BOOK Surrey advised his sister to the marriage projected for II. her, yet he would not consent to that designed for him1546. self; nor did the proposition about his sister take effect.

The Seimours could not but see the enmity the Earl of Surrey bore them; and they might well be jealous of the greatness of that family, which was not only too big for a subject of itself, but was raised so high by the dependence of the whole popish party, both at home and abroad, that they were like to be very dangerous competitors for the chief government of affairs, if the King were once out of the way; whose disease was now growing so fast upon him, that he could not live many weeks. Nor is it unlikely that they persuaded the King, that, if the Earl of Surrey should marry the Lady Mary, it might embroil his son's government, and perhaps ruin him. And it was suggested, that he had some such high project in his thoughts, both by his continuing unmarried, and by his using the arms of Edward the Confessor, which of late he had given in his coat without a diminution. But, to complete the Duke of Norfolk's ruin, his Dutchess, who had complained of his using her ill, and had been separated from him about four years, turned informer against him. His son and daughter were also in ill terms together: so the sister informed all that she could against her brother. And one Mrs. Holland, for whom the Duke was believed to have an unlawful affection, discovered all she knew: but all amounted to no more than some passionate expressions of the son, and some complaints of the father, who thought he was not beloved by the King and his counsellors, and that he was ill used, in not being trusted with the secret of affairs. And all persons being encouraged to bring informations against them, Sir Richard Southwell charged the Earl of Surrey in some points that were of a higher nature: which the Earl denied, and desired to be admitted, ac

cording to the martial law, to fight in his shirt with South- BOOK III. well. But that not being granted, he and his father were committed to the Tower. That which was most insisted 1546. on was, their giving the arms of Edward the Confessor, which were only to be given by the Kings of England. This the Earl of Surrey justified; and said, they gave their arms according to the opinion of the King's heralds. But all excuses availed nothing; for his father and he were designed to be destroyed upon reasons of state, for which some colours were to be found out.

1547.

of Surrey

The Earl of Surrey, being but a commoner, was brought to his trial at Guildhall; and put upon an in- The Earl quest of commoners, consisting of nine knights, and executed. three esquires, by whom he was found guilty of treason, and had sentence of death passed upon him, which was executed on the nineteenth of January at TowerHill. It was generally condemned as an act of high injustice and severity, which loaded the Seimours with a popular odium, that they could never overcome. He was much pitied, being a man of great parts and high courage, with many other noble qualities.

submission

But the King, who never hated nor ruined any body The Duke's by halves, resolved to complete the misfortunes of that to the family by the attainder of the father. And as all his King. eminent services were now forgotten, so the submissions he made could not allay a displeasure, that was only to be satisfied with his life and fortune. He wrote to the King, protesting his innocency: "that he had "never a thought to his prejudice, and could not imagine what could be laid to his charge. He had spent "his whole life in his service, and did not know that

66

ever he had offended any person; or that any were displeased with him, except for prosecuting the break"ers of the act about the sacrament of the altar. But “in that, and in every thing else, as he had been always obedient to the King's laws, so he was resolved

66

III.

1547.

BOOK" still to obey any laws he should make. He desired " he might be examined with his accusers face to face, " before the King, or at least before his council; and "if it did not appear that he was wrongfully accused, "let him be punished as he deserved. In conclusion, "he begged the King would have pity on him, and "restore him to his favour; taking all his lands or "goods from him, or as much of them as he pleased." Yet all this had no effect on the King. So he was desired to make a more formal submission; which he did on the twelfth of January under his hand, ten privycounsellors being witnesses. In it he confessed, "First, "his discovering the secrets of the King's council.

The par

liament meets.

Secondly, his concealing his son's treason, in using "to give the arms of St. Edward the Confessor, which "did only belong to the King, and to which his son "had no right. Thirdly, that he had, ever since his "father's death, borne, in the first quarter of his arms, "the arms of England; with the difference of the la"bels of silver, that are the proper arms of the Prince; "which was done in prejudice of the King and the

Prince, and gave occasion for disturbing or inter"rupting the succession to the crown of the realm. "This he acknowledged was high-treason; he confessed " he deserved to be attainted of high-treason, and hum"bly begged the King's mercy and compassion." He yielded to all this, hoping, by such a submission and compliance, to have overcome the King's displeasure. But his expectations failed him.

A parliament was called, the reason whereof was pretended to be, the coronation of the Prince of Wales. But it was thought the true cause of calling it was, to attaint the Duke of Norfolk; for which they had not colour enough to do it in a trial by his peers; therefore an attainder by act of parliament was thought the better way. So it was moved, that the King, intending to

of Norfolk

crown his son Prince of Wales, desired they would go on BOOK with all possible haste in the attainder of the Duke of III. Norfolk; that so these places, which he held by patent, 1547. might be disposed of by the King to such as he thought fit, who should assist at the coronation. And upon this slight pretence, since a better could not be found, the bill of attainder was read the first time on the eighteenth of January and on the nineteenth and twentieth it was read the second and third time; and so passed in the House of Lords, and was sent down to The Duke the Commons, who, on the twenty-fourth, sent it up attainted. also passed. On the twenty-seventh the Lords were ordered to be in their robes, that the royal assent might be given to it; which the Lord Chancellor, with some others, joined in commission, did give by virtue of the King's letters-patents. And it had been executed the next morning, if the King's death had not prevented it. Upon what grounds this attainder was founded, I can only give this account from the thirty-fourth act of the first parliament of Queen Mary; in which this act is declared null and void by the common law of the land: for I cannot find the act itself upon record. In the act of repeal it is said, "That "there was no special matter in the act of attainder, "but only general words of treasons and conspiracies; " and that, out of their care of the preservation of the King and the Prince, they passed it. But the act "of repeal says also, that the only thing with which "he was charged was, for bearing of arms, which he "and his ancestors had borne, both within and without "the kingdom; both in the King's presence, and in "the sight of his progenitors, which they might lawfully "bear and give, as by good and substantial matter of "record it did appear. It is also added, that the King "died after the date of the commission; that the King "only empowered them to give his assent, but did not

III.

1547.

BOOK give it himself; and that it did not appear by any re"cord that they gave it. That the King did not sign "the commission with his own hand, his stamp being "only set to it, and that not to the upper, but the ne❝ther part of it, contrary to the King's custom." All these particulars, though cleared afterwards, I mention now, because they give light to this matter.

His death

King's.

As soon as the act was passed, a warrant was sent to prevented the Lieutenant of the Tower to cut off his head the by the next morning; but the King dying in the night, the Lieutenant could do nothing on that warrant. And it seems it was not thought advisable to begin the new King's reign with such an odious execution. And thus the Duke of Norfolk escaped very narrowly. Both parties descanted on this differently. The conscientious Papists said, it was God's just judgment on him, who had in all things followed the King's pleasure, oftentimes against his own conscience; that he should smart under that power, which himself had helped so considerably to make it be raised so high. The Protestants could not but observe an hand of God in measuring out such a hard measure to him, that was so heavy on all those poor people that were questioned for heresy. But Cranmer's carriage in this matter was suitable to the other parts of his life; for he withdrew to Croyden, and would not so much as be present in parliament when so unjust an act was passed; and his absence at this time was the more considerable, since the King was so dangerously ill, that it must be concluded it could be no slight cause that made him withdraw at such a time. But the Duke of Norfolk had been his constant enemy; therefore he would not so much as be near the public councils when so strange an act was passing. But, at the same time, the Bishop of Winchester was officiously hanging on in the court; and though he was forbid to come to council, yet always,

Fox.