the Princess Mary. The first Earl's widow, Jane, was a prudent woman, and managed the liberd jointures left her by her husband weU. She was a very strict Catholic, and thereby paved the way for her son's misfortunes during EUzabeth's reign. Most writers give very severe and inimicd notices of Thomas, first Earl of Southampton, many of them weU-founded. But he had some friends, and some virtues. He was a faithful and devoted husband, and was very kind to aU his poorer relatives. He seems to have been honest in public affairs ; no word has ever been breathed against him on that score. He was in the habit of saykg "He who seUs justice seUs the King." Lloyd in his Worthies speaks highly of him, and Ldand has some remarkable characteristics to note, among his "Encomia," which no one has seemed to notice1. He says that Wriothedey was a favourite of ApoUo, and an actor of the highest order k the Cambridge University plays. "Your beauty so shone upon your brow, your head of golden hak so gUstened, the Ught of your keen mind was so efhilgent, and your winning vktue so adorned you, that, one amongst many, you were seen to be a pattern for aU." II. THE MATERNAL ANCESTORS The maternal ancestors of the thkd Earl of Southampton were more inter esting than were his father's. They were, like the Wriothesleys, associated with the pomp and power of kings, but in a more active sphere, necessitating physical strength, persond bravery, and military skill. Three successive Sir Anthony Brownes were "Chief Royal Standard Bearer of England," though each of them dso signaUsed himself in other official duties. Lilly's Pedigree of Nobility mentions an Anthony Browne in the reign of Richard II. He had two sons ; the younger, Sk Stephen, became Lord Mayor of London in 1439 ; the dder, Sir Robert, had a son, Sir Thomas, Treasurer to Henry VI. He married EUen, or Eleanor, daughter of Thomas Fitzalan, brother of John Fitzakn, Earl of Arundel. They had a large family; their eldest son, Sir George, carried on the Une known as the Brownes of Betchworth Castle. Our Sir Anthony was not the eldest, as many writers state, but the thkd son, who founded a Une for himself, more distinguished than any other of the branches. He was knighted at the battle of Stoke-upon-Trent in 1487 2, and became Esquke of the Body to Henry VII, and his Royal Standard- Bearer. That frugal monarch was not very Uberal to his servants, but Browne had knds k Kent, Surrey, and other counties. His chief important office was the Lieutenancy and Constableship of Calais Castle 3. 1 Vol. v. p. 159, Hearne's edition Leland's Collectanea. 2 Metcalfe's Book of Knights. 8 Dugdale's Baronage, a. 292. Arms, 1 and 4, 3 Lions passant m bend between two cotises Argent; 2 and 3 Arundel, a mullet for difference, over all a crescent for difference. Crest, out of a mound vert, 7 sprigs of Fox gloves Proper. 488 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON I have found no due to the name of his first wife. She left one daughter, who married and had a daughter. It was through his second marriage, however, that the fortunes of the family must be traced, and therefore we must follow the pedigree of his second wife. Sir John NeviUe was third son of Richard NeviUe, Earl of SaUsbury, and the Lady Alice Montacute. His ddest brother was Richard, the great Earl of Warwick, caUed the King maker, whose daughter IsabeUa married George, Duke of Clarence, and was the mother of the famous Countess of SaUsbury (executed by Henry VIII). His other daughter, Anne, was married first to Prince Edward, afterwards to Richard III. Mr George Wright says that the Nevilles had descended by various Unes from Edward I and III and John of Gaunt. John NeviUe was summoned to ParUament on 23rd May, 1 Ed. IV, as Lord Montague or Montacute, made Marquis of Montague in 1470, and was slain at the Battle of Barnet, 1471. This John had married IsabeUa Ingoldesthorpe, a great heiress, and though his son George was degraded and died unmarried, his five daughters became ks co-heirs1- The eldest daughter, Anne, married Sir WiUiam Stonor; EUzabeth married Lord Scrope of Upsal and Masham; Margaret, Sir John Mortimer; Lucy, Sir Thomas FitzwUUam of Aldwark, Yorkshke; Isabel, WiUiam Huddleston. I fortunately discovered the fuU facts of their relationskp from a lawsuit in which they were concerned on July 14th, 1492. By the foUowing year Lord Scrope had died, and the other brothers-in-law were put on a commission to settle his estate on April 28th, 1493. Lucy NeviUe had several sons by her husband Sir Thomas FitzwUUam, who made his wiU on 27th AprU, 14972. Hunter in his volume on South Yorkshire describes the FitzwUliams' tomb at TickhUl, but, by the misreading of a decayed epitaph, says he died on 29th May, 1 495, which was the date of the death of the Lady EUzabeth, his mother. The wUl of Thomas was proved by ks widow, Lucy, on 6th June, 1498. He mentions his heir, Thomas, but does not aUude to two younger surviving sons, John, and WiUiam, who became the most distinguished of aU. His daughter EUzabeth married Sir Nicholas Harvey, and his daughter Margaret married Sir WUUam Gascoigne. Thomas, the son of Thomas, died at Flodden, leaving two sons, who died early, and two daughters, each of whom married a Foljambe (brothers). AU this may seem to be irrelevant to the story of the second Sir Anthony Browne, but it is because these facts have not been studied carefuUy that so many errors have been made in the accounts of his Ufe. Lucy NeviUe, Lady Fitzwilliam, the fourth daughter of John NeviUe, after her husband's death went southwards, some time between AprU 1497 and June 1498, to the Court, with her youngest son, WUUam, stUl under ten years of age. She seems to have been married again very speedily, this time to Sk Anthony Browne the first. It was probably through his influence at Court that his stepson, the young WiUiam FitzwUUam, was chosen to be brought up with Prince Henry. Not long afterwards a son, Anthony, was 1 Calendar Pat. Hen. VII, 1484-1494, 28 mem., July 1492. 2 Surtees Soc. Pub. xlv. 247. ADDENDA 489 born to Sir Anthony, and two daughters— EUzabeth, who married Henry Somerset, Lord Herbert and Earl of Worcester1, and Lucy, married first to John Cutts, son of Sk John Cutts (Under-Treasurer of England), and second to Sir Thomas CUfford, brother of Henry, first Earl of Cumberland. Sir Anthony made his wiU at Cdais on 25th September, 15052, leaving ks body to be buried there beside ks first wife in the Church of St Nicholas. AUks lands in England he left to his wife Lucy, after her death to his son Anthony, failing him to ks daughter Anne. He does not mention ks two younger daughters. Lady Lucy was made sole executrix, overseers Sir Edward Poynings, Hugh Conway, and the Lord Prior of Canterbury. The will was proved on 19th November, 1506. Blore gives the date of Anthony's birth as 1500; St John Hope adds June 9th, though without giving his authority. He was but young when he succeeded to ks father. His step-brother, WiUiam FitzwUUam, com forted ks mother in her second widowhood and devoted himself to her chUdren with almost paternd affection. For their sake he forgot the Fitz wUliams, ks brothers by the fuU blood. He was appointed cupbearer to Henry VIII on ks accession k 1509, and later became squire of the body. Henry's first attempt at warfare in 15 12 was to help his father-in-law, Lord Ferdkand of CastUle and Leon, to invade France. Ferdinand was to advance from the south, Henry from the north, wkle a large part of the EngUsh army was to go through Spdn to Guienne to meet Ferdinand. But the Spaniard proved unfaithful. Ferdinand was absorbed in fighting Arragon to possess it himself; there were no contingents prepared to meet the English, no provision of good shelter or tents; famine, pestUence, disorder, desertion prevaUed, and the EngUsh fled to their skps and came home against orders. Henry was discredited through Europe, and ks nobles wanted to fight Ferdkand. Among those appointed to serve the king FitzwiUiam was "in the Vanguard"; he was evidently one who obeyed orders, marched into France and did not run away. Among the payments of expenses appears one "To WiUiam FitzwiUiam, ridkg into Spain to seek again soldiers that were departed from the army, £18. 15." In the foUowing year Henry made up his mind to wipe out the disgrace, and put out a great fleet, in wkch Fitz wiUiam appears as Vice-Admird in the Mary Rose. Hemy left Calais on 21st July, 1513, marckng inland. The weather was detestable, but the army was brave. FitzwUUam is recorded as in the vanguard, with his retinue of the King's guard. The King took Terouenne on 22nd August and Tournay on 21st September, and among the kmghts he made in the Church next day was WiUiam Fitzwilliam. Thereafter the young knight rose from glory to glory with rapid steps. Henry, resenting ks father-in-law's treachery, agreed to marry ks sister Mary to Louis of France. Though her husband lived only 80 days after her marriage, it served the occasion. One Uttle peep into the Ufe of Lady Lucy Browne is given by the wiU of A 1 Laly Scrope's will, Testamenta Vetusta 687 and Surtees Soc. cxvi. 129. Testa EOor. v. 2 P.C.C. 15. Adeane. 490 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON her sister EUzabeth, Lady Scrope, 7th March, 1518. She leaves her sister, Lady Lucy Browne, " a Primer and a Psalter which I had from King Henry Seventh's mother," and she leaves her niece, Lucy Browne, certain property, " if she goes on with the match she had arranged for the girl with John Cutts." (She did marry, and had a son of the same name as ks father, not entered in the pedigrees.) "The Treaty of Universal Peace" of 2nd October, 1518, was signed, amongst others, by Sir David Owen and Sir WiUiam Fitzwilliam. By tks time his influence had helped ks step-brother at Court, and young Anthony was among the gentlemen of the King's Privy Chamber. He and Percival Hart were sent over to France in the train of Sir Thomas Boleyn, ambassador. The next news about them is "Browne and Hart have been at variance, the latter is sore hurt on the head, and not likely to be whole before Easter." Sent for to return home, they went to take leave of the young French king, who enroUed them of his chamber with a salary of 200 crowns a year and a year's salary in advance, their place to be kept open whenever they require it. Boleyn said: "Browne is much esteemed here." This probably induced Henry VIII to pay him more attention. " Henry loved a fine man," and the Brownes were aU fine men, tks second Anthony especially. He shared in aU Henry's maskings and tournaments. He and ks step-brother, Fitz wUUam, were among the chaUengers on the Field of theCloth of Gold in 1520, and won honour all round. FitzwUUam was appointed Ambassador as weU as "Vice- Admiral," and was favoured by Wolsey, who wrote : "very glad am I to see the towardness of tks young man." Thomas, Earl of Surrey, admiral, and FitzwiUiam, vice-admiral, were appointed to attend on the Emperor from Gravehnes to Dover, and thence from Southampton to Biscay. Young Anthony Browne was aUowed to go with them, and was knighted at the siege of Morlak in Brittany for ks "hardiness and noble courage." FitzwiUiam was thereafter made Governor of Guisnes in France, and at home the king became more and more attached to the Esqkre of his Chamber, Anthony Browne, whom he trusted aU his Ufe. In 1525-6 he married Alice, daughter of Sir John Gage, K.G., Treasurer of the Household, and he was appointed Lieutenant of the Isle of Man during the minority of Edward Stanley, Earl of Derby. He and his step-brother were put on many commissions together, and were made BaiUffs in Windsor Forest and other forests. FitzwiUiam was asked to become Treasurer of the Chamber, as £ir John Gage, his predecessor, had been made Lieutenant of the Tower. Hardly had he accepted the post than he was hurried off as ambassador to Francis, when the latter was in trouble about the loss of ks chUdren. Sir Anthony Browne was also sent over with the envoys to help to make a firmer alUance with the French king. Browne was much distinguished by Francis, who always took him out with him when he went to mask and dance. Francis sent over the order of St Michael to Henry, and Henry sent over the order of the Garter, with a beautifuUy bound copy of the statutes1, by a group of noblemen with whom Sir Anthony Browne was associated. The latter was the story-teUer of the party and describes how the king received it. Afterwards Francis sent a 1 1527. B.M. now in MS. Room. Add. MS. 5712. ADDENDA 491 formal letter of thanks, printed in Rymer's Foedera, xiv. 232. There is a letter of Sir Thomas Heneage (a cousin of Fitzwilliam's), to Wolsey in March 1527-8, explaimng how he could not obUge Wolsey "because Mr Carre and Mr Browne are away, and there is none here to keep the King's bedchamber but Norris and me." A great attack of the sweating sickness prevaUed that spring, not often fatal — "40,000 have taken it in London, but only 2000 have died. Sir WUUam FitzwiUiam and Sir Anthony Browne have had it. The King sits alone, so does Wolsey."1 In October of that year Sir Anthony was made Standard-Bearer. Sir David Owen had married Mary, heiress of the De Bohuns, and with her had recdved the Casde of Cowdray. She died, and her son, Sir Henry, sold the property to Sir WiUiam FitzwiUiam in 1 5 29, though ks father, Sir David, kept it by the courtesy of England tiU his death in 1535. Sir William had leave to impark 600 acres in Easeborne and Midhurst, to enlarge Cowdray Park, and he began to restore or rebuild the castle with exqmsite taste. By that time Henry had plunged kto ks divorce troubles, and the Pope had reksed permission. Sk Anthony Browne was put in charge of the French ambassador, to make thkgs pleasant for km, and FitzwiUiam was sent over with the Duke of Suffolk to counsd the French king. " FitzwUUam is a noble person of great vdour, skiUed in the arts of war," said the French ambassador. "The matters are weighty and FitzwUUam undertook to carry the decisions by word of mouth." EventuaUy Henry sacrificed his great mkister Wolsey to have ks own way. After that the two brothers were constantly engaged together in the king's service, and various offices were granted them in survivorskp. In 1534 they mourned together on the death of their mother, the Lady Lucy. By her wiU she asked to be buried in Bisham Abbey, beside her father and mother. One husband had been buried in Yorkskre and the other in Cakis. She mentions her daughter EUzabeth, Countess of Worcester, her niece Lady Gascoigne, and her mece Huddleston, but she left aU her own property to her sons, WUUam FitzwiUiam and Anthony Browne. So the latter would then receive aU ks father's lands and the half of his mother's. Shortly after, FitzwiUiam was sent over on another embassy to France, on "the Kkg's Cases," and he thanks Lord Lisle for some "antique pictures," wkch probably were pkced among those that adorned the famous Cowdray picture gaUery. The visitation of the monasteries had begun early in 1535 with the Cis tercians. By August Fitzwilliam was at Guildford with instructions to the justices of the Peace to seke the smaUer reUgious houses, leaving CromweU to ded with St Mary Overies and the London houses. He went over to repair the fortifications at Calais and returned home to Cowdray by October. By that time Waverley Abbey had been seked, and Chertsey Abbey condemned. The dawn of the stormy year of 1536 was marked by the death of Katharine of Arragon. That incident made life easier for a time, to the, Pope, to the Emperor, and to Henry, as Head of the Church in England. It made the steps easier from investigation to suppression, thence to spoUation. Henry had 1 Letters and Papers Hen. VIII, iv. pt 2, 4440. 492 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON wasted ks father's treasures through reckless extravagance and was deter mined to fiU ks coffers somehow. He sent to the monasteries Visitors who maUgned them ; he sent orators to the people to teU them how much the king was horrified with the revektions. He said he meant to take their property, so that there never need be taxes any more. A subservient ParUa ment passed ks BiU for the lesser monasteries in February I535~6- In May came the tragedy of Queen Anne, and her death changed the prospects of the succession. Sir Anthony Browne nearly fell into serious trouble with the king by talking about the Lady Mary's chance, but a humble apology for ks boldness made ks peace. The story of Mary's brave struggles to defend her mother's honour is a matter of kstory. Among the July "grants" were Fitzwilliam's of the Abbey of St Mary of Waverley and the Priory of Ease- borne and many lands attached (not for notkng — the king always had large purchase money). FitzwiUiam settled aU ks property on kmseU and ks wife for Ufe, with remainder to ks brother, Sir Anthony Browne, and ks heirs male. He was made Lord Admiral, and ks brother was on a Commission of "sewering" in Byfleet, Surrey, when news was brought that the northern men were up. They disapproved of their king's proceedings, they beUeved it was only evU counseUors that moved him, they wanted to see him, to confer with him. Thus they caUed themselves "PUgrims," not rebels; their errand was the "Pilgrimage of Grace" and their banner bore the five wounds of Ckist. It began in Lincolnshire, but Yorkshire and the north soon rose. Henry summoned his nobles round him; FitzwiUiam was torn from ks vaca tion at Cowdray, Sir Anthony from ks "sewering" in Surrey, Norfolk and Exeter were ordered to join Shrewsbury with 8000 men, Browne was to take 2000 men and munitions to Suffolk. Letter after letter, correcting, and some times contradicting, each other, were sent out in aU dkections, ckefly in Thomas Wriothesley's hand: lack of horses, of ammumtion, of men, bad roads, bad weather, no provisions, and the insurgents increasing with their opposition! There is no doubt the Court was afraid, and with reason. In nearly every despatch the two brothers are mentioned. Others, because of their rank, might be nominal heads, but it was they who conceived pkns, brought strength, inspired courage among their own men and trust in their promises, even by the rebels. The Lkcokshire rising was earUest calmed. A Uterary question arises in this connexion as to the date of The Pilgrim's Tale, said to have been written by Chaucer, but referring to " our Cobler the dawe," meaning the leader of the pilgrims, Nicholas Melton, caUed Captain Cobler. Tks poem becomes doubly interesting as it is printed along with The Courte of Venus,, the story of wkch I worked out in my Shakespeare's Industry, page 310. The northern section was more numerous, and more determined, having outlets of escape through Scotland. Anthony Browne tried to persuade them to peace. Norfolk promised to carry their complaints to the king, but the king reproached his generals for leniency; some insurgents were taken and severe examples were made. The country was weU nigh quieted by the end of 1536. Sir Anthony was engaged in putting the defence of the borders on a firmer basis before he was aUowed to rest, though he does not seem to have ADDENDA 493 been noted when the king began to rain ks rewards upon the successful leaders in the foUowing year. He must, however, have felt some reflected glory when his brother, stUl Treasurer and Admiral, was created the Earl of Southampton. They were both at the diristening of Prince Edward, both at the knerd of Queen Jane. The new Countess of Southampton and the Lady Browne were among the mourners, and memorials of the queen were granted them. At the end of 1537, a grant of thirty manors in Sussex came to Sir Anthony. His father-in-law, Sk John Gage, and ks step-brother, both on the Commission for the suppression of monasteries, had been keeping their eyes open for him, and they found the right tkng in Battle Abbey, with the church, sixteen Sussex manors bdonging to it, and Romney Marsh in Kent. The patent was signed by the Earl of Southampton at Cowdray on 7th August, 1538. Sk Anthony at once began to alter the abbey, meamng to fit it for residence in three months, with ks new ideas of art and comfort. But he was not aUowed to superintend the work himsdf. He was sent by the • kkg on a curiously compounded embassy, to offer marriage to the Dowager Duchess of MUan, and ks daughter Mary to Don Luis of Portugal. Browne was sent with Bishop Bonner to Francis. The bishop said of ks coadjutor : "I cannot sufficiently commend his dexterity and discretion. He is a great treasure." Meanwkle Wriothesley was sent with Vaughan to the Governor of the Low Countries, who was acting as guardian for the lady. They re ported the Dowager Duchess very good looking, but she did not accept Henry's offer, and Henry blamed Browne for not managing better. Never- thdess when Master Carew was sent to the Tower on the 31st of December for supposed treason, ks office of Master of the Horse was granted to Anthony Browne. The sdary was only .£40, but the office was a plum reserved for favourites. Then came CromweU's plan for a diplomatic marriage with Anne of Cleves. After his humiUation by the Archduchess, Henry was soothed by the wUUngness of the Lady of Cleves. Holbein flattered Anne in his portrait of her, arrangements were rapid, and Henry sent over Sir Anthony Browne as ks representative formaUy to marry Anne of Cleves by proxy. His portrait in ks gorgeous special dress was painted for the occasion and hung m Cowdray tiU its destruction by fire. His wife, Lady Alice, had to go with him as lady-k-wdting for the bride. Sir Anthony's stout heart failed him when he saw the bride dect. So did Henry's. CromweU persuaded km that he could not go back then, and they were married on 6th January 1539-40. On March 31st of that year Sir Anthony had ks greatest sorrow in the death of ks wife AUce, who left a large famUy of seven sons and three daughters. Lady Gage seems to have gone to take the care of her motherless grand- cluldren. On AprU 23rd, 1540, Sir Anthony was created Kmght of the Garter. But a storm was brewkg. Henry was dissatisfied with ks new wife and was wrathful with every one concerned — he must have a victim, and CromweU was sacrificed on 28th July. The Earl of Southampton resigned his office as Admiral and became Lord Privy Seal. Sir Anthony Browne was fortunate enough to have to propose that the Earl of Surrey should receive the honour of the Garter, and he was duly dected on 23rd AprU, 1 541. It is 494 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON not dear whether they were rivals for the love of the "fair Geraldine" just at tks time or not. Then came the scandal of the fair young Queen Katharine, whom Henry had chosen for kmself. "The King has gone mad about tks affair of the Queen. He has gone into the country with no attendants but musidans and ministers of pastimes," said the French ambassador. But he had one man with km who could combine music and grave questions of state, one of ks Privy CouncU, Sir Anthony Browne. Cowdray was stiU bekg rebuUt and the Earl of Southampton's quaint device worked into the fretted roof — an anchor, because he had been Lord Admiral, a trefoU, probably because he had a tkee-fold sphere of work, and ks initials, W. S. — when there arose trouble with Scotland, and an army was prepared for the Duke of Norfolk to lead to the north. He wrote at once "To my Lord Privy Seal and my Cousin Sir Anthony Browne," asking them to put^rses and tents on board for the north; he would meet them on the day appointed at York in the middle of September 1542. The men arrived, the leaders arrived, but the goods and other provisions were badly mismanaged. Norfolk was 72 years old, Southampton was the real leader, and his pithul letters to Wriothes ley about the mismanagement would make a tragedy. "What a trouble it is to a trew hart," he said. Then he was struck down by disease. He reached Newcastle in a Utter. Norfolk wrote to the CouncU that he would rather have ks arm broken than see him so. "Without him and ks brother, I were aU naked." The next letter was written with weeping eyes : " There was never a more sorrowful man than I am for the loss of tks man." Sir Anthony Browne worked wonders. In his sorrow he did not let the king's affairs suffer for lack of faithkkess and energy. He carried ks brother's banner in the vanguard, and Southampton's men would foUow no one but Browne. Norfolk wrote to Wriothesley on October 13th, 1542, praising Browne beyond words, and ended: "Pray God put it into the King's mind to make him ks Brother's heir for the name and lands of Southampton!" Browne asked Wriothesley to go and try to comfort Lady Southampton, "my sister," and to find what ks brother's wiU was as to ks kneral. Sir Anthony also wrote to his father-in-law to see after his children, as he had no time to make arrangements. After having devastated Scotknd from Coldingham to Kelso, they were aUowed to return home. Sir Anthony left ks brother in the parish church at Newcastle, as he had only wiUed to be buried in Midhurst if he died witkn a hundred rmles of it. Before he reached home, Anthony found that aU ks brother's offices were begged for and granted to others by the king. It is always said that he inherited ks brother's property, but he never did. AU was left to him, it is true, but "after the death of the Countess of Southampton," and Sir Anthony did not survive her! Neither did the king grant him his brother's title, wkch he so nobly deserved. But he had aU the troubles of an heir. The widow and Sir Anthony Browne were executors. Southampton gave to the king "my great skp with aU her tackle, my Garter and CoUar of St George, a tabernacle of gold set with stones." He left very Uberal legacies to Sir Anthony's daughter, ks wife's god-skid (£100 for four years), sums of money to ks sister Gascoigne, to ks cousins Lady Katherke Heneage, Thomas ADDENDA 495 Barney, and Margaret Foljambe, and to his nephews John Cutts and WiUiam, Lord Herbert. " To Sir Thomas Wriothesley my best gilt cup ; to J ames Dyer, and Master Anthony Denny gUt cruces." He remembered all ks servants, and had special gifts for his weU-bdoved , wife and weU-beloved brother. If ks own property were not enough to settle aU, he trusted ks brother Anthony would see to tkngs, "having regard to ks inheritance and the kindness I have dways shewn km." Tks might not have been very easy for Sir Anthony to do at the time, as he had heavy expenses and a large family to educate. Southampton's Inquis. P. M. found Alice and Margaret, his nieces, his legd heirs to Aldwark, wkch passed to the Foljambes by their marriage. The tragedy of the Scottish king at Solway Moss, a week after the birth of his baby, Mary, the ckld of misfortune, has been treated in kstory, and exactly two months after the death of the Earl of Southampton, the Duke of Norfolk and Sir Anthony Browne, among the Privy Council, signed the Letter to the CouncU of Scodand 29th of December, 1 542. " Robert Lord MaxweU, Warden of the Western March was aUowed to go on parole to Sir Anthony Browne." It appears that Browne stayed with the king some time, before they both married agdn. Henry married Katharine Parr on 13th July at Hampton Court, and Browne seems to have married shordy after. At the end of The Book of Expenses of the Lady Mary is the Ust of her jewels, taken on 12th December, 1542. Among the missing are "A brooche of gold enamyled Black with an Agate of the Story of Abraham with four smaU rockt Rubies given to Sir Anthony Browne drawing her grace to his Valentine."1 The entry is undated, but it must have been on the 14th of February in some year when Sir Anthony was a widower, taking his chance among the gay young bachdors. Another undated entry was "A brooch of golde with oon Balace and the History of Sussanna, geven to Mrs Garret at her marriage." Tks refers to EUzabeth Fitzgerdd, daughter of the ninth Earl of KUdare. Her mother EUzabeth, fourth daughter of Thomas Grey, Marquis of Dorset, had brought her to Engknd k 1533. Her father was betrayed in 1534, imprisoned k the Tower, and died there. His son, her brother, Thomas, tenth Earl, rose k rebeUion because of ks father's doom, was taken and executed in 1537, and ks five uncles were hanged, though three of them were not at aU connected with the rising. Her youngest brother had been carried abroad by ks tutor, but Henry sought constantly to entrap km and make an end of the Une. Princess Mary had taken tks hdpless and penmless cMld into her care, and she became one of her mdds of honour. Though ody fifteen, the gkl had been celebrated in Surrey's song as "The fak Geraldke." * He had by this time written the famous sonnet of which the doskg Ikes are : Her beautie of kind, her vertues from above, Happie is he that can obtain her love. When he poured forth ks adoration, petulance, or despair, he forgot that he was already a married man. Sir Anthony Browne wooed her in an honourable 1 Royal MS. 17 B, xxvm. p. 137.- 2 Kilkenny Archaeological and Historical Society Pub. 11. 1873. 496 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON way to be ks wife, seeking no dower, and braving the possible anger of ks king. He was a widower, much her semor it is true, but not so much as has been said, and he took her to a happy home and made her safe. To Anthony Browne was first appUed Surrey's poetic pkase of "the happy man." Now Dr Notts said that Sir Anthony Browne " must have been over skty years of age," and every writer since has repeated that he was. When his first wife died he put up a noble monument at Battle for her and for himself, giving with great kllness aU ks offices. He left a space for the dates of his birth and death, and they have never been filled. Sir Thomas Fitz wiUiam had made ks wiU in April 1497, and ks widow proved it in June 1498. Her re-marriage must have been after that date. The earUest possible date of her son Anthony's birth was 1499. Blore in ks Monumental Antiquities says 1500, but gives no authority. That would leave Browne 43 or 44 at the date of ks second marriage, and when we remember that he was considered the handsomest man of ks time, noted for bravery and for warlike and diplomatic skUl, a favourite of the king, with a beauthul house and large possessions, we need not scorn the fair Geraldine for marrykg km, without leave of Surrey. There was nothing to knder her from reaUy lovkg Browne1. It is evident that ks affectionate sister-in-law had either let or given him Cowdray as ks home, and he was fimskng the rebuUdkg of it, as begun by ks step-brother, only in the ceiling there were placed in ks half the arms of the Brownes with the three lions passant. But he also buUt or rebuilt a dower house at West Horsley for ks young wife, and there he decorated the ceUing with the arms of Browne alternate with the arms of the Fitz- geralds. He was soon torn away from her to go again to the war with Scodand, waged in order to make the Scottish nobles give up their young queen to marry Henry's son Edward. "They Uked not the marriage so Ul as the manner of the wooing." Before the end of the year Henry had threatened to go to war with France, and Browne was recalled to be one of the Commissioners to draw up the declaration. Preparation began with the next year, but it was July before Henry crossed to Cdais. Browne was with the Duke of Suffolk, concentrating on the siege of Boulogne. Henry wanted to join them at once, but Browne would not let km come untU he had made "a place of safe lying for the King." The EngUsh were successfal, the town surrendered on 14th September, and the king allowed the inhabitants to go or stay as they pleased. Most of them chose to go, and filed past the EngUsh king as he stood watckng in satisfaction, Sir Anthony holding the Sword of State unsheathed by his side. Henry went home soon after, being well pleased with Suffolk and Browne, and not content with the other events. The "reward" to Browne was the Priory of St Mary Overies, Southwark. So little is known about tks that it is weU to explain. On the dissolution it had remdned in the hands of the king, but the inhabitants, aided by the Bishop of Winchester, had bought the Priory Church for their Parish Church in 1540. Now Browne received 1 The Times Literary Supplement, Sept. 20, 191 7. ADDENDA 497 "the Site of the late Priory of St Mary Overyes, the demesnes, lands, messu ages, witkn the Priory Close," on 28th July, 1544. With the old Priory buUdings he made himsdf a noble home north of the church, having a wharf of its own on the then dear-skning Thames. In 1545 Browne was put on the Commission to sign the BiUs and Warrants for tlie king himself. It is not dear whether he resented not being ennobled, as others were who did similar work, but he invented an origind way of insuring his being remem bered at home. He had made a great coUection of pictures and portraits in Cowdray, and he devoted one gaUery to a series of frescoes shewing scenes from his Ufe when in attendance on the king, as at the taking of Boulogne and other occasions. And he had the actors in the scenes to sit for their portrdts. The king and the Court were staying at Cowdray in August 1545, and doubtless the opportunity was sdzed for the purpose. Few reaUsed the rarity and origkaUty of his fine taste at that time. Browne was made one of the commissioners for the treaty with France on 17th July, 1546. In January foUowing there is the first notice of ks son. The office of Standard-Bearer of England was confirmed to Sir Anthony, in con junction with ks son of the same name, with a salary of £100 a year for Ufe. On the 28th of that month the king died. He had been fortunately uncon scious much of the day before, and the warrant was left unsigned that he had ordered for the execution of the Duke of Norfolk, who had served him so well. Sir Anthony Browne was appokted one of the king's executors and one of the guardians of the young prince. The CouncU kept the demise secret for a day to settle plans; then the Earl of Hertford and Sir Anthony Browne tore off to Hertford Castie, where Edward and EUzabeth were residing, announced the news, and carried the young king back to London on Monday. The burial was fixed for the 14th of February. The order for the kneral was : "After the Corpse, the ckef mourner, then the Lord Chamberlain, then Sir Anthony Browne, Master of the Horse, leading the King's Charger with trappings of gold and escutcheons of the King." After the kneral, Sir WiUiam Paget, Sir Anthony Denny, and Sir William Herbert told the CounciUors that the king had meant to increase his nobihty, and read out a long Ust of names to be honoured. Sir Anthony Browne was the ody expected name not among them. Was it that the king forgot ks faithfd foUower, or the gentiemen to whom he had reveded ks intention ? What made it harder was that Wriothesley was to be made an Earl, in the first place of "Ckchester," afterwards of "Winchester"; but ks own choice was "Southampton." And Browne's bdoved step-brother had borne the title; his wife still Uved as "Countess of Southampton." Browne was aUowed to remain Master of the Horse, and, as such, in the Coronation Procession of 20th February, 1546-7, he rode at King Edward's side and encouraged him tkough that fatiguing day. He had a picture made of that memorable scene for ks gaUery at Cowdray. Sir Anthony had two sons, who died early, by his second wife. He made his wUl on 21st AprU, 1547, and died at Byfleet on 6th May, 1548. His eldest son was not of age when he made the wiU, but had attained ks s.s. 32 498 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON majority before his father's death, so that there was no.wardskp in ks case. A long funeral procession escorted Sir Anthony to his tomb in Battle Abbey beside his wife, which he had himself prepared1. The young heir had a heavy responsibUity — a large family of brothers and sisters and a young stepmother about his own age to look after. The young widow in 1552 married Sir Edward Clinton, Lord Admiral, afterwards made Earl of Lincoln. She was very happy with her husband. He died in 1585, and was buried in St George's Chapel, Windsor. In 1590 she died and was laid beside him. Tkee letters from her are among the Additional Manuscripts2, British Museum, and one among the Loseley Papers, dated, in her beautikl, clear handwriting, "From the Court, 8th December 1589. "3 Tkough that letter I was able to trace the blunder made in the date of her death, always given as 1589. Going to Somerset House to see her wiU, I was surprised to find that it supported the error. However, strong in the strength of my letter, I read it careklly, and found there was a little interpolation which made me right. It was written " In the thirtieth year of Queen EUzabeth," but before 'the "thirtieth" was interpolated in very smaU handwriting "one &." The officer in charge of the Students' Room made a note of tks at the end, so no one else need make the error again. Sir Anthony was much praised by Lloyd and Winstanley. "He was the best compound in the world, a learned, an honest and a traveUed man, a good nature, a large soul, and a settled mind." His son was like to him; though he had not his father's opportunity of shewing his powers, he had more than his father's fortune. He had been knighted at the accession of Edward VI, and on the ist day of September 1550 was buried "the good lady the Countess of Southampton," his step-aunt, through whom at last there came to him the great inheritance from his step-. uncle. Tks made him a good match, even for the kgher nobUity, and he married Jane, daughter of Robert RatcUffe, Earl of Sussex, and ks wife Margaret Stanley, daughter of Thomas, Earl of Derby. By her he had two chUdren, Mary, who became the mother of the third Earl of Southampton, and Anthony, who died before ks father. Anthony the third got into trouble with the CouncU about his religion and his devotion to the Princess Mary. But the time was short before he raUied to her side at FramUngham. She made km Viscount Montague, after the name of his old ancestor, John Neville, Marquis Montague. She put him in PhUip's service, and he led the armies that fought victoriously at St Quentin. When Elizabeth ascended the throne he took the oath of aUegiance, and when the Spaniards threatened invasion he was the first to bring his troops to Tilbury to shew to the queen, headed by three genera tions, kmself, his son, and ks grandson. His Ufe is completed during the time of ks grandson Henry. An account of Cowdray as a building and its famous gaUery was intended 1 Sussex Archaeological Magazine, vi. 54. 2 Add. MSS. 12,506, ff. 47, 72 and 12,507, f. 131. 3 Loseley Papers, vm. 72. ADDENDA 499 to foUow here, but as St John Hope has done that work so splendidly there needs no other. To ks beautiful book on Cowdray aU those interested in the Ulustrations should turn. In the letterpress he gives some of the deeds and cases concerning it, and the transfer from the heir of the De Bohuns and ks father to the Earl of Southampton in 1527 and 1535. He does not foUow kUy the Uves either of FitzwiUiam or Browne. He ought to have read the Montague Correspondence in the Loseley Papers, and The Life of Magdalene Viscountess Montague, by her confessor, Father Smith, and he wodd have found that she did not Uve at Cowdray (p. 23), but at St Mary Overies and at Battle, where she died, not in 1606, but on the 8th of AprU, 1609. III. THE SECOND EARL AND COUNTESS OF SOUTHAMPTON The heir to the first Earl of Southampton's great estates and short-worn title was the infant who had been baptized on the 4th of April, 15451, amid all the reflected glories of royalty. None of his family had had so much honour pdd him on bekg "made a Ckistian," but he made no mark on his time. His Ufe has never been written. A few details are necessary. When his father died on 30th July, 1 5 50, he left ks wife, the new Countess of South ampton, as comfortable as he could. The young heir became of course a royal ward. Sir WiUiam Herbert, a friend of ks father's, "bought the wardship"2 from the young king for £1000. The authority perhaps had better be given, as it affects the reckonkg of later years. The vdue of the lands of Thomas Earl of Southampton found in office after his death is £1,353. 10s. 6d. Henry his son is heir, of the age of 4 years. The wardship of the said heir with lands and tenements to the value of £100 per ann. is sold to Sir Wm Herbert Knight, etc., for £1000, to be paid £140 at Michael mas then next ensuing (1551,) and so yearly £140, the last year £160, whereof the King remitted £700, in consideration of the good service of the said Sir William, and for that the said Earl was but 4 years old, and but one person, and there remained £300 to be paid, at next Michaelmas £50, and so yearly. Done by the King 17 November 1551, then present, the Lord Great Mr, the Lord Privy Seal, and the Lord Great Chamberlain, the Marquess Dorset and the Vice-Chamberlain at the which time the King's Majesty granted another £100 land for the better exhibition of the said Earl. Endorsed: "4 Ed. VI. A note of the bargain of the W. of the Earl of Southampton: to Sk Wm Herbert, etc." The Inquis. P. M. of Thomas, first Earl of Southampton, gives the details of his property, and ks wUl shews sometkng of ks fedings to ks friends. The young'heir seems to have been left a good deal to his mother's care. She evidently preferred to Uve with her famUy at Titchfield in those_ critical times, partly for their health, and partly for the power it gave her of directing their education tkough thek tutors. But the Privy CouncU kept its eye on 1 Wriothesley' s Chronicle, 1. 154. 2 Cecil Papers, Petitions 2138. Salisb. Papers, xm. 27. 32 — 2 500 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON her. On January 2nd, 15 50-1 (sk months after the death of her husband), it decided to "arrest Mr Colas a Frenchman, the Schoolmaster of the Children of the late Erie of Southampton,"1 on suspicion of poUtical correspondence. There is no krther aUusion to this incident, which probably acted as an excuse to make her find some other teacher. When Mary, the young Earl's godmother, came to the tkone, the Countess may have looked for more harmonious times. She appeared in the coronation procession, but she does not seem to have been much at Court. The only other recorded incident of that reign is another arrest2. "John Cartwright, servant to the Countess of Southampton, was committed tks day to the Marshalsea, for ks evU demeanour to Ruy Gomez of the King's Privy Chamber," 21st August, 1554. Tks was evidendy only some private quarrel. The servant was certain to have been a CathoUc, but he might have been of the anti-Spanish faction. The second Earl would be only thirteen when Elkabeth ascended the throne. The Countess seems to have retained some control over him at that date, and even later. For the Privy CouncU wrote her a letter requiring her "in the Queen's Highness' name, without krder delaye or protract of time, notwithstanding her former excuses to take order that the Earl her sonne may be here at Courte, before Candlemas Eve next coming,"3 9th December, 1564 (Candlemas, Feb. 1564-5). Sir Simonds d'Ewes says under date 1 558-9*: Henry Earl of Southampton and the Lord Dacres of the North were, I con ceive, at this time, both under age, and in ward to Her Majesty, and if they were present, (as many times such were admitted upon such solemn days as these) then doubtless they did either stand beside the upper part of the rail at the higher end of Parliament House; or else were admitted to kneel at the upper end of the House near the Chair of State, for none were allowed to sit under age. In the same volume he mentions the Earl of Southampton again in regard to the session of 5 EUz.5 The Viscount Montague is there entered as present, 1562-3. No clear hint is given as to what the young Earl of Southampton did with himself that first year after ks call to Court. The first reference to him, about a year after, records his marriage to Mary, the beautikl young daughter of Viscount Montague. We do not know whether it had been a love-match, allowed to run its course, or whether it had been arranged by the queen, or by the Earl of Pembroke, or whether the latter had sold the right of marriage to the Viscount Montague. It seemed an eminently suit able union. The fathers of the young people had been both of the old. faith and of the new nobUity. Both had some association with Sir WiUiam Fitz wiUiam, the former Earl of Southampton. Viscount Montague, son of his step-brother, had inherited Cowdray and ks other southern property. Thomas Wriothesley had secured ks title during the protectorate. There 1 Privy Council Register, 111. 184. 2 Ibid. v. 65. Marginal note "Insult to a Spaniard." 3 Ibid, vn, 9th December 1564, p. 174. Cotton MS. Appendix, xxviii. 24. 4 Journal House of Lords, p. 11. 5 Ibid. p. 58. ADDENDA 501 seems, however, to have been some domestic mystery or friction about the match. G. E. C. in ks account of the Wriothesleys indudes a note on the authority of Mr J. H. Round that a famUy prayer-book, preserved in Sir Thomas PhiUipps' coUection (and sold in 1895), contained the note "Memo randum, that my Lord of Southampton was maryed the Tewesday the XIX daye of February, 1565-6. The mariage was solemnked att London in my Lord Montague's House by hys advise, without the consent of my Lady his mother." But it seems to have been a notable wedding. "AU men and women of appearance in tks town and court (except the Earl of Arundel and the Lady CecUia) were this day at the Earl of Southampton's marriage, whence Mr Secretary has now gone to Court," writes Sir Nicholas Tkock- morton to the Eari of Ldcester from Baynard's Casde, 19th February, 1565-6 (Pepys' CoUection). We can learn sometkng regarding this notable wedding from a manuscript in the Bodldan Library1. " The copy of an oration made and pronounced by Mr Pounde, with a brave maske out of the same house aU on great horses att the marriage of the young Earl of Southampton to the Lord of Montague's daughter, about Shrovetyde 1565-6." As Uterature it is too inferior to reproduce. We can imagine the feUows of Lincoln's Inn, "Diana's virgin Knights, dad aU in white," rdmng in thek great horses, wkle Mr Pound redted, doubtless with due pomposity, the eighty-seven verses of ks own composition. He had done so because the "proper and vertuous maid" was about to marry an Earl. Whose towardness is such That not the Muses learned tongues Might prayse him overmuch. Wherefore even for ye noble wytte Which his young yeres doth showe Mkerva as greatly tenders him As anye she doth knowe. Mr Pound expkked that the Goddess had sent the bridegroom laurel, the Goddess Diana sent him a scarf, Hymen sent km "A figure of his wife." I have wondered if this present from the Lincoln's Inn men could have been the portrait of the bride preserved at Welbeck, taken " at the time of her marriage, aged 13." Tks Mr Pound was a cousin of the Wriothesleys — the previous Earl left a legacy to "Aunt Pounde." He became later distinguished as a recusant, was associated with Edmund Campion, and gave km an intro duction to the Earl of Southampton2. The next fact noted concermng Southampton is that he entered Lincoln's Inn a month later, stUl under age. " On March 19th 1 565-6 Henry Wriothes ley, Earl of Southampton, special admission."3 On the same day was ad mitted " George Peckham of Middlesex, at the request of the Earl of Rutland, fellow of tks Inn, and of Sir WUUam CordeU Kmght, Master of the RoUs." It may be remembered that Sk Edmund Peckham and Thomas Wriothesley 1 Rawlks MS. Part 1, 108. 2 Privy Council Register, 1581, xm. 170. a Book of Admissions. 502 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON had married sisters, but this George, if the son of Sir Edmund, would have been too old for a normal student at the Inn. Yet perhaps the specid force of his introduction lay in his age. George's son was another Edmund. This is important in the history of the Theatre. On November 2nd, 1570, Edmund Peckham of Bucks had also a "special admission." In 1589 he tried to use his knowledge of law to regain the HolyweU property and worried the Burbages sadly by besieging the "Theatre."1 Concermng the Earl's majority WUUam Overtoun, writing to Lord Burleigh on 19th August, 15672, mentions that "the Earl of Southampton had informed him that his rents were paid to him now"; yet in the' Book of Wards and Liveries3 an entry is marked " Special Livery." It records that in the reign of Edward VI Thomas Earl of Southampton died, leaving aU ks property to ks only son and heir to be delivered him when he was 21 years of age. The queen yields his inheritance to km on 6th February, 1568, with no mention of the Earl of Pembroke. It is not certain whether there could have been any settlement made at the date of Southampton's marriage. From his own Inquis. P. M.4 we learn that in 1568 there had been a formal settlement of lands on ks wife in place of dower, by an indenture between the Earl and the Viscount Montague and Symon Lowe, merchant, in con sideration of a marriage akeady solemnized between the Earl and the Lady Mary ks wife, ioth February, 1568. In the foUowing year an indenture was drawn up between the Earl and ks father-in-law, associated with Ralph Scroope and John Hippesley, Esq., further settling affairs, ioth May, 1569, when the Earl also made a wiU. At that time he had a daughter, ks only and weU-beloved child, the Lady Jane, and for the great affection he bore to her he desired at once to settle an inheritance on her, for her advance ment in marriage. He also left a legacy to the Lady Mabel, ks sister, and a similar legacy to Michael Lyster, the son of his sister, the Lady Mary, de ceased, sometime the wife of Richard Lyster, also deceased; a legacy also to Robert Cornwallys, son and heir of Thomas Cornwallys and the Lady Katherine, ks sister. His executors, the chief of whom was the Viscount Montague, were to secure these sums as soon as possible after ks death. " If none of the sons of the Earl, yet to be born, should survive," then everytkng was to go to ks daughter, the Lady Jane. A page is lost from the Inquisition just when it reaches the most important details. The young Earl was certainly by that time aware of the troubles in the north; he was sympathetic with the reUgious unrest and romanticaUy interested in the fortunes of Mary Stuart. That magnetic disturber of the normal currents of men's thoughts had landed at Workington on "May 17th 1568, out of Scotland by sea, writing a letter to the Queen."5 No sooner did she arrive than the Pope began to bustle. Many of the nobles, Protestant and Catholic alike, had been considering the grave danger to the country arising out of the unsettled state of the succession. They saw danger in Mary's 1 My Burbage, and Shakespeare's Stage, pp. 52, 166. 2 D.S.S.P. Eliz. lx. 51. a Part 5, vol. lxii. p. 290. 4 Inq. P. M. Eliz., Prima Pars 196/46, Southampton, 1581. 5 Burleigh's Diary. ADDENDA 503 influence, not only in insular but in continental poUtics, and honestly thought that the best thing that could be done would be to marry her to some unobjectionable feUow-countryman. Elizabeth tried conferences (be ginning at York on 6th October, 1568, and lasting tiU the ioth) of the tkee parties, i.e. the unsuccessful legitimist party in Scotland, who stiU supported the Queen of Scots; the successful revolutionary party, under her base brother, the Earl of Moray, who had made her infant son king in her place; and the English party, stronger than either of these or both com bined. The EngUsh, nominaUy acting as umpires, would be certain to decide in the way most pleasing to EUzabeth. Her representatives were the Duke of Norfolk, the Earl of Sussex, and Sir Rdph Sadler. The purport of the conference was to enable the various parties to come to some harmonious arrangement about the Scots Queen. The Earl of Moray utUised ks oppor tunities to enlarge on her crimes, to excuse ks own actions; insisted that the "lost casket" had been found, and that he had brought with him copies of the letters made by ks wife, wkch could prove aU that he stated. Queen Mary's party gave an indignant demal to ks charges, and protested that the meeting was not a court of justice, where a queen could be tried, but a conference for ways and means of procedure. The strange effect followed, probably from the very virulence of Mary's denunciation, that the Duke of Norfolk and others, who had previously thought her a hardened criminal, came to beUeve that she was the injured victim of evU tongues. Then a faint whisper was breathed, probably first by the Bishop of Ross and Lord Livingstone; that all trouble would be smoothed if the captive queen would marry the Duke of Norfolk. Nearly aU the leading noblemen, even Sussex and Leicester (and Burleigh at first), caught at the idea. York was too far off for Elizabeth to hear and manage affairs, so the conference was annulled, and a fresh one was called to sit at Westminster on 24th November. Queen Mary was removed from Lord Scrope's house at Bolton, because Lady Scrope was the sister of the Duke of Norfolk, and she was sent to Tutbury. "On the 27th of October, Certen Lords, Pembroke and Ldcester, were excluded from the Presence Chamber, for fardering the proposition of the Succession to be declared in Parliament without the Queen's aUowance" wrote Burldgh in his Diary. The Westminster conference proved litde better than that of York. In the following year Sussex came to see the danger that might lie in the projected marriage. Burleigh stUl thought it practicable, but advised Norfolk to teU thequeen at once. Unfortunately Norfolk consulted Leicester, who counselled him not to tell her without due preparation, and promised to do so himself when she was on progress. Elizabeth had many ears, and of course she heard, and knted her knowledge, with a warmng, to Norfolk. Some of ks sym- patiiisers had gathered together at Titchfield, the Earl of Southampton's house1, and Leicester began to realise the danger it might prove to himself. So he conveniendy fell iU, or pretended to be so, and affecting to be at the point of death2, sent a message to the queen that he could not die at peace 1 Nichols' Royal Progresses, Elizabeth, 1. 250. 2 Camden's Life of Elizabeth, p. 104, etc. 504 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON without seeing her. Elizabeth hurried to his bedside. There, with sigk and tears, he implored forgiveness himself, and revealed aU that the others had done, or thought of doing. The queen was very angry with the others, but forgave him, as he expected she would do, and he did not die then. After Ldcester's revelation the queen spoke sharply to Norfolk, and he promised - to give up all notion of the marriage. Burleigh entered in his Diary, 6th September, 1569: "I wrote to the Earl of Sussex, to know what had passed from him in the matter of the Duke of Norfolk, at Titchfield, South ampton." Pembroke was arrested and sent to the Tower1. Norfolk went home to Kennkghall, whence he was summoned to return. He unwisely made ks hedth an excuse for dday, was met on the way when he had actually started, arrested, and finally taken to the Tower in charge of Sir Henry NeviUe, nth October, 1569. The discontent in the northern counties about reUgious matters was in tensified by the faUure of the conference to secure the Uberty of the Queen of Scots, and many rose in arms under the Earls of Northumberland and Westmorland, before they were fuUy prepared. They were proclaimed traitors at York on 24th October; on the 25th the Scottish Queen had been forced to ride through the cold dark night from Tutbury to Coventry2.' A speedy and mercUess chase gave the skUled troops of the Earl of Sussex an easy victory over the insurgents. On 2nd January, 1569-70, Mary was taken back to Tutbury, the danger seeming over. On the 22nd the Earl of Moray was lulled by HamUton in Linlithgow, wkch made a kdeidoscopic change in the situation. In February Leonard Dacres, with the two younger sons of the Earl of Derby3, concocted a wUd scheme of rescmng the Scottish Queen, but Lord Hunsden frustrated their attempt on the 20th. On the 1 6th of March, 1569-70, "presaging evU to himself forks association with Norfolk," the Earl of Pembroke died at Hampton Court. On the plea of her having shdtered the rebels, Sussex invaded Scotland on the 17th of AprU, and mercUessly ravaged the unprepared country. The Pope had drawn up a BuU of Excommumcation against Elizabeth and had sent it over by Ridolpk. It was now translated into EngUsh and printed. John Felton, a CathoUc gentleman of London, fixed it on the gate of the Bishop of London's palace in St Paul's Churchyard during the night of 24th May, 1570. Felton was soon arrested, and on 4th August was condemned to be executed. The pubUcation of the BuU was the turning-point in Elizabeth's Ufe. Her love of compromise could stand her in stead no longer. Henceforth it had to be open war. She knew that all English men had now to choose between herself as representing their country and a Roman Pope against their country. She trusted her people and hersdf ; she freed Norfolk the very day that Felton was condemned. But Norfolk shewed a great lack of common-sense, of pohtical and psychological intuition, and 1 Camden's Diary, Harl. 36, Exam. 29th September 1569. 2 Burleigh's Diary. 3 Brother of Lord Dacres, whose daughters had married the sons of Norfolk and kept the property from Leonard. ADDENDA 5o5 of moral honesty. He broke the promise he had made to the queen; he did not realise the change in her temper; he falsified facts in his examinations; he wove his own fate. Beyond the foreign ambassadors, the two chief mischief-makers in England were Ridolpk, the Pope's Italian agent, and the Bishop of Ross, the Scottish Queen's advocate. The first had the simpler mission, to win back England to the Pope. He carried money to help the impecunious "faithkl," he stimdated fervour with promises, he kept kmself weU in the background. The aims of the other were more complex, first to secure the release of his mistress, next to turn in her favour the balance of power in Scodand, to restore her to her birthright. To contribute to tks, he wanted her to be recogmsed as heir-apparent of England. He also wished to restore England to the Pope, but that was kept in the background1. He was not so careful to efface kmself as was Ridolpk ; he had not come into the country secretly, but opedy with a safe-conduct, as one of the Scottish commissioners to the York conference, and had remained in the country as the Scottish Queen's "Ambassador." The Privy CouncU would not accept him, as ks mistress was not a free Queen of a State entitled to send one. They confined him under various pretexts, now under the care of the Bishop of London, now under the care of the Bishop of Ely. Into tks madstrom had the young Earl of Southampton been drawn, and it was ody by a miracle he was not sucked under. He must have attracted the attention of the Privy CouncU early, because on February nth, 1568-9, the Earl of Sussex wrote to CecU desiring ks "hdping hand for the young Earl of Southampton, that he may rather be charitably won, than severely corrected."2 Tks might refer either to ks reUgion or ks sympathy with the Scottish Queen and the northern Earls. It was before the settlement of his estates on loth May, 1569, and before any of the great events happened. Froude says "concermng the Scotch Queen's succession, some of them, Lord Montague, Lord Southampton and others had been in correspondence with the Spanish ambassador about it before the meeting at York, and it was by them that her marriage with the Duke of Norfolk had first originated."3 He does not give any authority for either statement. It is not dear what Southampton was doing during the summer of 1569, but when the northern Lords were in the field he sent ks servant, Mr Chamberiak, to the Bishop of Ross wkle he was Uving in Stephen Wkte's house k Bishopsgate. Mr Chamberlain had not met the Bishop before and expkined that the Earl could not then come, and had sent km in ks place. His master was a CathoUc, honoured the Queen of Scots, desired to know of her estate and what the Bishop thought he ought to do under the circum stances. The Bishop told him of the communing of marriage between her and the Duke of Norfolk, whereof the Queen's Majestie of England had taken some jolosie, and had there- 1 Murdk's Vol. of Cecil Papers, pp. 1-30. J. Lacy's account, Harl. Misc. v. 2 Foreign Series S. P vols. 169-170, p. 109. 3 Elizabeth, ix. 135-144. 506 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON fore committed them both to strait keeping, the one in the Tower, the other in Coventry; that the Earls had in the field a multitude of common people without armour, money, or good order. He looked for no success in their sudden enterprise and advised Southampton to keep quiet and not shew his favour or affection, as it would do him no good1. Chamberlain then told the Bishop that "Leonard Dacres, whose ckef desire was to Uberate the Scotch Queen, had been with Lord Montague seeking help. Montague reksed this, and advised Leonard to have notkng more to do with it." While the Earls were kgitive in Scotland, Southampton sent the same gentleman to the Bishop, to carry his master's thanks for the information and advice given, for he had proved it true. That was in January 1569-70. When the Earl was in town for some business of his own in May 1570 (it must have been after the Latin BuU was in the country), he sent another of ks servants to ask the Bishop of Ross to arrange a conference in St George's Fidds. The Bishop at first reksed, as he had been lately suspected and summoned to Court for his reUgion, and but newly been set at Uberty. He was trying to arrange a treaty for ks Queen, so a meeting might be hurtful to both parties. The Bishop begged the Earl to defer meeting. The next day, however, Southampton sent again, saying that besides ks wish to become acquainted with the Queen of Scots' ambassador, he had some necessary business about wkch he urgently desired to ask the Bishop's advice. Therefore the Bishop, with only one servant and one other man sent by the Earl to guide km to the appointed place, set off soon after 9 o'clock at night. The Earl joined him, accompanied only by Stephen White, having left his servants by the waterside. The two men introduced themselves to each other and Southampton asked about the state of the Scottish Queen. The Bishop gave a long account of his imprisonment in the Bishop of London's house, to account for his knowing so little about her then. MeanwhUe, he said, Queen EUzabeth's army had been ravaging Scotland, but now they were about to make a treaty. The Bishop was about to go to Chatsworth to send Lord Livingstone to Scotland, to bid commissioners come to London to help to modify the conditions. The Earl replied: God send you good success, I wish your mistress well and honour her. But I pray you tell me what think you of this Bull that is now published abroad, whether the subjects of this realm may with safe conscience obey the Queen as our righteous Princess? Or if it shaU be danger to our conscience or not? For I hear that sundry are departed these realms for the same cause (for even then was Lord Morley departed and, not long before, Mr Shelley, Mr Shelton and others)."The Bishop rephed that he could not think there was so great danger to men's consciences by vertue of the Bull, as that they should be driven to leave their country, wife, children and lands for the same, for though it did absolve the subjects from their obedi ence, yet were they not charged under pains of cursing, nor censure ofthe Church, to withdraw their obedience from her. If no other forces were sent by the Pope 1 Murdin, State Papers, p. 30. ADDENDA 507 or other Prince, for execution of the said BuU, it appeared to be but a threaten ing; and in that respect his opinion was that no subject of this land should hazard himself and his estates for that cause, for it apperteyned to the great Princes of Christendom to set forward the reformation or alteration of religion, and it was sufficient for the subjects that they were constrained to obey1 The Earl rephed "that it were better far to lose all that he had, than to Uve under cursing in this country, for then should he be under continual fear of consdence." The Bishop answered: "There was no danger to obey the Queen in TemporaUties, but in matters of ks reUgion, if he were pressed therdn, he could not weU obey against ks conscience; and so long as the Queen was the strongest party, he might well obey." Just then the watch came on them suddenly. " It was agreed between the Earl and me that in case we were demanded severaUy about our conference we both should say it was of sudden, and not of purpose, and that it was but of the estate of the Queen of Scots, and no other matter." It appeared to the Bishop that his intention was to have departed the realm for safety of his conscience, as Morley had done. So bang he had given km a strong counsel therein, but "seeing him but a young man, he thought it not good to deal with him in any other matter of importance." It would indeed have been better for aU had the Earl respected the objections of the Bishop to make an appointment then. Of course the meeting was reported by the watch ; the Bishop was committed again, this time to the Bishop of Ely, and on 7th June he was charged with "practising with the Earl of Southampton on Lambeth Marsh."2 He never reached Chatsworth, and was effectually prevented from helping his mistress at that difficult time. Apparently the Earl did not leave London. He would hear of the mis fortune fdlen on the Bishop, and would be prepared for some trouble fakng on himself, but he trusted the Bishop would keep their agreement. The trouble arrived on 18th June, 1570. "The Queenes Majestie having just cause gyven her to conceive some displeasure towards the Earl of South ampton," the Privy CouncU committed him to the custody of Mr Becher, Sheriff of London, "to have no communication with any one." The Sheriff found ks prisoner a kndrance to his own freedom, so he skUkUy suggested to the CouncU the danger of keeping the young man immured in London whUe the Plague was spreadkg rapidly in ks district. The Council was considerate, and on 15th July told Mr Becher3 that they had arranged that Sir WUUam More should come and take the prisoner away to Loseley with him. Their letter to Mr More to the same effect has the post script* : "It is meant that the expenses of the Earl shaU be at ks own charges." The Earl wrote to Mr More to prepare him, saying: "He came with no very good wiU,...but since it is their pleasure, I am glad they have placed me with so honest a gentieman and my friend."5 Mr Becher adrised Mr More "on Sonday mormng the 16th July 1 570,. . .hoping he would come tomorrow, 1 Murdin, p. 38. Confession Bp Ross, 2nd November 1571. 2 Privy Council Register, vn. 366. Loseley Papers, iv. 1. 8 Loseley Papers, iv. 2. * Ibid. iv. 3. 5 Ibid. iv. 4. 508 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON so as to be able to start on Tuesday,"1 which was done. So the young Earl's first detention at Loseley began on the 18th July, 1570. Sir Christopher More had bought Losdey in 24 Hen. VIII. He died on 15th August, 1549. ^s son and nelr> WUUam, had been born in January 1519-20, and was not kmghted tiU 15762. William More had a son, George, and two daughters; the elder, EUzabeth, born 28th AprU, 1552, married first Richard Polsted of Albury, Surrey; second Sir John Wooley of Pirford; tkrd Sir Thomas Egerton, afterwards Baron EUesmere, Lord High Chan cellor. She was Lady-k-Waiting to the queen, who loved her, and caUed her "her sweet apple." (These members of the family are so much associated with this story that it is wise to mention them here.) Six days after Southampton's arrival at Loseley, Lord Montague, from Cowdray, sent Mr More a carekUy-written letter3, enqmring after ks son- k-law's health, being desirous to know if his Lordskp would Uke him to do anytkng krther on ks behalf. Private commumcation was not, of course, aUowed. Lord Montague was bolder on 5th August, when he wrote: "As I received a letter by your sufferance from my Lord of Southampton, so send I one other to ks Lordskp open, and by you either to be deUvered or stayed. I tknk long to hear of ks deUverye."4 So did Mr More. An undated letter draft to CecU from More5 shewed that he keedy felt the burden of bekg a jaUor. Similar letters seem to have been deUvered to other members of the CouncU. Lord Howard acknowledged on 9th August a letter received on the 8th inst. from Mr More6, who had gone "to the Court at Osterley to make humble sute to my Lordes of the Privy Council, to be dischardged of keeping the Earl of Southampton." It was, he said, a restraint on his Uberty, and prevented km working on the various commissions to wkch he had been appointed. Lord Howard assured him that others could, execute the commissions, "but your staying at home, to avoid aU conference with him out of your hearing, and to see those letters wkch he doth receave or doth send: therein you do very weU, for in these two poyntes doth consist the greatest part of your charge." The letter7 next in date is, amusing. It seems to be a reply from Mr Becher to some kgky reproachful letter of Mr More's, in which he had charged Mr Becher with prevarication in magnifying the dangers of the plague in order to get rid of ks unwelcome guest, the Earl of Southampton. Mr Becher clears himseU: his words were, in the main, quite true, " though it was only a variety of the sickness, being a burning ague of wkch very few died...ks Lordskp was so fearkl of the sickness, that he was, with fear, much disquieted" (14th August, 1570). On 5th September Lord Montague thanked Mr More for ks kind letter, and for his letter to Lord Leicester " to do my Lord of Southampton good and procure his en largement."8 The CouncU was stUl suspicious. On 23rd October9 they asked Mr More whether Southampton had been attending common prayer in his house ; if not, he was " to move and persuade him thereto."10 More kept 1 Loseley Papers, iv. 5. 2 Manning's Surrey, 1. 99. 3 Loseley Papers, iv. 6. * Ibid. iv. 7. 6 Ibid. iv. 14. 6 Ibid. iv. 8. ' Ibid. iv. 9. « Ibid. iv. 10. • Ibid. iv. n. 10 Ibid. iv. 14 a. ADDENDA 5o9 a very rough draft of his reply, that when his Lordship first came he asked him to attend common prayer with the others. Southampton had answered: Since he was restrayned of his liberty in my house, he had no disposition to come out of his Chamber to praye, but rather to occupye himself there in prayer, thinking it to be no great difference to do thone, or thother, and therefore desired me to think that he did not absent himself from the same, as of one that contemned the service, for not onely had he usually Common Prayer in his own house, but dso at Court he did there frequent the same order, and requested me to be satisfied. Shortly afterwards Mr More had told the Earl that since he had been an inmate neither he nor ks family had been able to go to church, so he had engaged a learned man to come once a week to instruct them, and asked km to jok them. " Since then he has come both to the service and the instruction in the parlour."1 On 31st October, 1570, Montague expressed surprise that, after aU that Lord Southampton had done and written, he had not been rdeased. He would Uke to know if the Poursuivant had brought a pardon to Loseley; if not, ks daughter must discharge her wifely duty by presenting a persond petition to the queen. It was not until the I ith of November2 that the Earl of Ldcester told WUUam More to bring ks prisoner to Kingston "by tomorrow at mght at furthest, so that he may be before the CounseU on Monday mornkg, and they might take the order with him appointed by the Queen." Sir WiUiam More had not detected ks prisoner in any secret cor respondence nor in any attempt to have private conference with any one. The CouncU did not then know the kU detaUs of ks meeting with the Bishop of Ross, so he apparendy was dlowed to go home to ks wife and ckld. William More went cheerkUy back to ks commissions. Mr Bray has tried to put Camden in the wrong by insisting that the Earl of Southampton remained at Loseley during three years, a blunder wkch has affected the writings of aU who have foUowed km3. It is erident that Southampton suffered somewhat from the great expecta tions the CathoUcs had of ks exerting his influence and active hdp to give them support and guidance. It is noteworthy how much the disaffected used the names of Lord Montague and himself in their letters, especially ,those written from the Low Countries and Spain. Even Guerau de Spes, the Spamsh envoy, wrote to the Duke of Alva on ist December, 1569 (just dter the defeat of the northern rebels) : Lord Montague and the Earl of Southampton have sent to ask me for advice as to whether they should take up arms, or go over to your Excellency. I told them I could not advise them until I had due instruction to do so. I said that my letters had been seized because there had been rumours about them lately, and I therefore did not know what they ought to do4. On 18th December the same ambassador informed Philip that Lord Montague and his son-in-law had embarked for Flanders, but contrary wmds drove them back, and they had to land. An order thereupon arrived 1 Loseley Papers, iv. 12. 2 Ibid. iv. 13. 3 Archaeologia (1819), xix. 263. 4 Calendar Simancas Papers (Spanish), 1568-71, p. 214. 510 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON from the Queen, and they did not refuse to go to Court in order to clear them selves, which Montague having done, he received the governorship of the County Sussex, but he was able to send George Hamberton, a kinsman of the Duchess of Feria, to the Duke of Alba, to assure him of his good intention and the sympathy of many others 1. He wrote again: "Montague, Southampton, Lumley, Arundel, the moment the Lancastrians take up arms, wiU rise."2 Sir Francis Englefidd, a fervid CathoUc, an open servant of Pklip II, and heir to many EngUsh properties wkch had been confiscated (among them Fulbrook in Warwickshire, where some of the old gossips say that Shakespeare kiUed his deer), was a corre spondent of many of his co-religionists in England. He wrote to one of them that " Lord Montague and the Earl of Southampton should have been long since with the Duke of Alba," 1570 (March?). He learned to know better. In a letter to Dorothy Essex from Louvak, April 19-29, 1570, he said: Lord Montague did not come hither as you thought, nor any other man of account. Lord Cumberland died about the time the two Earls fled. The Ward ship of his son was given to Lord Bedford, and the child removed thither from Lord Montague, with whom he had been brought up. Lords Arundel and Montague are put out of the Lieutenancy. This accounts for the report that Lord Montague had fled, some say these affronts are done to make them fly3. He also wrote to the Duchess of Feria, eldest daughter of Sir WiUiam Dormer4 by his first wife, Mary Sidney, sister of Sir Henry. She was maid of honour to Queen Mary, and married Pklip's favourite, the Count of Feria, on 29th December, 1559. "As Sir WUUam Dormer is not likely to live long, if your brother comes to Ul hands, it wiU be in as iU case as before, and but in the marriage with Lord Montague would be the safety of both, and a piUar to the famUy that shall succeed in the realm " (2nd September, 1570). Sir WiUiam Dormer died in 1575, learing by ks second wife Robert (married to Lord Montague's daughter Elizabeth), Richard, Francis, Catharine (married to John, Lord St John of Bletso), Mary (married to Anthony Browne, Lord Montague's son and heir apparent), and Margaret (married to Sir Henry Constable). A sister of Jane Nudigate, Sir WiUiam's mother, had married Sir Leonard Chamberlain of Oxfordshire. His son, George Chamberlain, was a servant of Lord Montague5. He did go to seek service under Philip, which was possibly the origin of the rumour about ks master. His examination shews further points in the famUy pedigree, and brings in Sir Edward StradUng6. Some of his family were servants to the Earl of Southampton. His cousin, the Countess of Feria, became Duchess in 1569-70; ks "Aunt Dormer7" died on 7th July, 1571, and the Duke of Feria on 6th September, 1571. Notkng is heard of Southampton during the early months of 1 571. Sir 1 Calendar Simancas Papers (Spanish), 1568-71, pp. 218-274. 2 Foreign Ser. S.P. 1570 (785). Simancas Papers, 274, 2nd September 1570. 3 D.S.S.P. Eliz. Addenda 44. 4 Ibid. xvm. 45. 5 Murdin's S. P. p. 242. 6 D.S.S.P. Eliz. xix. 36. 7 Life of the Duchess of Feria, by Henry Clifford. ADDENDA 511 WiUiam CecU became Lord Burleigh on 26th February, 1 570-1. Shortly afterwards he secured Charles Bailly, a Bdgian, the confidential servant of the Bishop of Ross. The Duke of Norfolk's agent was also arrested. Ere long the real nature of the conference of the Earl of Southampton with the Bishop reveded itsdf. In consequence of fresh suspicion the Duke of Norfolk was sent to the Tower for the second time in September 1571. Guerau de Spes wrote on 31st October, 1571, that "the Earl of Southampton had come unsuspidously up to town in October, and was again arrested. They mean to lodge aU Catholics in the Tower."1 Camden says that, after the Duke2, "Banister, his CounseUor-at-Law, the Earls of Arundd and Southampton, Lord Lumley, Lord Cobham and Thomas ks brother, Henry Percy, Lowder, PoweU, Goodyere and others were committed to prison, who, every one, in hope of pardon confessed aU they knew." Probably each one fdt he had done notkng traitorous or criminal. It is extraordinary, however, how charges accumulate under care- fd manipulation of coloured translations. Terrified men under torture, or tkeat of torture, re-examined agdn and again before new examiners, become apt to agree with the suggestions of their examiners. They examined Charles BaiUy3, servant of the Bishop of Ross, and tortured km untU he told more than aU; and the Bishop himself, under threat of torture, confessed more than he should. Sir Thomas Smith, one of the examiners, implored Burleigh to rdease him from ks pdnkl task and let him go home. We have done aU, Banister with the rack, Barker with the fear of it, we suppose we have got all. . . with our help, for of his own wit he could not haiie done it. Only the Duke's foolish devotion to that woman kept the fire burning still, though once quenched.. . . Bp Rosse is a very firebrand of Sedition, and cunning to make a motion of meeting with a spark of ambition, playnely such a one as your Lordship knew one was, who is now dead1. Norfolk's friends were kept in the Tower to give the Council time to sift and check each confession. Many of these are pubUshed in Murdin's volume. It is noticeable that those of the Earl of Southampton taken at that time are not included. But he is mentioned by the others5. WiUiam Barker on September 1 8th said that "the Bishop of Ross told him that the Lady Arundd, Lords Montague, Southampton and Lumley favoured Norfolk's marriage and would be his friends if he went through with it." On 3rd October6 Lord Lumley demed knowing anytkng of the matter talked of between the Bishop of Ross and Southampton in Lambeth Marsh. Henry Goodyere was examined on 1 3th October 7, ckefly about Mary Stuart, but also about Southampton. From the Cecil Papers we know that the Earl himseUwas examined on 31st October8, just after the confession of the Bishop of Ross. He said he had only met the Bishop in Lambeth by chance, and had only talked about the Norfolk marriage. He knew nothing of 1 Simancas Papers, a. 287, 348, 393. 2 Elizabeth, p. 163, Simancas Papers, a. 393. 3 Murdin, S. P. 1-101. 4 A side-note added "The Earl of Moray." 6 Murdin, p. 99. 6 Ibid. p. 99. ' Ibid. p. 99- 8 Ibid- P- 99- 512 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON strangers landing on Scottish soU. On 3rd November J he stated that Nicholas Wilkenson had moved him to speak with the Bishop. He had sent George Chamberlain, a servant of Lord Montague's, with ks first message. After the condemnation of the Duke of Norfolk the Earl had begun to hope that he would be Uberated. But he heard that a bitter compldnt had gone up to her Majesty about ks outrageous behaviour since he had been prisoner in the Tower. He wrote urgently to Burleigh2 to aUow him to defend himself from " the slanders and maUcious accusations lately preferred against me," that he might know the truth and move her Majestie in ks favour. It is said that the usage of myself should be so unmete to my present state, as rather I should (yf yt were true) shew myself Lunaticke than otherwise. At first generally, for abusing the Lieutenant for discontentation in things wherein was no cause of myslike, in such maner that when my meate hathe been brought to me, I have thrown the dishes one way, the saucers and trenchers another way, that no men wold nor durst come willingly near me. For first I protest to your Lordship I never abused the Lieutenant, for although peradventure therein I could directly turne the Catt in the panne, yet, considering myself to be a prisoner under his charge, and accordingly intending to behave myself, have suppressed any thought of injury.. . .1 dowghte, my Lord, that this report be made to prevent some other whome yt may happe had just cause to complayne, and that it was feared that if the whole body were at liberty the little member, the tongue, should not be restrayned. . . I would be loth to find fault needlessly with anything. . .and I hope this place hath made me rather more wise than more wyld. Two of his owne men will be sworne, who lightly were never absent from me. . .that, except upon just cause, I have never mysliked anything. . .if I wanted anything amended, the casting about of dishes was not the way to effect it.... Let yt be proved that since my coming hither I disordered dish or saucer, or used any furious words to any, I will not only never crave her Majesties favour, but wish that I moughte for my Lunacye have "Little-Ease" for my Lodginge, thereby the sooner to be restored from madnesse to more modestye. The charge "being false," he begged Lord Burleigh to let him be tried and ks accuser brought forth, whom he doubted not he would be able to prove a false and sknderous man "to his shame and my credit." Southampton then pleaded for the restoration of her Majesty's favour. "These two troublesome troubles" had taught him much he wodd never again forget so that he wodd serve the Queen with ks body, Ufe, and goods, and wodd be deeply bound in gratitude to Lord Burleigh himself. " From my pryson witkn the Tower, the 4th day of April 1572." Burleigh and the Council did not find time to tknk of him then, bdng absorbed in greater troubles of a greater man. Thomas Gresham wrote to Burleigh about Southampton's expenses on 14th July3. There were new troubles brewing for the prisoner. On 9th July, 15724, there was a new examination of Henry Goodyere, Henry Percy, and the Earl of Southampton. The interrogations given the first were: 1 Murdin, p. 99. 2 D.S.S.P. Eliz. lxxxvi, 4th April 1572. 3 D.S.S.P. Eliz. Addenda xxi. 72. 4 Murdin, S. P. pp. 222-4. ADDENDA 513 1. Whom did you use to tdk to out of your prison? 2. What speech used the Earl of Southampton touching the Duke of Norfolk's death? 3. What did he say concerning the Duke's children? 4. Whether he said of the Earl of Leicester that he was the cause of the Duke's death, and that he trusted the Earl would come to suffer in the same place as the Duke did? Goodyere sdd: Being imprisoned in a Tower not past thirty foot from the Tower where the Earl of Southampton lieth, and of Henry Percy, sometimes walking in a little court that he used at one time only did speak to the Earl, and especially of the delivery of the Earl. The Earl did come once towards this examkate with a joyfd countenance and said that he heard good newes, and that my Lord of Leicester had sent him word that he should keep his promise to him. That the Earle of Southampton never spoke to him of the Duke, or of his death. But Sir Henry Percy was often on the Leads when this examinate was at his book, and he does not know if the Earl talked to him. Of the third query he knew nothing. He never heard the Earl of Southampton talk evil of the Earl of Leicester, but much good. Henry Percy sdd: he had spoken with Mr Goodyere, but only of their deUverance. He had spoken with the Earl of Southampton about the Duke's death; it was he himself who sdd the Duke had entaUed his lands upon his children. The Earl of South ampton never imputed the death of the Duke either to my Lord of Leicester, nor to any other councillor. He never heard the Earl wish that Leicester should suffer k the Duke's place. He had dways spoken well of the Earl of Leicester, and did say that he put all his trust k him for his delivery. Southampton himself, bekg examked, acknowledged that he had talked with Sir Henry Percy and Mr Goodyere on the Leads, but no undutiful speech passed between them. Touchkg the Duke's death, he did speak. He heard say that he died godly and vertuously, and that he, standing in his window, heard the Duke say (casting his hands abroad), "Once again, God save her Majestie!" It might be that he said he was sorry that the Duke deserved to die, but for any other speech he used none. As for him saying that the Earl of Leicester was cause of the Duke's death, he protested before God, and voluntarily took a corpord oath upon the Bible1, that he never spake such words of the Earl of Leicester, but spake as much honour of him as he could, and hath taken him as his specid good Lord. He desireth to come to his trial, and if found guilty he desireth to suffer death2. (Burleigh was made Lord Treasurer on 15th July, 1572.) Southampton did not like imprisonment, and seemed to suffer much from it. Two letters from his wife to her cousk shew that she was not neglecting him. The first is undated, but finds its pkce through the second. My good Lord, as I am lothe often thus to troble you being so much my Lord his good frend and myne, so am I nowe constreyned to crave yor Lordship's advyce. My old Lady hath yesterday night sent unto me to goe to her on Mon day to the Court, to make suit to the Queen's Majestie for my Lord, which I would do on my knees to do him good. Marry, perceaving by my Lord my 1 Could he forget when Leicester shammed illness in his house to escape himself and desert the others? 2 Cecil Papers, 70. s. s. 33 5H THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON father, as also from my Ladie Clinton, howe unpreparyd the Queen's Majestie is as yet to receave oure sute and howe unwilling sondry of my Lords of the CownceU be that I should as yet presse her Majestie therein, I can hardlye resolve what I were best to do, speciaUy for that I feared my absence wilbe used by some as a matter to my discredytt, and yt to goe tiU my frendes advyse me I dare not, and therefore humbly I beseech your Lordship yf you see no lykeli- hodd of my comming to purpose att thys tyme to testifye and remember my redkess, and the respect that moveth my stay. And thus my good Lord, I rest most bound unto you during my lyfe. (Scribbled in my bed, not being weU this Satterday morning.) Your Lordship's poor frende and cosyn, M. Southampton1. "My old Lady" was, of course, her mother-in-law, the dowager Countess Jane; "my Ladie CUnton" was her step-grandmother, once Lady Browne, " the fair Geraldine," whose husband was on the CouncU. The next letter is dated the 16th and endorsed 17th July, 1572. My Lord, I am now enforced to troble your Lordship with thes fewe lines to crave your helpe for the saifFgard of my Lord his lyffe, who hath ben since your Lordship's departure, being sicke I feare of a burning fever, as dso trobled with a sweUing in his stomake which he was never tyll this time trobled withall. He fears a dropsy yf presently he syke not remedy. Therefore I beseeche your Lordship for God's sake, be a mean for some more liberty for him, and that I may have recourse to him to ataynd him in his sickness, if his full inlargement will not be obtayned. Truly my Lord, if he be no better atended now in his syckness then comonly he is I much fear his lyffe will not be longe. The necesity of the present cause compelleth me to be thus earnest for lybertye to goe to him, which I hope shall not be denyed him being syck, and have been granted to others in helthe. Thus expecting your Lordship's answer of some good comfort upon the which my Lorde his weU-doing restyth, I comytt yor Lordship to God, who send you increase of honor and your hart's desyres. From London the 16 of July. Your Lordships poure cossen, M. Southampton. If yor Lordship or any of my Lords of the CounseU thinke this untrewe, if yt be examyndd yt will be found too trewe 2. Some aUeviation may have been found for her husband's disease, but his rdease did not come that winter. On 22nd December, 1572, an InteUigencer wrote to Alva: "The Earl of Arundel has been released.... There are good hopes too, of ks son-in-law Lord Lumley, and the Earl of Southampton."3 It was February before tkngs began to move in that direction. On the 13th of that month the Earl wrote to the Lord Treasurer that he had been told by ks wife and father-in-law how much kindness he owed km, and how gratekl he was he tried to express in his ponderous and long-winded style. He asked a krther favour: "I am bolde to send your Lordskp the forme of a letter I wish to be deUvered to her Majesty, so as she may reade the same," to be deUvered either by ks wife or the Lord Treasurer. " From my weari- 1 Cotton MS. Titus, bk. 11. 161, f. 342. 2 Ibid. f. 308. 3 Simancas Papers, 11. 374. ADDENDA 515 some prison." Tks is endorsed " 1 3th February 1 572-3, Earl of Southampton, devoted to ye CathoUc reUgion, and ye Queen of Scots."1 The next day he wrote to the Lords of the Council a humble letter of submission and entreaty that they would testify to the Queen his wish to do dutiful and faithkl service to her, and hdp him to regain her favour, without wkch Uberty would be worse than bondage *. On the 30th of March, 1573s, Lord Montague was Ucensed to confer with his son-in-law " touckng matters of law and the use of ks Uving in the Lieutenants presence." His May Day brought him some brightness ; the queen ordered the Lieutenant to hand over ks prisoner to Sir WiUiam More. Doubtless the confinement, wkch had fretted km so much in 1570, wodd be draped in roseate hues by comparison with that in the Tower. He was in grief about the illness of ks bdoved mother, and two days after ks reUef he was aUowed to go and visit her in charge of Mr WiUiam More 4. On the 5th of May5 the CouncU gave ks keeper permission to aUow ks prisoner's wife6, friends, and servants to visit km, to aUow them to ride out together, and even to visit Dogmarsfidd, the house he was rebuUding. But William More was to go with km. There was new friction by the 1st of June7, for the Earl of Southampton kd left the Tower without paying the Lieutenant's bUl for his food, and now contested some of the items. Apparendy Southampton reminded Burleigh of the fdse charge of raging words and broken dishes, and all the inferences the charge was intended to convey. The CouncU appointed arbitrators to settle the dispute, Sir Peter Carew, Sir WUUam Pickering, Sir Thomas Wroth, and Thomas Heneage, " either to end the matter between them or to make report to my Lordes what they tknk." The Earl of Southampton8, however, shortly afterwards complained that though his commissioners were ready and his servants sent up to witness for him, the Lieutenant had begun to slack the proceedkgs, excusing himself for the want of the com missioners he had himself appointed. Therefore since at ks own cost ks servants are forced to continue in London and notkng done, he asks that the case may either go on at once, or be postponed tiU he is at liberty to attend himself. I dowghte not but to make his doyings apparent, and hope that sins I have been, as I can prove, both worse served than my Lord of Hertford was, or my Lady Scroope(?) for her degree, I shall not be forced to pay more according to that rate. Her Majesty may allow what yt shaU please her for any that she payeth for, but I am well assured, no Earl that hath defrayed his own charges hath pdd more than my Lord Hertford did, according to which rate I offer, which is far more than ever I cost him. He then went on to plead for pardon before the Queen's "abode here. My wyfe ere tks had revyved the same, but that she hath bin, and yet is, de- 1 Lansdowne MS. xvi. f. 22. 2 Ibid. xvi. 23. 3 Ibid. xvi. f. 23. ' Reg. Privy Council, viii. 92. 5 Ibid. vin. 102, 109. 6 Loseley Papers, iv. 16. ' Ibid. iv. 17. * Lansdowne MS. xvn. art. 14, f 28. 33—2 516 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON tayned by syckness, wkch being ons gone, notwithstanding her condition she shaU, before the progresse, if possibly she maye performe her duty therdn" (16th June, 1573). There are two letters, written one by the Earl and the other by the Countess, to the Earl of Sussex about these disputes, printed in the CoUection of Letters made by the Rev. Leonard Howard, D.D., of South wark in 1753. Apparently the arbitrators settled the dispute about costs, as we hear no more of it. The Earl had no reply at the time to ks plea for freedom. An undated draft of a letter written by Sir WiUiam More to the Earl of Leicester1 seems to fit into this period better than any other. The Earl had told him that he understood the iU success of ks friends' petition to the queen for ks freedom, > and he ys falen into that hevynes and pensiveness of mynde, as that I fere yt will either breed in hym some present syckness or some great inconveniences hereafter. I have used the best perswasions I can to staye him from the same, but it lytle prevaileth, and his annswere ys yt albeyt his restraint of libertye is very pdnfufl unto him (because he doutyth the same to be soch discomforte to my Lady his wyff, as may be to her great harme), yet he feareth greater the displeysure of her Highness, which he thinketh vehemently conceyved against him as that his lyfe groweth to hym to be very tedyous I perceyve his hope of qudifying the Queenes Majesties displesyear agaynst him resteth chyfley in you, whose good care yf he may affect the same it shaU not only be greatlye to his comforte, but also bind him in honor to be at yor commande ment during his lyf. By whatever means it came about, a warrant arrived to aUow Southampton to leave Loseley on 14th July, "to reside with your verie good Lord the Viscount Montague your father-in-law." 2 He was aUowed to dsit the house he was buUding, if he did not stay away from Cowdray more than one night. Tks relative freedom brought happiness to aU concerned. The next letter preserved at Loseley is undated3. It was from Lady South ampton to Lady More. I send this berer to bringe me word from you howe my little Mall came unto you and how she hath past the greatest parte of her so wery journey. I doubt not of your over great care of her whill she rests in yor hands ; my only desire is to heare of her save coming unto you. When she hath rested with you one holl daye I praye you lett her be sent hether, (nott too farre in any place tyll she come to me). My Lord my father, also my Lord, do looke for her tomorrow, yf not, then upon Satterday at the fardest. Lady Southampton sends ten thousand thanks to Lady More for aU the great kindnesses she had received from her and her famUy, for wkch she remains their debtor ready to requite it. Her husband would have written also, but "he hath been very sycke and is now in bed not weU. Good Mr Polsted I must not forget to salute in most hartyest manner, and do wish me with you every day and houre....Tks present Thursday."4 The "Utde 1 Loseley Papers, iv. 15. 2 Ibid. iv. 18. 3 Ibid. iv. 19. 4 Ibid. iv. 21. Manning's Surrey, 1. p. 99. ADDENDA 517 MaU" referred to was thdr second daughter, Mary, probably at that time sent to see her grandmother, who lay iU in London. Mrs Polsted was Lady More's daughter EUzabeth. I do not know how long afterwards it was, but I am indined to beUeve that it was on the foUowing Tuesday that the Earl wrote to Sir WUUam More announdng the birth of ks son. The which, dthough it was not without great periU to them both, for the present, yet now I thank God, both are in good state. Yf your wife wiU take the paynes to visit her, we shd be myghty glad of her company, and so with my harty commendations to your son Polsted and his wife, and to good Mr Saunder, if he be with you, I end for this time bidding you hartily farewell. From Cowdray this present Tuesday 1573. Your assured frend, H. Southampton1. We know from other sources that the date was the 6th of October, 1573. "Mr Saunder" was the "learned man" whom Sir WiUiam had employed to give ks household reUgious traimng when he and they could not go to church by reason of thek attendance on thek prisoner. Things went weU at Cowdray. We have no record of the ckld's baptism, nor of his godparents. Probably it was privatdy perfonned by some priest, and ks sponsors were chosen for thek faith not thek fortune. Then the happy father planned for himseU and ks wife an early hoUday in London, spending a mght on the way at Losdey. He wrote to Sir WUUam More from Cowdray on ist November, 1573, saying that, dthough he had latdy "in divers ways pestered your house," yet he meant to be there on "Tuesday even, senmght," and added: I pray you recommend me hertily to your son and daughter Polsted and to good Mr Sawnder. And also if you would be so good as send for your glasier and teU him that nowe I am redy for him at Dogmersfield. . . for some part of the howse is to be glazed before the frost, and the glasse and aU things are redy. Sir WUUam More was not content to be without ks old friend, Lord Montague, and urged him to join them2, but he was reaUy too Ul to move, and was confined to bed for a fortmght longer. The Earl of Southampton seems to have had ks kU pardon by that time. His mother had long been failkg and was now very iU; she Uved over sk months after. One of her medicd prescriptions has been preserved, "a cure for the iUustrious Lady Jane in her previous ilkess."3 Her wUl was drawn up on ist Jdy, 15744, and she died not long afterwards; the wiU was proved on 26th July. She left certam leases to her son, Henry, Earl of Southampton, faUing whom to ks son, Lord Harry Wriothesley, faUing whom to the Lady Mary Wriothesley, failing whom to her own daughters. Her household stuff was to go in the same way. She left Uberd shares of her catde and sheep to her son-in-law, ComwaUys, and ks wife Katharine, the rest to her son. Certain leases were left direcdy to her grandson, faUing whom to ks sister Mary. Her own 'daughter, Mabel, was to have for Ufe Longlands and Gravelpits, lately parcel of the possessions of the monastery of ClerkenweU, after her to Robert 1 Loseley Papers, iv. 21. % Ibid. iv. 22. 3 Add. MS. 28,023, f. 8 6, also f. 68 * P.C.C., Martyn 43. 518 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON CornwaUys, her daughter's son. One hundred pounds' worth of plate was left to each of her daughters, ioo marks' worth to Lord Harry Wriothesley, and the same to Lady Mary. To my son the Earl aU my stuff in Southampton Place, Holborn, my best crosse of gold set with diamonds on one side and enamelled with green and red on the other, with a faire pearl hanging at it. A faire tablet of golde wherein is the picture of my Lord his father's face, weighing about z\ ounces, also my great flaggon chayne that I was wont to weare about my middle for a girdle, weighing 12 ounces.. . .To my Lady Southampton, my son's wife, a Browche with an Agate and 7 little rubyes, with the picture of a face upon the Agatt; also a girdle of gold, with roses black and white enameUed, and wheatsheaves enamelled. . . . To my daughter Katharine my best booke of gold, set with 4 diamonds and a ruby in the midst on one side, and 4 rubyes with a diamond in the midst on the other side, and the Queen's writing in the same book ; also my wrethed long girdle of gold with black enamel ; and a short girdle of perles with little perles of gold enamelled in black, a brooch of gold with a saphire in it, and a Storye, also a cheyne of fine golde. To my daughter Mabel my best brooche which hath 10 diamonds in it and a ruby at the foot of the Storye; also a gold booke with a black knot inamelled and two scallop shells; a chain of gold inameUed black and white; a long girdle of gold, another with pillars inamelled red and white and black, the links playne and wrethed, and a cross of gold, with a crucifix sett with 2 diamonds and a perle pendent, with another chayne. To my son's daughter, the Lady Mary, my best flower of gold set with 2 rubyes, 2 emerdds, and 3 perles pendent, a tablet of gold with an old storey in it, a pair of beads without AmeU, and a tablet hanging at them, inamelled ; a browche of gold with 2 little rubyes in it. These jewels to her at her marriage. If she dye, to her brother the Lord Harry, if he die too, to my daughters. All my perles to my daughters. To my daughter CornwaUys a pair of Tennes, with red currall richly dressed with lyly pottes enamelled with words graven on them. To my daughter Mabel another payre of tennes in gold and jewels and one of my diamond rings to each. All the rest of my rings to my son. . . . To Robert Cornwallys my daughter's son £40, to Michael Lyster my daughter Mary Lyster's son, a gilt bowl 32 ounce weight. To her daughter Mabd she left £500 if she marries within three years, or £300 if she marries later, the £200 to go to her son's daughter. She prayed her son to be good to his sisters, to her servants, farmers, and tenants. She left to Andrew Mundaye, her servant, £10, and a year's wages to aU her servants. To the poor of Titchfidd and Holborn near London she left £60. ly. 4^. Her son Henry to be sole executor; overseers, Mr Justice Manwood and Mr Baver of Lincoln's Inn, who are to have £10 a year for their trouble. Her son buried her at Titchfield, but I have found no account of the pro ceedings. Beyond his legacies, the Earl would step into her jointures and dwelling-houses, and his position in the county would be strengthened. For some time afterwards he took as much part in county affahs as he was aUowed to do, being on various commissions. A report of the commission on the protection of the country was sent in on 8th July, 1 5741, signed by him and others. One section is speciaUy interesting, because it gives a Ust 1 D.S.S.P. Eliz. xcvn. 32. ADDENDA 519 of the places most likdy to be invaded in the south, and it describes many good possible landing places in ks own property. We find a place at the entering of Beaulie Haven caUed Needle Oie from Lymmgton eastwards, being of the depth of 9 feet at low water, but the channel somewhat crooked ; a place called Stands Oie from Bewlye Haven eastward being an oxen rode a mile and more in length, the water whereof is so shore deepe that any shipp may ride within a cable length of the shore without danger of any of the Castles, having good anchor holde and very faire landing, both for gallies and long boats We find a place called Browne Downe in the Hundred of Titchfield, being an oxen rode in length a mile and a half, with very deep water near shore and good landing. Stoke Bay was dso considered good landing, and the south side shore of HayUng. That might almost be caUed war-work. He was put on the Com mission of the Peace on 12th July. His father-in-law's communications1 to the Privy CouncU shew what the Earl should therefore have been engaged on k August 1574 — the State of the Musters, the Charge of the Watch to the Country, the need of considering the restraint of grain and dctuds, as there was dearth in the ndghbourhood. Yet strange rumours came of him through the army of spies employed by Burldgh. Edmund Woodshaw2 (a double traitor) wrote to Burleigh from Antwerp on 3rd September, 1574, concernkg another spy caUed Avery Phillipps, "who repaked to the Copleys." There was great triumph among the northern rebels when they had heard that the Earl of Oxford was flying, and that the Earl of Southampton had fled to Spam. In a Council held at Louvain it was concluded that the Earl of Westmoreland should ride to Bruges to welcome him, and persuade him not to return, but the Earls did not meet. It were a great pity such a vdiant and noble young gentleman should communicate with such detestable men. Woodshaw had been 35 years in the Low Countries and wanted to get back to England, but he had no money. " I appUed to my uncle Leveson and my cousk Arden of Park HaU, but they would not help me"; apparently Burleigh would not help km either. On the 27th of that month of September Southampton was formaUy thankkg the Earl of Sussex for teUing him of the queen's good opinion of him. I wish to Uve no longer than with all dutifukess to deserve the continuance of the same. I must nedes allso thinke myself greatly bounde unto your Lordship for the care you have of my wel-doinge and desier to persuade her Majestie of my unfeigned affection to continewe her Highnesse good opinion towardes me. I mynde, God willing, my good Ladies Funerailes performed, tp do my duty to her Majesty and myself to acknowledge her manyfold gratiousness towards me.. . .From Titchfield the 27th September 1574. Your Lordshipps assured frende and brother, H. Southampton3. 1 D.S.S.P. Eliz. xcvin. 12. 2 D.S.S.P. Eliz. Addenda xxiii. 62. 3 Cotton MS. Titus, bk. 11. 149, i 319. 520 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON On the 1st December, 15741, the city of Southampton signified its recogni tion pf the Earl's work in county affairs by making km Free of the City. Of tks he was a Burgess, through ks residence of BuU or Bugle HaU. A year or two seems to have passed in peace; then sometkng happened. A mysterious letter (a lesson to shew how nearly alike were the numerds 7 and 1 sometimes written) was addressed to the Earl of Sussex. Wdsingham was not made Secretary untU 1573. My good Lord, I have dealt with Mr Secretary Walsingham touching the matter I wrote to your Lordship of, who seemeth not to be privie to the doing thereof. Although not ignorant of such a generall matter intended, I pray your Lordship to consider of yt in my behalfe, as that I alone be not shott at, but that I may receyve as much favour as others, not deserving the contrarye. The dis credit wiU be great, my case beynge sole, and my enemies wiU condempne me of some speciaU crime, though I be altogether innocent, he hath willed me to send unto him saying that he will be a mean that I shaU now be more parciaUy dealt with all the others in the case wherunto I beseech your Lordship put your helping hand.. . .From my house in London the 15th February 15712. Endorsed: "The Earl of Southampton, 15th February 1577." The hand writing is more careless than usual, probably from ks excitement or Ulness. If 1577-, of course it must be read as 1577-8. I find no krther trace of tks. Another mysterious undated letter may come in here, from Henry Howard to Sir Ckistopher Hatton3, whom he addresses as "good Mr Vice Chamber lain," so that it must have been written after nth November, 1577, when Hatton was appointed. The letter runs: "I have lain seven months in the Tower and yet am not privy to the least offence either to my Prince or Country.. ..My Lord Southampton can avow upon ks honor that I never heard mass with him, and yet I must be kept in prison." Nicolas puts this as March 1584, supposing that it came before another one dated 27th April, 1584, in which he complains of having lain in the Tower for seven months innocendy. Tks date is impossible; Southampton died in 1581, and was Ul some time before. But it might have been 1578. The Earl of Southampton and the Countess were stiU presenting gifts to the queen and receiring gifts in return in the spring of 1578-9. The Earl's wrath may have been kindled by a summons before the King's Bench for not keeping the roads safe by ks house in 15784. A Uttle kter he was again summoned in a dispute about land B. From a newsletter among the State Papers 6 we hear that by February 22nd, 1578-9, "the Earl of Southampton is out of the Commission of the Peace." Yet on 4th September, 1579, Sir Francis Wdsingham wrote to teU him that he had misunderstood the CouncU's orders to the Commission of Piracy7. 1 Corporation Documents, vol. in. Southampton. 2 Cotton MS. Titus, bk. 11. 159, f. 338. 3 Nicolas, Life of Sir Christopher Hatton, pp. 368, 376. 4 Coram Rege Roll, Hilary Term, 20 Eliz., among criminal cases at the end, f. 119, Middlesex. 5 The Coram Rege Roll, Trinity Term, 22 Eliz.; Controlment Rolls, p. 94, at top. 0 D.S.S.P. Eliz. Addenda xxv. 74. » Ibid, cxxxn. 1. ADDENDA 521 "Though the Vice-AdmiraU be speciaUy named, yet if any difficulty had prevented km from bdng present, the other commissioners may proceed without him, espedaUy if your Lordskp or some of the other chiefest per sons named in the Instructions be present." That is the last notice of the Earl, in regard to pubUc service. Some doud had come over km in ks domestic rdations. He had more and more shut kmsdf up in the society of ks gentiemen servants, who flattered him. He had become cold to ks wife and distrustkl of her relatives and friends. Perhaps ks imprisonment in the Tower had brought on some crud disease, such as consumption, in wkch the patient's judgments some times become disorgamsed and ks mental vision distorted. The ody key we have to the state of affairs is a long letter written by the Countess to her father, in answer to one of ks asking for a full explanation, so that hemight be able to help her. I received your Lordship's last1 by the messenger himselfe, who would not adventure to comytt it to any other, because your Lordship's desire therein should be the better satisfied, and by him also I receaved assurance that the letters so long wantinge were at last saifly come to your Lordship's hands, which much joyed me. My Lorde sent me word by Dymocke the other daye that it was not his meaning to keep me as a prisoner, nor to barr me of my libertye either within dote or without, only he barred me his bord and presence, which was all he re- strayned me of. I told the messenger my Lorde could lay no greater punish ment upon me, neither could I take that but in the highest degree of imprison ment, howsoever it pleased him otherwise to esteem it, but I was content to beare it, tiU God would relieve me and deUver me out of such bondage. "My Lorde, (saith Dymocke) yor Ladyship knoweth is resolute, yett be there meanes to wyn him." Wold God I knew them, quoth I, they must be tolde me before I can putt them m proofe, for every waye that my simple wytt could conceave was in reason lykest to move him to better, I had not letted to use, and longe and often had offered myselfe to him in such humble sorte as might become me. If want of knowledge hadd made me leave that undone that would have done me most good, I trust I was to be excused, the rather because I shewed myself willkg to do anythkge that was by his Lordship looked for and fit for me to do. "Naye sayth he, from my Lorde I can say nothmge. Butt what my own opmion is, if it please you to heare it, I will teU yowe, that is that my Lord may be weU used at your two cousins' hands, and by fair meanes to be by them in- treated to accept me as he dyd before his last breache, and to leave the perfect reconcylement of yowe to yourselves, for by none wolde he be enforced tiU himself listed, and that I wolde procure a protection to him for his conscience, that he might Uve untowched for that, with the Queen's good countenance, which by my frends be wanted." (Many other lyke thinges he spake of, as little to the purpose, and full weU I know from whence they came.) My answere was that I marveUed my Lord would leape before he came at the stile, or make shewe of doubt of that he is so little feared, sure I was, if he had thoughte that for me, or by my frendes, he had this longe tyme lyved without question, therefore he would have thoughte hymselfe in reason and honor bound to have made a better recompense to us both than any yet he hath yelded. He tolde me then, 1 Cotton MS. Titus, bk. u. 174, f. 366. 522 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON it woulde be smaU honor to me that for me or by my frendes his troble should be procured. Nott by me, I assured him, it should ever come, neyther did I thinke my frends wold seke that revenge of him. Yett what mighte fall upon hym I could not warrant but wold be sorye if otherwise than well, and woulde, notwithstanding his extreme dealing towards me, do my best ever to save him from troble or dainger. This was, in effecte, so much as he hadd of me, whereof I hope he could take small advantage. Howbeit a great dteration I found in him, for he tolde me not long since it was past all amendement, and howe he wolde teache mee a waye howe to amend it, wheruppon I gather my Lord to stand so doubtful and perplexed between hate and dread, as what to do he knoweth not well. Yett had he as leave dye as breake his own greate hearte, though he see a manifest dainger before his face. I understand by sufficient meane that my Lorde did write of late to some of the Council for Pretie's libertie, and how it was answered that there was some other particular matter to charge him withd more than he was committed for, and therefore could not yett be dismissed, but he should be remembered when tyme served, in which respect I trust your Lordship and my deare friends wiU foresee that he be not delivered, for many great causes, which I shall hereafter open to yowe, tiU my caise first take end. And truely, if I be not much disceaved, to wynne him libertye and save him from farder troble my Lorde woolde somewhatt breake his own likinge, wher, if he might gett him owt before he wold take such harte as none shold be able to do anything with him. He told Foscue and Payne yesterday on occasion of a quarrell that hapned betweene Dymocke and them, that he liked them no whit the better for laughing at Prety's imprisonment, and said they should well perceave he would beare him out though it cost him £500. And nowe my Lord that I fynde no fayre nor mild entreatye, nor good per- swasions by my friends, nor any duetifull behaviour or endeavour from myself can move his hard harte to relent towards me, butt after this without anye offence of myne, doth offer me this extremytie, onely to take revenge for his lewd servant his just punishment, I am discomforted any longer to continewe that course that hitherto I have taken, but nowe do I humbly beseche yor Lordship, and other my good friends, to take in hand my cause, and to bring it to such kind of tryall as shall by your wisdomes be thoughte best for me, assuring myself that so much favor shall be by yowe obtayned for me as worse then I am I shall not be, for now I rest condemned generally, though I trust not so much of the better sorte that knoweth me, as some would wish I should. My will, which longe hath overruled yor Lordship and others in this caise, I now leave to be ordered by your discretions, to whom I absolutely comitt myself and my cause, and will rest content with what end soever it shall lyke you and them to bring it unto. I will prove at last to conquer my fond affection by discretion, which I must confesse hath mightilye wrought in me towards him, or else I doubt my frayle nature could hardly have borne with patience what hath byn offered me. My Lord, sayd he, is weU assured her Majestie will never open her mouth to him for me, howbeit thatt taketh not away my hope, but that she will by your Lordships means yelde me her gratious favour, and be content to bestow her breath to do good (yf it may be) between us. And truly my Lord, by the last speech I had with Dymocke (who is the other himself) I find some little hope yet left that she may do that none other can. And the rather I beleve it because I have myself hard him saye that she only should overrule him and none other. Mr Titchborne the Sheriff was laytely here and desired my Lord he might see me, he told him with his harte if it pleased him. Whereupon he took occation to say somewhat more to him towchinge our present state, very honestly and ADDENDA 523 frendlye. His answer was onely this, that God must direct these matters howe and when it should please him. I refuse to see none that my Lord permitts to come to see me, for yf I dyd then should I embarr myself of a special friend or two by whoes presence and companye a day or two in a fortnighte I have that little comfort that nowe I enjoy, and yett it is lowred att, as seldome and little as it is, because it is thoughte to be done chiefly for my sake. And truly I have just cause to acknowledge myself much bounden to God for happynes it pleaseth Him to send me that way, for there are not many in this shyre of the better sorte but by some means they have made offer to me of their service, wherek or howe it may in any waye steade me, which I take as God's good gifts and nothinge of my own deservinge. Did your Lordship see this howse, by my troth, I thkke you would saye in your liffe you never came in the lyke so whoUy bent against their yonge. Mr Dymocke, as they sticke not to tell him to his face, it is pitty he lyveth, to be the begyner and continuer of this dis- cention between us. But my Lord so impatiently bereth to here this playne speech, as some pretie quarrel is soone found to turne them away. This howse is not for them that wiU not honor Dymocke as a God. It is a pece of comforte to fynde that nott one servante in this howse (Mr Dymocke only sett asyde, and some one that he hath made as himself) butt is ready either to depart with me or to deUver me out of this thrddome. That it pleaseth your Lordship to assure me the contkuance of yor fatherly care of me, I most humbly thanke yowe, it is nowe the only comfort I have, and that I meane to cleave unto. I beseche yor Lordship, do not thkk I wolde so much disguyse myself to yow my dear father, that I wolde, to my owne harme, kepe anything from your knowledge, whereby I might prevent that extremity that is intended to me. Truly my Lorde, if I be charged with more than you are already acquainted withall, it is by corruption, and no truthe. It may be my Lorde will mix upp olde matters, repented and forgotten long since, if he do, well, he may blame me of folly, but never justly condemne me of fault. And as for the matter charged of Dogmarsh- field and Dowsam his coming hither, he shaU never prove it as he would, except he win some to perjure themselves about it, for, by my truthe, in my liffe did I never see him k that house, neither I assure you since I was by my Lord for bidden his company did I ever come in it. Desyre I dyd to speake with hym, I confesse, and I told you whye, and I wish that the cause, with my meamnge, were uttered by the partie himself upon his conscience (yff he have any) where upon I coveted to speak with him, and then I trust I shall be acquited of greater evell than overmuch follye, for desyring or doing that which, being by my enemye mistaken, doth breed this my slander and danger. Neither had I ever done for him as I dyd, or used him other than a common person of his calling, had I not seene my Lorde his lykynge so extraordinarie for him, as warranted me to frende him so farre as I might, without evell meamnge. And thus yor Lordship understandeth as much as I knowe (if more be added, I have the greater wrong). The life I have Jedd these two yeares, with the bitterness which I have with patience endured, hath byn sufficient to satisfy for so muche as I ever erred ¦n, but by many other accidents I weU fynde it is not my fait but myself he excepte the Parliament holde, which is doubtful, but 1 trust your ™mp wm be there at convenient time after Easter, and then, with helpe of my deare friends procure him to utter the cawse that nowe moveth him more than before to use This extremitye to me. Lett him do it before I be sent for, and what done that may be by her Majestie to calme him. And good my Lord, if it may be, let it be heard and ended by some counciUors, and go no furder, for very lothe I 524 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON would be to have my name come in trial in open court. Doylye hath promised to work cunningly to overthrow me, and so dyd he att my coming from London, and putt it largely in practice, but I truste in God he shaU faile of his purpose. And now my Lord, with my humble duetye to your Lordship and my Ladye with earnest desyr of your daylie blessing to me and myne, I rest whoUye at your Lordship's commandmente, and do commit myself and my cawse to your honorable consideracion. The 21st of March 1579. Your Lordship's humble and obedient daughter, M.S. That your Lordship shdbe witnesse of my desier to wyn my Lord by aU such meanes as resteth in me, I have sent yowe what I sent him by my little boye. Butt his heart was too greate to bestowe the readinge of it coming from me. Yet wiU I do my parte so longe as I am with him, but, good my Lorde, procure so soone as conveniently yowe may some end to my miserie, for I am tyred with this life. Tks suppUes the whole information we have concermng the fortunes of the family, and from the date it is clearly connected with the mysterious letter of 1577 akeady quoted. One reference in the Register of the Privy Council throws Ught on one incident Lady Southampton mentions (23rd February, 1578-9)1: "Tks day Edmund Pretye, servant to the Earl of Southampton, was for certain misdemeanours by him used against Mr Anthony Browne, the ddest son and heir of the Lord Montacute, by their Lordships' order committed to the Marshalsea." It is probable that Mr Anthony, resenting the affronts given to ks own (and ody kU-) sister, had checked him, and that Pretty had defended ks master's doings in some unseemly way. I have not found any more of the proposed "case," nor of the remaining Ufe of the second Earl, except through a letter from Mendoza to the Spamsh king, dated 21st August, 1580. "The Queen has written letters to the Earls of Northumberland, Montague, Worcester and Southampton, to five barons, and 300 gentlemen, and has ordered them to be imprisoned. She fears a CathoUc rising here."2 We know that Montague was not imprisoned, and there is no trace of Southampton having been so. Probably by that time he was too iU to be troubled. Ody once more does ks name come before the CouncU3 during ks Ufe- time. The results of the confessions of Edmund Campion on 4th August, 1 58 1, shew that he delivered a copy of his "Challenge" to one Norice, a priest commonlie re maining about London, that he delivered it to one Pounde, then prisoner in the Marshalsey, who is thought to have dispersed the same abroad, and that one Stephens brought the said Pounde to speak with Campion at Throgmorton House in London. Further that Pounde directed Campion by a token to one Dimmocke to speak with the Earl of Southampton. They are required to question Pound further. Note: They found that Pound had akeady been sent to the prison at Wisbech Casde, and he was then ordered to be sent up to the Tower for krther 1 Privy Council Register, xt. 398. 2 Simancas Papers, in. art. 41, p. 56. 3 Privy Council Register, xm. 153, 170. ADDENDA 525 examination. The discovery of a connection with Campion, however sUght, might have proved disastrous for Southampton had he Uved much longer. The dosing months of the Earl's Ufe (however the "case" had been settled) shew no trace of kiprovement in domestic affaks, nor does his wiU, drawn up on 24th June, 1 58 1 1, " in health and perfect memorye, but recaUing the frailty of Ufe." The testament is long; its uses Umited, as we have seen, by an indenture made between the Earl and Anthony, Viscount Montague. His body was to be buried in the chapel of Titchfield, beside ks mother, and the chapd to be altered and finished witkn five years after ks death; the roof plastered with pendants set full of my armes, the waUs plastered like my house in Dogmersfield, the Chapel paved and divided with iron grates from the Church. Also two fak monuments, one to be built for my father (whose body I would have brought here and buried) and my Lady my mother. The other for me with portrdtures of white marble on the monuments. One thousand pounds to be spent on them. His executors were to prodde a fit kneral, not exceeding £1000, one hundred marks in alms to be given; £200 to be divided among the poor people on ks property that they should pray for ks soul and the souls of ks ancestors ; to every almshouse in London and the County of Southampton £3 for the same purpose "as soon as possible after my decease." His debts were to be pdd, and aU wrongs made good. To the Queen, above her thkds, he left a rkg of 200 marks' vdue, " meekly beseeching her Majesty not to think of the vdue of the ring, but of the goodwiU of the giver, and I beseech her to be good to my Uttle infants, whom I hope to be good servants and subjects of her Majesty and of the State." To his " son Henry Lord Wriothesley at 21, U he Uves, or if he dies to any hek femde at 18, the parsonage of Tichfield for the maktenance of hospitaUty, as my mother meant to leave it, whatever might be said in her wiU." He left of course the bulk of ks property to ks son and heir. To ks daughter, the Lady Mary, at her marriage, or when she comes to the age of 18, the sum of .£2000; if she die, tks to go to the male hek, but if she become hek, to go towards the performance of the wiU. She was to have .£60 a year to bring her up, and .£20 a year to herself till she reached 18. And as sUppery and wavering youth requires to be underpropped with elder counsel, he commanded his daughter to obey the executors and not choose to marry herself agamst thek wiU. He willed her to be brought up by his sister Katherine Cornwallys, or his Aunt Lawrence, and if both of these should refuse, or should die, she was to be pkced in some good vertuous house at the pleasure of his executors, provided dways that she be not in the house with her mother. And if she refuse to obey his executors, her portion to be taken away, and no penny bestowed to maintdn her. AU ks armour and war-krmture was to be kept unspoUed for ks hek mde or hek femde. To ks sister Lady CornwaUys he left 500 marks; to Ms sister Mabd Sandys one pak of sUver pots worth £50, "To my very friend Mr AUan Langdale, D.D., an annuity of £6. ly. ^d." Four jewels 1 P.C.C., Rowe, 45. "Pounde" was the cousin who wrote the wedding masque. 526 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON of gold worth £5 to be given to Lady Paulet, wife to Lord Ckdiocke Paulet; to the Lady Paulet, late wife to Ralf Scrope; to Mrs EUzabeth Hodge, wife to Master Hodge, and to Mrs EUzabeth WeUs, wife to Gilbert Wells. To each of ks aunts, Aunt Lawrence, Aunt Pound, and Aunt Clerke, £20. (Tks latter was an adopted aunt, see ks father's wiU.) He wished ks servants to stay on in ks house with aU charges for three months after ks death. A yearly rent of £5 was to be paid to ks servant Henry AUway. To my Trusty servant Thomas Dymock and to every other gentleman of my bedchamber £40 above their wages. To the said Thomas Dymocke £200 if dive 2 years after the testator's death. My will is that the said Thomas, for the good opinion and truste I have of him, shodde be speciallye one of those appointed after my decease to be attentive to, and daily about, the person of my son and hek Lord Wriothesley; to have care and charge thereof, whose duty in that behalf to be carefully and honestly performed I nothing doubt. WiUiam, ks beggar boy, was to be kept at school tiU 21, and then receive £40. He asked Viscount Montague to see aU tks done, and also that Dogmars- field should be fimshed witkn eight years after the plans of Adams of Green wich and that witkn ten years they should bestow £500 in krmskng it; and that ks house in Wktley Park be comfortably fimshed in building for ks hek. Thomas Dymock should have the keeping of it tiU ks son came of age, with £6. 13/. 4^. a year for ks trouble, and he may be aUowed to keep 12 kine and one buU, and four spare buUocks running, and 20 sheep in the park at Wktley, with 10 loads of hay from Titchfield meadow, and as much wood as he can burn, "And that he may remember what a good Lord and Master I have been to him, that he be good to my son, I leave him £10 a year for Ufe." To ks servant WiUiam Chamberlain he left 100 marks, to ks loving cousin Edward CarroU a sUver gUt cup worth 20 marks, to his loving cousin John Savage, son and hek to Sk John Savage, a chain worth ^40; " IckeU and Upshot in Co. Southampton and aU that I purchased of George Gifford to be used by my executors untU my hek be of age." To the Earls of Arundel and Rutland he left a silver gUt cup each, and he hopes they may be as kind to his hek as they had been to km. To my good friend Mrs Briggit Chower, gentlewoman of the Queen's Bed chamber, £100. To my trustie servant Nicholas Collins £100... to Edmund Prettye £100, to my servants Thomas Castlan £40, and Thomas Hollo well £40. I straitly charge my heir when he comes of age to make to Thomas Dymocke, my man, a lease of what I have leased him. And because I fear that after my decease either my wife, or any other, whom I doe not in this my last will nominate, may seeke to intrude themselves into some of my doings, either concerning my will, or these particular things that may presently rise to the benefit of my heir, I earnestly charge my executors that they yield not to such matter, and that nothing be done by any of my executors without the consent of the whole, and Thomas Dymock to be one of them. If any of the clauses of my wiU breed trouble, and my executors cannot settle it, Charles Paget Esq. and Thomas Dymocke to decide I give my bay horse to Thomas Dymocke, who hath broken and made him, and my black jennet to my brother CornwaUis, also my colt called WeighiU. ADDENDA 52y After strict instructions to ks executors, he named them : Charles Paget, brother to Lord Paget; Edmund Gage of Bartley, co. Sussex- Gilbert WeUs of Braineridge, co. Southampton; Ralphe Hare bencher of the' Inner Temple, and lastly my good and faithful servant Thomas Dymock gent., and I give every one of them for their paines too marks. For overseers Lord Henry, Earl of Northumberland, my Lord Thomas Paget and my loving brother Thomas Cornwallis, giving to each of them plate to the vdue of £80. He asked ks executors to take great trouble with ks affaks for ks son's sake, and to take great care that my son be godly and virtuously brought up, and dways assisted by them k friendship and good counseU as in my life they did to me firing, and that they wiU offer thek prayers to God for my soul. H. Southampton. Witnesses: George Fortescue, Edmund Prettye, Thomas Fryar, Thomas Peigham, and Flox Hunt. A codicU contains a Ust of manors set aside for the Queen's Thkds. Item, because my house at Dogmarsfield is yet unperfected, and it is large, and will require careful looking to, and because a smaller thing will be more convenient for my wife after my decease, my desire is that my executors may compound with her for her interest in Dogmarsfield, and because my intent is that she shall not be prejudiced in any way I will my executors to offer her fourscore pounds by the year, which is a greater sum than the same is worth, unless the parkes were destroyed. And because the whole world shaU witness that I die k perfect charity, if my said wife be conformable in this, that my executors pay her £500 as soon as they may conveniently gather it. But if she refuse to compound, then there to be no such legacie. And I give to my Lord Montague a George and a Garter of the value of £40 in token of perfect love and charity between us. H. Southampton. At the foot is written, probably for purposes of probate, I Thomas Pagett witness that the wiU, of which this was a copy, was written by my Lord of Southampton's own hand. I Thomas Dymock, late servant to the foresaid Earl, must testifie as Lord Pagett hath before written, and that it was the Earl's wish it should be per formed with the will1. The Earl died at ItcheU, a house of ks not far from Titchfield, on the 4th of October, 1 581. We do not know where the Countess was, except that she was not by her husband's bedside. She most probably had taken rekge at Cowdray. The wiU is doubly autobiographical, disclosing not ody the Earl's char acter and affections, but ks capacity at the time. He left five times as much as ks father did by wiUing more than he had. Lord Montague would not be likely to interfere more than he could help (under the ckcumstances), except to use ks influence to get Edmund Gage out of prison on baU, to enable him to make possible a just settlement. The Queen had apparendy intervened. Lady Mary Wriothesley was brought 1 P.C.C.^ Rowe, 45. 528 THE THIRD EARL OF SOUTHAMPTON over to Cowdray the night before the funeral. The wiU aUowed sk years for the completion of the chapd and monument, and apparendy the executors took the opportumty of delay, as the kneeUng figure of the boy by ks father's tomb is not that of a ckld of eight, but of one nearly fourteen years old. Little pubhc notice was taken of the Earl's death ; Camden even records it briefly in the wrong year1. The Earl of Southampton found one panegyrist, probably of ks own household, certaidy of ks own faith, who wrote an epitaph on him nearly as long and quite as heavy as Pound's Prothalamium. Tks, published without name of prkter or of date, was printed as a broadside, signed by John Phillips, and preserved among the Huth Ballads in the British Museum2. It does not seem to give quite accurate kstory, though it proves some points. Southampton was again eulogised when Gervase Markham sang the praises of ks son in 1624. The only known portrait of the second Earl, that preserved by Lord EUesmere at Bridgewater House, was first printed by Sir Sidney Lee in ks Illustrated Life of Shakespeare, 1899, and reprinted in Mr R. Godding's beautikl volume, The Wriothesley Portraits. It was probably painted to match that of ks wife in Welbeck Abbey. The expression of the countenance suggests a character "difficult" to Uve with. The Countess was referred to in the ninth stanza of Churchyard's Pleasant Conceipte, prepared to shew EUzabeth on New Year's Day, 1 593-4 3- IV. SOUTHAMPTON'S CONTEMPORARIES IN ST JOHN'S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE Professor Moore Smith, when working on some of the Uves of the men of St John's College, sent me a few notes to hdp me, and I feel they ought to be preserved here. Lansdowne MS. 33, art. 43, is a Ust of members of the University in 158 1, classified coUege by coUege, under the professors whose lectures they attended. Unfortunately the rubrics are faded so as to be hardly legible; and as the date was too early for Southampton, one could hardly caU the men "contemporaries." As a fellow-commoner or nobleman, he would Uve chiefly with feUows and other feUow-corrimoners and come Uttle in contact with ordinary undergraduates. There is another list, arranged in the same way, for the year 1588 in Lansdowne MS. 57, art. 92. Tks does faU in Southampton's period, if he remained in residence until ks M.A. in 1589 (noblemen did not take the B.A. degree). In tks Ust among the Auditores Philosophiae from St John's is "Ds Nash," i.e. Tom Nash, B.A. Under Auditores Dialecticae Coll. Johnis is a Ust beginmng with feUow-commoners designated as "Mr" (of course "Mr" can mean "Master of Arts," but Masters of Arts would not study dialectic, the second-year subject for undergraduates.) These feUow- commoners are: "Mr Cheek, Mr Brooke, Mr Goodyer, Mr Wrotsly, 1 Camden's Elizabeth, p. 287. 2 Huth Ballads, 58. 3 Nichols' Progresses, IV. 233. \ ADDENDA 52Q Mr Clench, Mr BiUingsley sen., Mr BiUingsley ju." Prof. Moore Smith queries whether Wrotsly here represents Southampton. In the list of Johmans wkch foUows (those not fdlow-commoners) appears Cotgrave, i.e. Randle Cotgrave, the lexicographer. Another Ust of Johman feUow-commoners contemporary with South ampton appears under Auditores Rhetoricae (first year students) : "Mr Day, Mr Trapes, Mr FretchweU, Mr Parker, Mr Harper sen., Mr Harper ju.," foUowed by ordinary undergraduates. Among the latter are " Jhonson sen.'; and "Jhonson jun." FuUer, of course, said that Ben Jonson was at St John's ; but other tkngs go against it, so we must not assume the identity. A Henry and a John Johnson matriculated from St John's in 1588. Of the first Ust of fdlow-commoners above, Mr Brooke seems = And. Brooke, matric. f.-c. of St John's, Mich. Term, 1587. Mr Goodyer=Hen. Goodyere, matric. f.-c. of St John's, Mich. Term, 1587. Was tks Donne's friend, Sk Henry Goodyere ? Mr Clench=Rob. CUnche, matric. f.-c. of St John's, Mich. Term, 1587. Mr BiUingsley, sen. and ju. = John and WUUam BUlingsley, matric. f.-c. of St John's, Mich. Term, 1587. None of these five graduated. Mr Cheek does not appear; he may have left St John's for Emmanuel, where one of the name matricdated in 1588, Mich. Term. If so, aU appear in Venn's Matriculations except "Mr Wrotsly." Professor Moore Smith considers that he must be Southampton and thinks the abandonment of his rank kteresting. But I know that two of ks relatives of that name were Udversity men about that time, and leave the question open, thanking my correspondent for helping me so much in one point of research which the state of my eyes forbade me to try. Note to Chapter xxi, p. 333. Much has been unavoidably omitted in the latter half of this book, in order to secure space for other detaUs, particularly in connection with the generd kstory of the Colonies. But I desire to direct particular atten tion to the fact that Southampton was concerned in the compiling of A true Declaration of the estate of the Colonic in Virginia . . .published by advice and direction of the Councill of Virginia. . .by William Barrett 1610. This boodet of 69 pages states that "their primarie end is to plant religion, their secondarie and subalternate ends are for the honour and profit of our nation These Islands of the Bermudas have ever beene accounted as an inchanted pile of Rockes, and a desert inhabitation for Divels; but all the Fairies of the Rockes were but flockes of birds and all the Divels that haunted the woods were but heards of Swine. . . .What is there in aU this tragicdl Comedie to discourage.. . .Nil desperandum, Ckisto Duce et Auspice Christo." Further facts in the same connection may be found in P. Force's Tracts on American Colonization, Vol. in. 1844, and J. P. Lefroy's Memorials of Bermudas, 1877-79, 2 vols. s.s. 34 INDEX Abberston, 45 Abbot, George, archbp, 358 — Maurice, 425 Aberdeen, 272, 388, 392 Acadia (Canada), 440 Adams, William, 93, 94 Ainger, Francis and Douglas, 39 Alencon, Francois, due de, 29 Algiers, pirates of, 384, 392 Allen, Edward, 298 Alleyn, Giles, 93 Althorpe, 237 Alton, Hants, 15 Amazon, the, 378 Ambassadors, English. See Carleton, Digby, Winwood French, 50, 218; on Essex, 214-8 Spanish, 284. See Gondomar Venetian, reports by, 203, 222, 266, 268ff., 285, 339, 348, 385-6. 39L 4°4ff-. 444. 446- 488ff., 452, 463 America, North. See Virginia Angers, 116 Anjou, le due de [Henri III], 29 Anne of Denmark, consort of James VI and I, 251, 267; a Roman Catholic, 269, 281; and Southampton, 281-3, 29^; and masques, 338, 350; and the Elec tor Palatine, 359; 365, 370 ;d., 397 et passim Annesley, Cordelia (Harvey) , 274, 343 Anstey, 136 Antonio, Don, of Portugal, 344 Archangel, the, 321-2 Arden, Edward, 29 — John, 91, 197, 223 Argall, Capt. Sir Samuel, and Vir ginia, 329, 420 ff. Armada, the Spanish, 32 Arundel, countess of, 398 — Margaret (Willoughby), Lady, 23, 68 — Mary (Wriothesley), Lady, mar ried, 22, 105, 261; died, 337 — Sir Matthew, 22, 68 — Thomas Howard, 2nd earl of, 348. 356. 359, 382; 398 — Sir Thomas, Lord, 22, 23, 33, 68, 69, 82, 105, 136; 261; cr. peer, 291 ; 398, 403, 447 Arundel, William, 23 Ascoli, prince of, 32 Ashley, Sir Anthony, on Cadiz voyage, 100 Astle, Mr, 99 Aston, Sir Roger, 243 Aubrey, J., Wiltshire, 69 Audley, Lord, 141 Azores, the, 98. See Island-voyage Bacon, Anthony, 103, 178, 200; d. 234 — Sir Francis, visct St Albans, masques by, 29, 74, 360; and Essex, 2ioff., 220; and James I, 257, 269 ; and Southampton, 263 ; and Cecil, 359; and Raleigh, 393-4; unpopular, 392, 450; tried, 401-4 — Lady, in Bainham, Sir Edward, 197 Ballynahinch, 154 Bancroft, Richard, bp of London and archbp, 21, 22, 104, 191, 221 Banquo, 296 Barlow, John and George, 199 Barnes, Barnabe, Parthenophil and Parthenophe, 54 Barnet. battle of, 18 Barrett, Thomas, archdeacon of Exeter, 27 Basse, Humphrey, 116 Bath, Knights of the (1616), 383 Beaulieu, Hants, 15 et passim — John, 352 Beaumaris, 157 Bedford, Julian (Foster), countess of, widow of 2nd earl, 67, 105 — countess of, 236 — Edward Russell, 3rd earl of, 33, 66; and Essex, igoff., 234, 240-2; 308, 350, 394 Bell, Sir Edward, 293 — Mr, 429 Belvoir Castle, 67, 233, 357 Bennethore, Sir T., alderman, 300 Berkeley, Henry, 460 — Sir John, 460 — Sir Maurice, letter, 304 — Sir Richard, 178 Bermudas, the (Somers Is.), 317, 328ft., 416 INDEX S3i Bermudas Company, the, 418 ff., 433 fi- Berwick, 257 Bingham, Sir Richard, 102 Birch, Thomas, Memoirs of Reign of Elizabeth, 102-3 Bkon, A. de Gontaut, Marechal de, 128, 221 Bisham, 296 Bishopswalton, 46 Blount, Sir Christopher, 109, 163, 184,1906. ; depositions by, 201-2, 210; execution of, 223-4; 231-2, 244 — Sir Charles, 120, 135 — Thomas, 155 Bodley, Sir Thomas, in, 298 Bohemia. See Palatine Bohun, family of, 19 Bollifant, Edmund, printer, 99 Bond, Dr, of Oxford, 50 Booreman, coiner, 294 Bowes, Ralph, 50, 52 Bowles, J. chaplain, 354 Bowyer, S., harbinger, 45 Boys, Mrs, 444 Bradley, Wm, 303 Brandl, Dr, and tie Sonnets, 344 Brandon, Lady Eleanor, 102 — Lady Katharine, 88 Brathwaite, R , The Scholar's Med ley, 365, 468, 480 Brazil sugar, 50 Bream, Capt., 294 Brett, Mr, 422 Brewster, Capt., 423 British Museum, the, 382 Broadhenbury, tithes of, 27 Brooke, George, 103, 268; executed, 272 — See Cobham — Lord. See Greville Brown, Alexander, English politics in early colonies, 425 Browne, Sir Anthony (i), 19, 487 — Sir Anthony (ii), 19, 38 — Sir Anthony (iii). See Montague — Anthony (iv), 2, 3, 27, 30, 47, . 49 — Anthony Maria. See Montague, 2nd visct — Sir George, and Sir Henry, 30, 47. 49 — Jane (Sackville), 49 — Mary (Dormer), wife of An thony (iv), 2, 3 — Mary. See Southampton, coun tess of Browne, Sir Matthew, 98 — Sir William, 107 Bruce, Edward (Lord Kkloss), 247, 248, 251, 260 Buckingham, Geo. Villiers, earl and duke of, 370, 384, 447; and the navy, 385, 397; and Southamp ton, 4ioff.; 447ft., 462; slander about, 466, 474; d., 467 Bullen A. H., Lyrics from Song- books, etc., 78 Burbage, James, 93, 102, 127 — Richard, 45, 102, 273; d., 397 — players, the (Lord Chamber lain's, Lord Hunsdon's) 45, 102, 174; (King's servants) 272 ff., 284 Burby, C, 56 Burgh or Borough, Lord, 97, 105 Burlamacchi, banker, 453 Burleigh, Mildred (Cooke), Lady, 34 — William Cecil, Lord, Lord Treasurer, and Southampton's wardship, 8, 17-26; 28, 33, 42; diary, 44, 50, 98; 85, 88, 103; d., 120 — 2nd Lord. See Cecil, Sir T. Burley, Capt., 294 Burseldon Ferry, 82 Bushell, Edward, 197 Butler, Capt., 435 Byrd, William, Psalms, Sonnets and Songs, 78 Cadiz expedition (1596), 96-100, 3i8, 374 Caen, 117 Caesar, Sir Julius, 175, 272, 281, 294 Calais, 31, 96 Calley, John, letter of, 81 Calshot Castle, 82 Calvert, George (Lord Baltimore), 444 Camble, sheriff of London, 197 Cambridge, University of, 370, 377, 456 — St John's College, 24, 370 ft., 398, 475S- Camden, William, 5, 62 ; and Islands voyage, 109; on Essex, 220, 221 Campion, Thomas, 313 Canaries, route by, 324 Canterbury, 104 — archbps of. See Abbot, Laud Cape Cod, 325 Carew, Sir George Carew, Lord, and letters, ioy, 108, 155, 224, 239, 246, 248, 251; cr. peer, 291, 352. 3^9. 378, 386, 451 34—2 532 INDEX Carew or Carey, Sir Henry, 149, 155. 197. 223 Carey, Sir George. See Hunsdon, 2nd Lord — Sir John (3rd Lord Hunsdon), 253. 257 — Sir R. (earl of Monmouth), 254, 257 — Mrs, 238 Carisbrooke Castle, 294, 482 Carleill, Christopher, and explora tion, 314 Carleton, Sir Dudley, letters to and from, 106, 117, 118, 120, 124, 170, 188, 207, 233, 266, 288; 306, 356, 398, 409, 464, 465 ; accused, 3°3 Carlisle, James, Lord Hay, earl of, 313. 348, 357. 394. 425. 428 — Lucy (Percy), Countess of (Lady Hay), 394 Carr, Robert. See Somerset Carter, Francis, 422 Catesby, Sir Robert, 197, 223 Cavendish, Lord. See Devonshire Cecil, General Sir Edward (Lord Wimborne), 399, 423 ft. — Lady Katharine, 89 — Sir Robert. See Salisbury, E. of — Sir Thomas. See Exeter, E. of. — Sir William (i). See Burleigh — Sir William (ii). See Salisbury (ii) Chamberlain, family of, 20, 21 — John, newsletters of, 106, 117, 120, 122, 140, 184, 207, 233, 250, 287, 338, 341, 349, 360, 398, 406ft., 416, 443 — Wilham, trustee, 101, 116, 245, 294; encroaching, 345, 351 — Mr, of Cosham, 80 Chambers, E. K., article by, 73, 74 Chandos, Edward Bridges, Lord, 239 Chapman, George, Ovid's Banquet of Sense, 53; 323; Iliads, 354, 355; Eastward Hoe, 323, 360 Charles I (Prince), 283; Duke of York, 288; 325, 358, 359, 370; P. of Wales, 383; and Bacon's trial, 401 ff., 447, 448ft. ; at Titch field, 474, 482 — IX, king of France, 29 Chartley, 157, 233 Chaucer's metre, 65 Chelsea, pageant at, 349 Chenies, Lord, 293 Chesapian Bay, 324 Chichester, 46, 48 Chichester, Sir Arthur, 183 Cinque Ports, the 233 Clandon, 46 Clerke, Mrs, 5 Clethro or Cletheroe, 52, 429 Cleves and Juliers, duchies of, 368 Clifford, Sir Conyers, 143 Clinton, Edward. See Lincoln, E. of Cobbe, R. and T., Southampton's suit against, n8ff. Cobham Hall, 104 Cobham, Lady (countess of Kildare), 290 — Henry Brooke, Lord, 32, 39, 102, 103 — Henry Brooke, 2nd Lord, 103, 127, 164; and Essex, 190, 210, 248 ff.; and James I, 259, 267ft.; condemned, 272; forfeitures of, 290; 300 Cocks, Miss (Lady Percy), 187 Coke, Sir Edward, Attorney-Gen eral, i8off. ; and Essex, 198, 2o8ff. ; and Raleigh, 270; 413 — Sir John, 481 Colchester, recordership of, 90 Collet, Thos, 440 Collingwood, Edward, 439 Compton, William, Lord, and Islands voyage, 97, 105, 106 Condell, Henry, 273 Coningsby, Richard (harbinger), 46 Constable, Capt., 149 — Sir Wm, 197, 200, 290 Conway, Sir Edward (Lord Conway), 422, 444, 448 ff. — Sir Edward, junior, 456 Cooke, J., servant, 313 Cope, Sir Walter, letter, 288; 322 Copley, Anthony, 32, 268 Coppinger, Lettice and Margaret, 39 Coppuldyke, John, attorney, 292 Copthall, 62, 88, 89 Cornwallis, Sir C, envoy to Spain, 3°4. 357 — Katharine (Wriothesley), Lady, 5 — Sir Thomas, 5, 46, 47 — Sir William, 86, 281 Coryate, Thomas, 343 Cotton, John, recusant, 361 Council, the, and Essex, ch. x passim; and others, 223 ft.; fines plotters, 234 — of the North. See Star Chamber Coventry, 178 Cowdray, 1 et passim Cowes Castle, 445 INDEX 533 Cox, Mr, 149 Cranmer, George, 118 Crashaw, Raleigh, 325 — William, divine, 325 ff., 360, 371ft., 417 Cripps, family of, 11 — George, 11, 12 Croft, Sir H. and Sir J., 264 Cromwell, Edward, Lord, 141, 191, 197, 212 — Thomas, Lord, 460 — Sir Oliver, 265 Crowe, John, 386 Cuffe, Henry, and Essex, 125, 126, 149, 197, 200; executed, 224 Culpeper, Sir T., 481 — of Aylesford, 1 1 Cumberland, George Clifford, earl of, 50, 94; at Cadiz, 97; 101, 180, 288, 317 — countess of, 174 Cundell, Thomas, 197 Dde, Sir Thomas, and Virginia, 329, 392, 421, 425 Daniel, Samuel, Complaint of Rosa mond, 65; 277-8, 280; Philotas, 292; The Queen's Arcadia, 296; 306; Musophilus, 323 ; Tethys, 350 Danvers, Lady, 69, 8off. — Sir John, 69 — Charles and Henry, and Long's murder, 69, 80 ff., 117-8, 121; 141, 144; (Sir C.) 156, i77ff., i86ff., 190 ff.; depositions by, 202, 210; execution of, 223-4; (Sk H.) 257, 261; a peer, 269, 434ff.; letters of, 145, 149, 167 Darcy, Mrs, 238 — Sir Thomas, 348 Darell, Hadrian, 67 Dartmouth, 321, 385 Dauntsey, Wilts, 69 Davies, John, poet, 276, 306 — Sir John, igofi., i97fi- 212'- evidence of, 223, 261 Davison, William, Secretary, on Ireland, 91 Dekker, Thomas, 280, 358 De la Warre, Elizabeth (Shirley), Lady, 331 — Thomas, Lord, and Virginia, 325 ff., 417, 419. 426 ff. Denmark, Christian IV, long of, 176, 288; 307-8, 365 Denny, Edward, Lord, 313 Derby, Eleanor (Clifford), countess of, 102 Derby, Elizabeth (Vere), countess of, 85-6, 162 — Ferdinando Stanley (Lord Strange), 5th earl of, 85, 344 — Henry Stanley, 4th earl of, 85 — William Stanley, 6th earl of, 68, 85, 86, 97, 101, 106, 162 Desmond, lands of, 317 Devereux, Sir George, 199 — Walter, Lord Ferrars of Chart- ley, 139 — family of above, 139, 140 — See Essex, earls of — Penelope. See Rich Devonshire, Ch. Blount (Lord Mountjoy), earl of, 92, 106, 107; and Southampton, 1635.; and Essex, 177ft.; and Ireland, 175, 232; and Cecil, 223, 24g, 251; cr. earl, 269; 277, 290; d., 305 — Wm, Lord Cavendish, earl of (cr. 1618), 423 ff. Dieppe, 40, 116 Digby, Sir Everard, 3ooff. — Sir John, 212; and Spain. 364, 385-6, 418 Digges, Sir Dudley, 409 Dingwall, R. Preston, Lord, 348 Dixie, Sir Wolston, 52 Dobell, Bertram, on Register of Noble Men, 76 Dockwra, Sir H., 156, 527 Dogmarsfield, 1 Doleman, Jesuit, 211 Doncaster, Lord. See Carlisle Donne, Dr John, 434, 447 Donnington, Mr, 136 Dormer, Lady, 46 — Sir R., Lord, 47, 291 — Sir Wm, 3 Dorset, T. Sackville, Lord Buck hurst, earl of, 49, 167, i77ff-. 252, 270; cr. earl, 280, 288; d., 339 — Richard Sackville, 3rd earl of, 342. 354. 383. 42°ff- , , ± — Robert Sackville, 2nd earl of, d., 342 — (Pembroke and Montgomery), Anne (Clifford), countess of, 342 Douglas, Sir R., 341 Downhall, Wm, servant, 131 Drake, Sir Francis, 29 96; and Vir ginia, 315; 3l8 Drayton, Michael, Endymion and Phoebe, 53; 280; Ode to the Vir ginian Voyage, 324 Dredge, stable-boy, 82, 83 534 INDEX Drewell, Sk Humphrey, 83, 98, 105 Drummond, Sir J., 345 Drury, Dr, chief registrar, 7, 1 1 — Sir Drue, 178 ft. — Sir Robert, 168, 179, 183 Dublin, Essex in, 201, 231 Dudley, Lord, 203 — Sir Robert, 317 Dugdale, Gilbert, 280 — Sir William, 5, 481 Dunfermline, 391 Dunkirk, 32 Dunmow, 283 Dunscombe, Capt., 294 Dutch, the, 176-7 Duvenvoord, Admiral, 96, 98 Dymock, Thomas, steward, 3, 7ff., x5. 17. 27, 69, 82, 83, 130 East India Company, the, 327, 378, 384, 410, 418 Edinburgh, 391 Edmondes, Sir Thomas, 102, 118, 123, 125, 129 Edmonds, Piers, 199 Edward I, 18 — Ill, 18 — IV, 19, 24 Edwards, Thomas, Narcissus, 61 Egerton, Sir Thomas (earl of Elles- mere), 120; and Essex, 156, 178, 190; and Heneage, 264 Eglisham, Geo. 466 Elizabeth, Queen, passim; and Essex, 39-40, 87-9, ch. x; 140, ch. xn, ch. xm; and Bridget Manners, 66-7 ; and Lady South ampton, 112; and Southampton, ch. ix, 152, 169; and Rutland, I43-5: maying, 243; omen on, 248; death of, 253-4; and Ra leigh, 318, 237; and Virginia, 315; at Cowdray, 45-7; Oxford, 50 — (princess), queen of Bohemia, 300; marriage to Prince Palatine, 357fi-> 365; and Southampton, 448, 450, 462ft., 473 Elken, William, alderman, 51 Elverton, 46 Emden, 176 Enfield, 145 Essex, Frances (Howard), countess of, 3°3 — Frances (Walsingham), countess of, 144, 173, 174; and Sir P. Sidney, 306 — Lettice (Knollys), countess of (aft. married (a) Leicester, (6) Blount), 178, 184 Essex, Robert Devereux, 2nd earl of, and Southampton, 35-54, ch. ix passim, 69, 7g; and Danvers murder, 84; 86 ff., 94; at Cadiz, 96-100; and Islands voyage, 105-1 1 1 ; and Ireland, 136, ch. x; ancestors of, 139; favoured, 140; and Grey, 164; disgraced, ch. xn ; schemes of, i86ff. ; arrested, igoff. ; followers of, 197; evi dence on, 199ft.; tried, 206 ff.; d., 220; comments on, 220ft., 243ft.; 344, 374, 459; letters, 125, 126, 134, 147 — Robert Devereux, 3rd earl of, and his countess, 303; 368; 453; 457. 462 — Walter Devereux, earl of, 139, 140 Estcourt, Sir T., 473 Ewens, Ralph, 285 Exeter, Sir T. Cecil, 2nd Lord Bur leigh, earl of, 31, 94, 191, 240 Falkland, Henry Cary, visct, 481 Falmouth, 107 Fareley, 46 Farnham, 308 Fawkes, Guy, 300 Fenner, Edward, Judge, 292 Fermor, Sir Geo., 267 Ferrar, John, and Virginia Co., 423«f. — Nicholas, Deputy, and Vkgirna Co., 429ft. — Nicholas the elder, 425 Ferrol, 108 Ferrour, John, 291 Field, Richard, printer, 31, 52, 59, 60, 113 Finch, Moyle, 62 — Sir Thomas, 62 Finisterre, 108 Fitton, Anne, 238 — Sk Edward, 238 — Mary, and Lord Herbert, 42, 129, 176, 238-9; Fitzgarret, 182 Fitzgerald, Edward, 39 — Elizabeth. See Lincoln — Gerald, 39 Fitzwilliam, Sir Thomas, 18, 31 — William. See Southampton, earl of Fletcher, John, Bishop of London, 91, 102 INDEX 535 Fletcher, Lawrence, 272-3, 390 — Dr, ig7 Flores (Azores), no Florio, John, 68, 69; and the Dan vers case, 83; 93; 136-8, 261 Fortescue, Sir John, 112, 252 Foxe, John, De Oliva, 63 Frobisher, Sir Martin, 50, 52, 344 Furnivdl, Dr, and the Sonnets, 344 Fynett, Sir J., on Salisbury's death, 353: 358; 464 Gage, Edward, and Southampton's property, 5, n, 12, 14, 15, 18; 51, 101, 116, 245, 294 Garnett, Anthony, 11 — Henry, Jesuit, 86, 300, 301 Garrett, Sir Thomas, 105 Garter, Commission on Order of the (Ust), 393 Gates, Sir Thomas, and Virginia, 323. 325fi-. 419. 428. 44i Gayley, Professor, Shakespeare and the Founders of Liberty in America, 446 German, Sir Thomas, 124 Gerrard, Sir Thomas, 155, 314 Gibson, Anthony, A Woman's worth, 176 Gifford, Sir George, 97 — Philip, 422 — Capt. R., 252 Gilbert, Sir Humphrey, 314-5 — Capt. Rawley, 322, 324 Gloucestershire, 188 Golding, Arthur, Metamorphoses of Ovid, 53 Gondomar, Diego Saxmiento d A- cuna, count of, and Virginia, 445 Gordon, Sir Robert, 348 Gorges, Sir Ferdinando, 141, 190ft.; deposition by 209, 223; and Cecil, 261 ff., 322, 325 — de Montemayor, 96 GosnoU, Capt., 3192.; 338 Gratiosa (Azores), 109 Gravesend, 177, 307, 357, 421 Gray's Inn and Southampton, 28, 35 ; revels at, 70-4, 79 "Great Britain," 254, 256 Green, Thomas, 375 Greene, Clement, 281 — Thomas, of Stratford, 198 Greenfield, B. W., 465 Greenstreet, Mr, on Derby, 162 Greenwich, Court at, 29 et passim Grenville, Sir Richard, 31 ; and the Revenge, 92-3, 314-5, 317; and Virginia, 316 Greville, Sir Edward, 198 — Mr, 178 — Sir Fulke (Lord Brooke), 29, 99, 116, 124, 242; and James I, 283; and Sidney, 306, 315-6; and Virginia, 323; 339, 386, 422 — Fulke, the younger, 344 Grey, Sir Henry, 39 Grey de Wilton, Arthur, Lord, 28, 32, 163 — Thomas, Lord, 106, 109, in; and Ireland, ch. x passim; and Southampton, ch. xi; 177, 179, 184, 191; and Essex, 207I1., 241, 24811. ; and James I, 259, 269 ff.; 300; d., 367-8 Griffith, pirate, 251 Grimson, recusant, 2g2-3 Grosart, Dr A. B., 68 Grose, Lawrence, sheriff. 83 Guiana, 318 Guildford, 44, 45 Gunter's, 200, 201 Gwynne, Dr M., Vertumnus, 29b — - Dr Owen, 370 ft. Haddington, visct, 338 Hdnes, factor, 327 Hakluyt, Dr John, and Virginia, 322; Voyages, 315, 317 Hall, Joseph (bp of Exeter), Satires, 161 Hamble, 83 Hamersley, Alderman, 429 Hamford, Mr, 429 Hamilton, James, 2nd marquis of, 445, 467 Hammond, Colonel, 482 Hampstead, 41 Hampton Court, 269; plays at, 274, 279; 286 Hansby, Sir Ralph, 401 Harding, Mary, 65 Hare, Ralph, trustee, 5, 15, 101 Harington, Sir John, 241, 265, 272, 359 Harlow, Capt. Edward, 324-5 Harman, Thos, 322 Harvey, family of, 31 — Elizabeth (Fitzwilliam), 31 — George, 246 — Nicholas, 31 Sir Wm, letter to the queen, 31-2; 42, 97, 98; and countess of Southampton, 104, 117, 124, 536 INDEX 130, 134, 140; 261; rewarded, 269; 274, 289, 343 Hatfield, MSS. at, 264; 336, 354 Hatton, Sir Christopher, 21, 22, 39 Haughton, Lord, 427, 429 Hawkesworth, Mr, 304 Hawkins, Dr, 197 — Lady, 239 — Sir John, 96, 318 Hay, James, Lord. See Carlisle, earl of Hayes, Edward, and The Golden Hind, 315 Hayward, Sir Rowland, 52 Heidelberg, 365 Helmes, Henry, 70, 72, 80 Hemings, John, 273, 300 Heneage, Elizabeth, 62 — Sir Thos, 39; and countess of Southampton, 62; 63 ft., 75-9; death of, 88-92, 112; debts of, 264, 291 Hennings, steward, 83 Henri IV, king of France, 39, 84, 116, 120, 221,246, 254; murdered, 349 Henrietta Maria, Queen, 474-5 Henry VIII, 19, 30 — P. of Wales, 280, 340, 341; and pageants, 348 ; Spanish marriage for, 351-7; death of, 357-9; 378 Henslowe, Philip, 298 Herbert, Sir Gerard, 397 — Sir John, 322 — Sir PhiUp. See Montgomery — Lord WilUam. See Pembroke, 3rd earl — Dr, 179, 189 — Mr, 426 — of Cherbury, Edward, Lord, 368-9 Hertford, 51 — Edward Seymour (Lord Beau champ), earl of, 46, 88, 344 — Wm Seymour, eaxl and mar quis of, 481 Heydon, Sir Chr., 197, 223 — Sir John, 197 "H. G.," Mirrour of Majestie, on Southampton, 395 Highgate, 281 High Ongar, 99 Holhday, Alderman, 197, 241 Holstein, Duke of, 291 Holyrood, 257, 259 Hooker, R., Ecclesiastical Polity , 446 Horsey family, the, of Melcombe, 68 Howard, Lord Henry. See North ampton, earl of — Lord Thomas. See Suffolk, earl of — of Effingham, Lord. See Not tingham, earl of Huddleston, Isabel (Neville), 18 — William, 18 Hughes, Charles, on Willobie, 68 — Thomas, Misfortunes of Arthur, 29 \ Hungary, 23 Hunnis, William, 64, 75 Hunsdon, EUzabeth (Spencer), Lady, 237 — George Carey, 2nd Lord, 102, "5. 237. 317 — Henry Carey, Lord, 67, 88, 102 Huntingdon, 265 — Henry Hastings, 5th earl of, 42 8 Ingoldsthorpe, IsabeUa, wife of George NeviUe, 18 Ireland, 135, ch. x passim, 163-9, 175, 176, i8off. Islands voyage, the, 105-in, 459 Itchell, 5, 33, 186 Izaak, painter, 341 James VI and I (k. of Scots) passim; and Essex, 202 ff., 247ft.; acces sion in England, 255 ft., 265; and silk-worms, 256; and literature, 257 ff.; favours Southampton, 259, 265 ft.; on progress, 270, 308ft.; and the stage, 272 ft.; and festivities, ch. xix passim; and gunpowder plot, 299 ff. ; supposed death of, 303 ; and Virginia, 325ft., 423-446; and earl of Salisbury, 337. 339,' and animals, 308, 346; debts of, 348 ft.; books by, 360; 377; Scottish progress, 384, 387- 3g2; foreign poUtics, ch. xxvn passim; d., 474 Jennings, Edward, vice-admiral, 342 Jephson, Capt. John, 143, 186 John of Gaunt, 18 Johnson, Alderman, and Virginia Co., 423ft. Jones, Inigo, masques by, 303 — Thomas, 281 - W., 474 Jonson, Ben, Every Man in his Humour, 106, 126; masques, ch. xix passim, 303, 323, 338, 341; Lady of the Lake, 348; Oberon, 350 INDEX 537 Jourdan, Silvester, on Virginia, 33off.; Malone on, ib. "Justice Shallow," 188 Kemlworth, 75 Keymis, Laurence, 318 Kildare, Gerald, earl of, 38 — Mabel (Browne), countess cf, 47 KilUgrew, Sir M., 446 — WiUiam, g2, 113 King, Rev. John, 21, 104 Kingsmill, Richard, 21 Kinnersley, Francis, 223 Knollys, Sir Francis, 139 — Dorothy (Bray), Lady, 239 — Lettice (countess of Essex and Leicester), 139, 140 — WiUiam, Lord (earl of Ban bury), 108, 190, 211; and Mary Fitton, 238 ft., 296; letter to , 108 Lake, Sir Thomas, 94, 290, 308, 336, 337. 345 La Mothe, M. de, of the French embassy, 218, 339 Lane, chaplain, 456 Laneham, Robert, 75 Laud, WiUiam, bp of London, 421; archbishop, 480 Lawrence, Mrs, 5 Lee, Henry, 156, 202 — Thomas, 156; and Essex, 200, 206, 208, 231 Leicester, Robert Dudley, earl of, 8ff., 17, 28, 29, 48; 202 — countess of 304, 398 Leigh, Sir John, 144, 347 — priest, 30 Leland, John, antiquary, 24 Lennox, Esme Stuart, duke of, and Raleigh, 250; 348, 35g L'Estrange, Sir Nicholas, Anecdotes, on Southampton, 308 Leven, Sir Melgar, 120 Leveson, Sir John, 201 Lewisham, 243 Lewknor, Richard, 45 liege, letter from, 222 Lincoln, Edward Fiennes de Clinton, earl of, 38 — countess of, EUzabeth Fitz gerald, widow of A. Browne (ii), her wiU, 38ft., 57 — bishop of. See Williams Linley, Sir Henry, ig7 LinUthgow, 247 Lisbon, 100 Lisle, Robert Sidney, Lord, 291, 359; and Virginia, 325, 417; letters to. See Sidney, R. Little Shelford, Southampton at. 313. 355 Littleton, Sir Edward, 223 — John, 197, 203 — Stephen, 303 Lodge, Thomas, Scylla, 53 Loftus, Adam, Irish chancellor, 155 Lok, Henry, Sonnets, 113 London, passim Bartholomew Fair, 51 Blackfriars, 102, 103, 127, 290 Charterhouse, 266 ClerkenweU (Holywell), 93 The Compter, 197 The Curtain, 173, 242 Drury House, 1875. Essex House, 189 ft. The Fleet, 238 et passim The Globe, 174, 188, 201 Holborn, Ely Place, 21, St An drew's, 21-2, 104; South ampton House and St Mary Overies, 3 et passim Lambeth, 196 London Bridge, 2 Ludgate, 191-2 Paris Garden, 298 Port of London, 50 Savoy, 62, 70 St Paul's, 91; chain of, 191, 197 Strand, 195 ft. Tower, 194s. et passim Whitehall, 359 See Gray's Inn — Bishop of. See Bancroft, Fletcher, Laud — Lord Mayor of, ig7 Long, Henry, murder of, 70 ft. — Sir Walter, and the Danvers case, 70ft. Lorkin, Rev. T., 393 Lorymer, Stephen, 94 Loseley, passim; Papers, 100 Low Countries, wars in the, 29, 31; EngUshmen in, 325 Lumley, John, Lord, 45 Lydiat, Thomas, cosmographer, 341 Malone, E., on Southampton, 282 Maltravers, James, Lord, 384 Manners, Lady Bridget (Mrs Tyr whitt), 55, 65-7,300 children of, 67 — Francis, ig7, 223 — George, 223 — John, 233 53« INDEX Manners, Roger, 65-6, 94, 105, 145 Manningham, Diary of, 258 ft. Mansell, Sir Robert, 384, 386; and the Virginia Co., 417, 423ft. Manwood, Roger, Justice, 344 Mar, John Erskine, earl of (Scottish envoy), 224, 247ft. Margate, 124 Markham, Gervase, Honour in its Perfection, 6; 92, 268, 272; Tragedy of Sir R. Grenville, 317; 336; on Southampton, 457-60 Marlowe, Christopher, Hero and Leander, 53 Marston, John, 323 — Robert, on Thomas, Lord Grey, 368 Martyn, WilUam, on Virginia, 4ig Mary I, queen of England, 19 — Princess (dau. of James I), 291; death of, 338 — queen of Scots, 5, 2g, 30, 202, 365 Masham, Thos. 318 Massey, Gerald, gg Massue de Ruvigny, Daniel de 478 Matthew, Tobie, 124, 126, 239 Matthews, C. E., 464 Mayflower, The, 440 Meedes, Henry, 82 Menny, Sir J., 347 Meres, John, 43 Metcalfe, Valentine, 313 Meyrick, Sir Gelly, 98; and Essex, 154, 179ft., 186, igoff., 201; tried and executed, 223-4, 261 Micheldever, parsonage, 26 — suit over, 1 18-120 — lease of, 453 Middleburgh, 184 Middlesex, Lionel Cranfield, earl of, Treasurer, 401-4, 448, 452 Middleton, Sir Thos, 460 Midhurst, 50, 51 Mildmay, Anthony, 80 Minsheu, J., Guide into Tongues, list of subscribers, 377 Mompesson's case, 401-4 Monson, Sir Thomas, 2g5 — Admiral Sir WilUam, 109, in; Voyages, 107 Montacute, AUce, countess of SaUs bury, 18 Montague, Anthony Browne (iii), viscount, and the Wriothesleys, 1-6, n-15, 18, 27, 35, 37, 45, 49. 51! lands of, 11 8-9; 345 — Anthony Maria Browne, 2nd visct, 3, 20, 4g, 51, 85, 106, 120, 177; and gunpowder plot, 300 ft., 356 Montague, Jane (Ratcliffe), Lady, 3 — Magdalen (Dacre), Lady, 2, 46, 47, 302ff.; will of, 334ft.; d., 342 Monteagle, Lord, 144, 201, 2g8 Montgomery, PhiUp Herbert, earl of, 287, 291, 348, 350, 394; and Virginia Co., 417, 423ft. Mordaunt, conspirator, 300 More, Sir George, 39, 322 — Lady, 1 — Sir William, i, 2, 11, 27, 39, 44, 45. 47. 7° Morice, James, 93 Mortlake, 273 Moryson, Fynes, 84, 142 — Richard, 142 Mountjoy, Lord. See Devonshire, earl of — Mountjoy Blount (called) Lord, 460 Munster, 459 Nalton, minister, 286 Nash, Richard, 55, 83 — Thomas, 55-8 Nassau and Orange, Prince Maurice of, 368-9 Nethersole, Sir Francis, 454 Nevers, due de, 243 NeviUe, George, 18 — Sir Henry, and Essex, 202, 232, 263; 323, 356, 359 — Sir John, marquis Montagu, 18 — Richard, earl of Salisbury, 18 — Richard, earl of Warwick, 18 Newcourt, Richard, Repertorium Ecclesiasticum, 22 New England, second colony of, 440 — Forest, the, 33, 308, 337, 397 Newdigate, Lady, Gossip from an old Muniment Room, 239 — John, 238 Newfoundland, 315 Newport, Capt. Chr., 324, 325 Newton, Adam, letter, 340 Newton, T., Encomia of Leland, 63 Nichols, John, Progresses ofQ. Eliza beth, 46 Nicolas, Sir H. N., 21 Nixon, Anthony, 297 Norfolk, Thomas Howard, duke of, 1, 5. 48 North, Sir Thomas, Plutarch's Lives, 59 Northampton, Henry Howard, earl INDEX 539 of, letters of, 132, 142, 143 153; and James I, 248ft., 261, 270; cr. earl, 280; 288, 291, 339, 359; d., 365 Northumberland, Henry Percy, 8th earl of, 5, 54, 102, 103, 184; and Southampton, 248 ft. Nottingham, Charles Howard, Lord H. of Effingham, earl of, High Admiral, and Southampton, 7, 16, 17, 26, 31, 342; and Cadiz, 96ft., i76;and Essex, 179ft., 232; and the queen, 253-4; 288, 397 — Katharine (Carey), countess of, 220; d., 253 Noy, WiUiam, attorney-general, 413 Oatlands, 37 Oglander, Sir J., 465 Ogle, Charles, 197 Onslow, Mrs, 238 Orinoco, the, 378 Ormonde, Thomas Butler, earl of, 28, 180 Ortegal, Cape, 108 Osborne, Francis, 243 Owen, Sir David, 19 Oxford, 50, 295; Univerdty of, 377 — Henry de Vere, 18th earl of, 34, 90, 406, 414, 452-7 — Anne (Cecil), countess of, 34 Paget, Charles, 5, 17 — Thomas, Lord, 5, 7, 15, 17 — Wm, Lord, 423 ft. Palatinate, warof the, 399, 404, 447ft. Palatine, Frederick, count and elector (the Palsgrave), 357ft., 370 (king of Bohemia), 399 — Frederick Henry, prince, 365 Palavicino, Sir H., financier, 107 Palmer, Sir Henry, 124 Paradise of Dainty Devices, The, 220 Parker, Sir Henry, 197 — Sir Nicholas, 109 — WiUiam, 322 — Mr, 115 Parkhurst, Sir Wm, 410 Parkinson, Capt., 82, 83 Parliament, 400 ft., 450 ff. Parma, duke of, 32 Payne, servant, 83 Peckham, Sir Geo., and Virginia, 314-5 Peele, George, Englandes Hollydayes, 94 Peend, Thomas, Hermaphroditus and Salmacis, 53 Pembroke, Henry Herbert, 2nd earl of. 33. 42, 5°. 187 — Mary (Sidney), countess of, 187, 306, 307, 398 — William Herbert, 3rd earl of (Lord W. Herbert), 97, 104, 176, 177, 187, 238ft., 277, 325, 344, 350; Chamberlain, 389-; "puri tan," 383; 384; and Sir T. Smith, 394; 398, 401, 425, 445, 466 — Sir WilUam, 5 Percy, Algernon, Lord, 384 — Allan, 305 — Sir Charles, 187, 197ft.; 223 — George, and Virginia, 326 — Sir Joscelyne, 197, 201 ; trial of, 223 — William, 54 Petit, John, letter, 174 Petre, Sir John, 90 Pett, Phineas, 356 Pettie, W., verses of, 471 Peyton, Sir John, Lieut, of the Tower, 224, 244-5, 261 Phihp II, king of Spain, 2g, 30 — Ill, king of Spain, 284 PkUipps, Ambrose, 201 — Augustine, 273 — John, 5 Pitts, Richard, 27 Plots, Throgmorton's, 2g Essex', igoff. Main and Bye, 271 ff . Gunpowder, 2ggff., 313 Plymouth, 2g, g6, 97, 98, 106, no; and piracy, 294 — Merchant adventurers of, 322 Pocahontas, 324 .420ft. 432 Pope Gregory XIII, 29 Popham, Capt. George, 322, 324 — Sir John, C.J., 322, 325 Porter, Mr, 422 Portsmouth, 28, 45, 48, 50 Pound, Mrs, 5 Powhatan, Indian Ckef, 324, 420, 432 Preston, Sir Richard. See Dingwall, Lord Probyn, 90, 91 Proctor, Rev. John, 21 PubUc Record Office, the, 382 Purchas, Samuel, 321 Purfoot, T. and T., 141 Puttenham, George, Art of English Poesie, 59 Queeney, Richard, 198 54° INDEX Quinby, Edward, vice-admiral, 342, 365 Raleigh, Sir Walter, 77; at Cadiz, 96-8; and the Islands voyage, 1 05- 1 1 1 ; and Southampton, 115; 135, 154; and Essex, 190, 203ft.; intrigues of, 223, 242, 248ft.; and James I, 259, 260, 267ft.; tried, 271ft.; hated, 237, 272; 300; anecdote of, 309; and Vir ginia, 315 ft.; and Guiana, 318, 344; grant to, 348; last voyage, 384; second trial, 393-4; 419; letter, 204 ; History of the World, 394; Discovery of Guiana, 427 — Sir Carew, 50 — Carew, 422 Ratcliffe, Elizabeth (Lady Hadding ton), 338 — Mary, 66 — Meg, 246 RavaiUac, murderer of Henri IV, 349 Raymond, Capt., and the Bermudas, 317 Raynesford, Sir H., 422 Reynolds, Edward, letters to, 149, 154 — Wm, igg Rich, IsabeUa, 3g4 — Sir Nathaniel, 441 — Penelope (Devereux), 99, 104, 131, 140, 156, 158, 161, 173, 175; and Essex' plot, 177ft., 195ft., 240; 245, 261, 277; and her lovers, 305-6 — Robert, Lord (E. of Warwick), 97, 106, no, 140, 306 Richard II, acted, 106, 188 Richmond, P. Henry at, 357 — duchess of, 463 — Ludovick Stuart, duke of, 466 Ripsley, Sir John, 448 Rivers, Father, 252 Roberts, James, printer, 92 Robinson, Francis, 82, 83 Rochelle, 109 Roe, Sir Thomas, 323, 369; and exploration; 378ft.; 425, 447, 449 ff.; and Southampton, 4626. Rohan, Hercule, due de, 214, 218 Rolfe, John, 420 ft. Romsey, 2g4 Rosier, James, 321 Rounching, William, 97 Rowe, Sir William, 51 Royston, 313 Rudolf II, emperor, 23 Russell, Anne, and Lord Herbert, 238 — Elizabeth, 238 Ruthven, Wm and Patrick, 268 Rutland, Edward, earl of, 93 — Elizabeth (Charlton), countess of, 65-7 — Frances (Sidney), countess of, 141, 174, 189 — Francis Manners, 6th earl of, 357 — John Manners, 2nd earl of, 67 — Roger Manners, 6th earl of, 33, 5" 93, 94, roi, 102, 137; and Essex, 141, 173, 184, igoff., 212; fined, 233; 261; d., 357 Sackford, Mr, ig7 Sackville. See Buckhurst, Lord — Sir Edward, 435, 446 St Albans, 105 St John, OUver (Lord Grandison), 432 St Leger, Warren, 180 St Malo, a prize from, 50, 52 St Sebastian (Spain), 98 SaUsbury, Robert Cecil, Lord Cran borne, earl of , 20, 7g; secretary, in, n6ff.; 123, 155; and Essex, chs. xn and xm passim; 199; accused, 2ioff. ; petitions to, 218, 219; 223ft.; described, 240; powerful, 243; and James I, 247 ft.; minister, 2553.; and Theobalds, 266, 366-7; cr. peer, 282; and festivities, ch. xix passim; 291, 2gg, 308; and Vir ginia, 325ft., 416; 334; treasurer, 33g; and Southampton, 347, 351 ; death of, 352-4 — William Cecil (Lord Cranborne), 2nd earl of, 290, 349, 354, 422 — Capt. Owen, ig7, 200 Sandham, I. of W., 347 Sandys, Lord, 197, 212 — Sir Edwin, 323; suspected, 406, 413; and Virginia Co., 417, 423 ft. — George, 428 — Mabel (Wriothesley), Lady, 5 Savage, John, 5 — Sir John, 5 Savile, Sir Henry, 392 Scarlet, Thomas, printer, 46, 56 Scott, Gilbert, 82 — R. F., Master of St John's Col lege, Cambridge, 313 INDEX 54i Scriven, Thomas, bailiff, 66, 67, 145, 233 Scrope, Lady, 254 — of Masham, Lord, 18 — EUzabeth (Neville), Lady, 18 Selden, John, 407 Shaftesbury, 68 Shakespeare, John, 198 — WiUiam, at court, 76; and James I, 257, 273ff.( 280; 375; d., 381. See Southampton. Son nets, 41 ff., 70, 74, 343, 381; Venus and Adonis, 52ft. ; Lucrece, 64, 67; Comedy of Errors, 70—4, 7g; Midsummer Night's Dream, 75; Richard II, 188; Henry IV, 188, 201; Love's Labour's Lost, 288-9; Macbeth, 296, 301; Tem pest, 330ft., 360; Winter's Tale, 332 Sheffield, Edmund, 3rd Lord (earl of Mulgrave), 325; and Virginia Co., 425ft.; 451 — Gregory, 197 SheUey, Richard, 51 — Sir Thomas, 90 Sherwood, Forest of, 33 Shirley, Sir Anthony, 109 — Sir Thomas, 331 Shrewsbury, GUbert Talbot, earl of, 139, 290, 334, 357 Sidney, Frances (Walsingham), Lady (countess of Essex), 140 — Sir Henry, 140, 306 — Sir PhiUp, 29; Art of Poesie, 41 ; Arcadia, Astrophel and Stella, 41 ; 69, 99,' and Penelope Rich, 306; and Virginia, 314 ft. — Sir Robert, letters to, 86, 87, g4, 104, 107, 114, i2g, 135, 175, 177ft., 187ft. See Lisle, Lord "Sir John Falstaft," 160 "Sir John Oldcastle," 177 Smedley, Dr, MSS. of, 208, 246 Smith, Sir Francis, ig7, 223 — Henry, J.P., 80 — Capt. John, and Virgkia, 324ft., 420ft. — Richard, 92 — Sir Thomas, and Virginia, 317, 325; 386; and his son's marriage, 394; and the Virginia Co., 417, 423 ft. — WUUam, 426, 428 Snell, Thomas, J.P., 80 Somers, Sir George, 322, 3256., 416 — Is. See Bermudas Somerset, Lady Blanche, 238 Somerset, Lord Henry, 50 — Robert Carr, earl of, 365; and Overbury, 369, 383 — Sir Thos, 348 Somerset House, 284 Sophia, princess, dau. of James I, 307 Southampton, 15, 39; Ust of free men of 344; wine monopoly at, 345 — EUzabeth (Leigh), countess of, 482, 483 — Elizabeth (Vernon), countess of, courtship of, 86, 87, 94, 11 2-6, 122-31; 156, 173, 177, 246, 293; guardian, 331, 462ft., 473, 480, 483; Letters, 157-160, 196, 218, 476 — Henry Wriothesley, 2nd earl of, 1-6, 8ft.; wUl of, 14ft., 25ft.; 458 — Henry Wriothesley, 3rd earl of, childhood, ch. 1; wardship, ch. 11; at Cambridge, 24-7, 33; at Gray's Inn, 2gff., 70ft.; friends, 30-33; and Burleigh, ch. iv; and Essex, 35-44; and Shakespeare, 40-44, ch. v, 64 ; and the Queen, 48 et passim; and a prize, 52, 101; and Nash, 55-8; and Florio, 68, 6g; and Danvers, 6g, 80; at Gray's Inn Revels, "jo—yg; fined, 86; and Cadiz, 96-101; chal lenger, 103; and Islands Voyage, 105-111; in France, ch. ix; im prisoned, 131; married, 122ft.; in Ireland, ch. x, 164ft., 178ft.; and Grey, 164ft., 207ft.; dis graced, ch. xn ; and Essex' plot, 174 ft., igoff. ; tried, 206 ft.; speeches, 2og, 213; pitied, 203-4; petitions, 225; in the Tower, 244 ft.; favoured by James I, 2475., 266, 270, 281; by Queen Anne, 282 ff.; at Court, ch. xix, 350; and I. of Wight, 2g2ff., 347; and Bodleian, 2g8; and Virginia, ch. xxi passim, 378 ft.; and East India Co., 327; his ironworks, 345; wine monopoly, 350; Lon don property, 3g3; and recu sancy, 28g, 360; abroad, 368; and St John's Coll.library, 370ft. ; and Algiers, 384-6; "malcon tent," 383; his daughters, 378-g; and Sir T. Smith, 394; and the Palatinate, 3gg; and the attack on Bacon, 401-4; confined, 404- 542 INDEX 413; and the Virginia Co., 416- 446; and the Country Party, 422; out of favour, 447 ft.; and war with Spain, 447 ft.; quarrel with earl of Oxford, 452 ft.; officers under, 460; death and obsequies of, 461ft.; elegies on, 4676. ; descendants of, 483 ; letters of, 101, 121, 166, 167, i6g, ig6, 2g2ff., 3ogff., 33g-40, 342, 346, 352, 411, 449; dedications, etc., to, 52, 54, 56, 64, 92, 99, 113, 137-8, 184, 355, 365, 369, 396, 414 Southampton, Jane (Cheney), coun tess of, 2, 3, 5, 21, 26, 118 — Mabel (CUfford), countess of, 19 — Mary (Browne), countess of, 1-6; and the wardship, 7ft.; portrait, 42, 43 ; marries Heneage, 62, 75; 88-92, 101, in; marries Harvey, 104, 117, 140; and her son, 130, 132, 136; 162; petitions for him, 219; gratitude, 260; and James I, 264-5, 291, 307; 343 — Rachel (de Massue de Ruvigny) , countess of, 478; d., 480 — Thomas Wriothesley, ist earl of, 6, 14, 19, 24, 374; 458 — Thomas Wriothesley, 4th earl of, 120,313, 473ft. ;and St John's Library, 478-9; career of, 481ft. — WiUiam Fitzwilliam, Lord Ad miral, ist earl of, 19, 35, 47; 119, 120 Southampton Hundred, Va., 425 Southwell, Mrs, 238 Spain, 27 ; peace with, 284-5 — Infanta of, 2ioff. — Philip III, king of, 211, 386 Sparrow, Francis, 318 Spedding, James, Life, etc., of Bacon, 74 Spelman, Sir Henry, 377 Spencer, Sir John, 237 — Lady Penelope (Wriothesley), 378, 393, 398, 473 — William, Lord, 393, 403, 473 Spenser, Edmund, Colin Clout, 42; Faerie Queene, 42, 53; Protha- lamium, 100; death of, 140; 237, 306 Spinola, Ambrogio, marquis of, 368-9 Stafford, Sir E., 289 Stanhope, Richard, 91 — Sir John. See Stanhope of Harington Stanhope, Sir Thomas, letter to Bur leigh, 36 — of Harington, Sir John Stan hope, Lord, 84, 97, 155, 197, 23g, 241, 242 Stanley, WiUiam. See Derby, 6th earl — Sir Wm, adventurer, 85 Star Chamber, 174, 177, 203 Stewart, Arabella, reUgion of, 250, 252; 35°; d-. 36g Stonor, Anne (Neville), Lady, 18 — Sir WUUam, 18 Strachey, WiUiam, on Virginia, 318ft., 326, 32gff., 416, 417 Stratford-on-Avon, suit of, 198 Stratton parsonage, 26 Stringer, PhiUp, 50 Suffolk, Thomas Howard, earl of, 85, 96, g7; on Islands voyage, 105- 111, 191; 266; his daughter, 303; 386 Sully, M. de Bethune, Baron de Rosny, due de, 254 Surrey, Henry Howard, earl of, 41, 57 Sussex, countess of, 105 — Henry Ratcliffe, 4th earl of, 28, 45 — Robert, 5th earl, 92, 94, 97, 197, 357 — Robert Ratcliffe, ist earl of, 3 Sylvester, Joshua, 341, 369, 377 Talbot, R., engineer, 351 Terceira (Azores), 109, no Thames, the, frozen, 338 Theobalds, 308 et passim Thomond, Donogh O'Brien, earl of, 183 Throckmorton, Elizabeth, 318 Throgmorton, Edward, 107, 223 — Francis, 292 — Kenelm, 324 Thynne, Capt. Edward, 272 Tichborne, Mr, 45 Tilbury, 30, 47 Tilney, Edmund, of Leatherhead, 46 Timperley, and monopoly, 345 Tisbury, 337 Titchfield, passim; Charles I at, 475, 482 Tradescant, John, 422 Tresham, Francis, 300 Trumbull, Wm, diplomatist, 352 Tubbe, John and Henry, 363, 482 Tufton, Sir R., 422 Tuke, Sk Brian, 63 INDEX 543 Turks, the, 23 Tyburn, 356 Tyler, Thomas, 42 Tyrone, Hugh O'Neill, earl of, and Essex, 141, 154, 172-3, 182, 208, 231; and Mountjoy, 252-4; 269 Tyrwhitt, Mr, 65 — Robert, 65-7, 300 Udall, Wm, spy, 155, 182 — Mr, 394 Vaughan, John, 223 Vautrolher, J., bookseller, 31 Vere, Lady EUzabeth, and South ampton, 34-7. See Derby, countess of — Sir Francis, 109, no, 168, 248, 251, 368 — Sir Horace, 400, 448 — Lady Susan, 287 Vereiken, ambassador, 177 Vernon, Sir John and family, 86 — John, 197, 223 — Sir Robert, 86, 197, 200, 223 Verviers, Treaty of, 120 VilUers, George. See Buckingham Virginia, 29, 31, 306, 314-33; squirrels, 326, 346; 447 — Company (the New) 3253., 354, 392, 416-46 Virginian tobacco, 290, 316, 424, 427. 435 Wade, Mr, igg Wake, Isaac, 297 WaUop, Robert, 473 — William, 46 Walsingham, Sir Francis, 202 — Lady, 172, 295 Waltham and Havering, Forest of, 90 Wanstead, 120 Ward, Sir A. W., Shakespeare and the Makers of Virginia, 446 Wardour, 23 Warwick, 283 — Ambrose Dudley, earl of, 28 — Robert Rich, earl of 423 ft. Warwickshire, 300 Watson, Thomas, Passionate Cen tury, 42 Webbe, Henry, 93 — WUUam, Discourse of English Poetrie, 41 Welbeck, 42 Weldon, Sir A., Court and Character of King James, 283 ; 394 WeUs, Gilberd, 5, 15 Wesel, siege of, 369 West, Sir T. and Danvers' case, 80, 82 — Horsley, 38, 50 — Indies, voyages to, 378. See Virginia — Knoyle, Mere, 68 Weymouth, Capt. G., 318ft. Wharton, Lord, 66 Whitchurch, Dorset, 329 White, Capt. John, in Virginia, 316ft. Whitefield, Thomas, 28 Whitehall, plays at, 279, 287 Whiteley Park, Hants, 27 Whitelock, Edward, ig8 Whyte, Rowland, newsletters of, 86, 88, g4, 2go. See Sidney, R. WhytUn, Rev. Ralph, 21 Wight, Isle of, and Southampton, 2g2ff., 321 Wilbraham, Thos, 457 Wildgoose, Sir J., lunatic, 274 Wilkes, Sir Thomas, 52, 102 WUles, secretary, 244 WilUams, John, bp of Lincoln, Lord Keeper (archbp of York), 369, 374, 404; letters, 410-13, 462 Willobie his Avisa, 67-8, 87, 161 Willoughby, Ambrose, 114, 115 — Henry, 68 — Sir Henry, 23 — of Eresby, R. Bertie, Lord, 287, 453, 457 Wilson, Thomas, Art of Rhetoric, 41 ; Diana, 96, 98, gg WUton, 270, 272, 273, 337 Winchester, bishop of (W. Day), 84, (T. BUson), 204 Windsor, the Court at, 267, 283, 2g6 — ¦ Lord, 106 Wingfield, Sir Edward, g3 — Edward Maria, 322 — Sir John, 98 Winter, Robert, and Gunpowder Plot, 303 Winwood, Sir Ralph, 204, 214, 218, 224, 234, 349, 359; and the Virginia Co., 417-8 Wither, George, 355 — Mr, 433 Woking, rumour about, 303 Wolfe, John, publisher, 55, 61 Wollaston, Wm, merchant, 116 Wollaton, Notts, 23 Wolstenholme, Sir John, 423 Woodrington, Ephraim and Henry, 241 Woodstock, the court at, 357 544 INDEX Worcester, Worcestershire, 30 1, 303 — Edward Somerset, earl of, 50, igo, 288 Worthing parsonage, 84, g7 Wotton, Edward, Lord, 351 — Sir Henry, 369 Wright, T., The Passions of the Minde, 414 — priest, 212 Wriothesley, Anne (Wallop), 281, 398, 473 — Awdry, 483 — EUzabeth (Estcourt), 473 — Elizabeth (Percy), 480, 483 — Penelope, 483 — Penelope. See Spencer — Rachel (Russell), 480, 482 — Henry, Lord. See Southampton, Henry, 3rd earl of — Lord James, 291, 344, 384; 400, 448, 449, 453; d., 460 Wriothesley, Lord Thomas. See Southampton, 4th earl — Mr, Thomas, 422, 436, 437 Wroth or Wrote, John, of Virginia Co. 432 ft. Wyatt, Capt., 318 — Sir Francis, 435 — Sir Thomas, 41 Wyndham, George, 53 Xanten, pacification of, 369 Yarmouth, I. of W., 294, 347 Yeardley, Sir Geo., in Virginia, 432, 441 tt-'j Yelverton, Sir Henry, 393, 401-4 ;,-., Yong or Young, Bartholomew, gg'jj Zouch of Codnor, Sir Ja., Lord, 322, 359 PRINTED IN ENGLAND BY J. B. PEACE, M.A. AT THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS