Queen Elizabeth, apprehensive of her danger from the popish party in Scotland, and queen Mary’s friends there, yet remained unresolved what to do; and whether to consent to what was done in Scotland towards their queen. However, her own security inclined her on the other hand; that is, to favour what the protestants had done: of whom she was better assured that they were on her side. And therefore, when commissioners were sent out of Scotland to the queen in March to adjust the Scots queen’s affairs, (viz. the bishops of Galway and Ross, and lord Leviston, on that queen’s part; and earl Morton, and two more, on the king’s,) and both parties were very stiff; one, for the queen to be restored to her government; the other, for the king her son to reign: the English court stood variously affected:
which the earl of Leicester, in the said month of March, gave this account of to Walsingham, then the queen’s ambassador in France:
“That the queen was scrupulous about it. The unworthiness of their queen to rule she granted but the instances of their cause, to depose her from her dignity, she could hardly be persuaded in. And so she
remained much perplexed. That on the one side she was loath to set her up, or to restore her to her estate again: and on the other side, as loath to defend that which she was not yet well persuaded to have justice with it. Between these, her council sought for these two things, viz. that herself might be preserved in surety, and the true religion maintained assuredly. For that as the state of the world stood, and upon true examination of this cause, it appeared, that both the ways were dangerous touching the queen of Scots. For as there was danger in delivering her to her government, so there was danger in retaining her in prison: her friends abroad beginning to speak proudly for her.”
Thus the earl of Leicester. But it was known, that all that was done in this conference was sent by special messengers from the Scotch queen’s party to the French king, the king of Spain, and the pope; and succours conveyed at this very time from them; as appears by a paper of secretary Cecill, which may be read in the Annals of the Reformation.
Religion was also very much concerned this year, in the motions that were made about queen Elizabeth’s marriage. For though her subjects earnestly desired her marriage, to secure a protestant succession, yet they dreaded her matching with a popish foreign prince. But even they that were in the true English interest, out of a fear of the Scots queen’s succession, could have been glad to see her married with whomsoever it were, equal in dignity with herself. This appeared, and also how the queen herself pretended, for the good of her people, to be affected that way, by
expressions in secretary Cecill’s correspondence (in a letter dated March the 3d) with Walsingham, ambassador in France; instructing him from the queen,
“That if any should deal with him to understand his mind, in the case of her marriage, he might say, that at his coming from
England, upon some common bruit of such a matter concerning her majesty and monsieur d’Anjou, the French king’s brother, he [Walsingham] was assured, that her majesty, upon consideration of the benefit of her realm, anti to content her subjects, resolved to marry, if she could find a person in estate and condition fit for her to match withal. And that she meant not to marry but with a person of the family of a prince.”
And that Walsingham should say, that he could not by any means perceive, that her majesty was altered from that disposition. So as that he might conclude, that if any such matter should be moved to him by any meet person to deal therein, he would advertise her majesty thereof. And that her majesty would have him so to do. And then that wise counsellor added his own judgment;
“That if God should permit this marriage, or any other, to take place, he [Walsingham] might well judge, that no time was to be wasted, otherwise than honour might require. That he was not able to discern what was best: but that he saw no continuance of her quietness without a marriage. And that therefore he remitted the success to Almighty God.”
But this, he said, he writ privately to him, as he trusted it should remain to himself. How matters proceeded in duke d’Anjou’s courtship of the queen will be shewn under the next year.
And because the welfare of the nation did so much depend upon the
queen’s marriage, it seems some were employed secretly, by calculating her nativity, to inquire into her marriage. For which art even secretary Cecill himself had some opinion. I have met among his papers with such a
judgment made, written all with his own hand. Which iudgment I am apt to believe (if not done secretly by himself) he had either from one Bomelius, a Dutchman, and famous for physic and this art, and resiant in England about this time; or perhaps from sir Thomas Smith: who studied astrology much;
and by this scheme he found that the queen had not much inclination to marriage: yet that her wedlock would be very happy to her: that she should be somewhat elder when she entered into matrimony: and that then she would have a young man that was never before married: that she then should be in the 31st year of her age: that she should have but one husband. Then for the quality of the man, that he should be a foreigner.
That (especially towards the middle of her age) she should not much delight in wedlock: that she should obey and reverence her husband, and have him in great respect. That she should arrive at a prosperous married estate; but slowly, and after much counsel taken, and the common ru-mour of it everywhere, and after very great disputes and arguings concerning it for many years, by divers persons, before it should be effected. And then she should become a bride without any impediment. That her husband should die first: and yet she should live long with her husband; and should
possess much of his estate. For children, but few, yet very great hope of one son, that should be strong, famous, and happy in his mature age: and one daughter. The calculation of all this, by judgment and aspects of the planets, is set down in the Appendix. It was drawn up, no doubt, privately, for Cecill’s own instruction, to judge the better of so weighty an affair, by what might be gathered from astrology; the good estate of the whole realm so much depending on the queen’s marriage.
The bull of pope Pius V. against queen Elizabeth was set up in Paris at Pont St. Estienne, containing the selfsame matter, and on the same day (March the 2d) that Felton set it up at St. Paul’s, London: putting her under a curse, and all that adhered to her; and absolving her subjects from their oath of allegiance: and those that should obey her to be involved under the said curse. This insolent bull may be read at length in our histories; and particularly in Camden’s Elizabeth. The people of Paris flocked mightily together about it. The queen’s ambassadors then in France were the lord Buckhurst and Mr. Walsingham. Whose servant went boldly and tore it down, and brought it to his master. Who with the lord
Buckhurst, after some conference, repaired to the king; and immediately broke with him in that behalf. He calling Walsing-ham unto him, asked him the contents of the said bull. Whereof being advertised, and Walsingham presenting to him so much of the said bull as was given him by his servant, the king shewed himself very much moved thereat, in such sort as that both might very well see he was unfeigned. And forthwith he called Lansac unto him, to take order with the judge criminal, for the searching out of the setter up of the same. And assured the ambassadors, if by any means he could be found, he should receive such punishment as such a presumption required; considering the good amity between him and his good sister.
Walsingham then shewed the king, that if he did not take order in this, the like measure might be measured to himself. To which he answered, that he did perceive that very well; and that whosoever he were, that should seem to touch in honour any of his confederates, he would make account of him accordingly. After Walsingham departed from the king, Lansac told him in his ear, that he had great cause to guess, that this was done by some Spanish practice.
It may open a door to the dangerous practices that followed the next year, by reason of the Scots queen and the duke of Norfolk, what was told to Walsingham the latter end of this. Which was, that one who desired his name to be in cipher, gave him to understand, that a friend of his, in talk
with an Italian bishop, (who came lately to Paris from the pope to
congratulate the marriage of the French king,) had learned of him, that he had a practice in hand for England; which would not be long before it brake forth: and further shewed, that one merchant in that town had 14,000 crowns to be employed in that behalf.
Dr. Curteis was this year consecrated bishop of Chichester, in the room of Barlow, deceased. This bishop had some controversy with the lord admiral for sea-wrecks; which he claimed, as bishop of Chichester: not only such as were within his lands and manors, but also some miles out at sea, on the coast of Chichester. Whereupon a suit was commenced. Several writings whereof remain in the Paper-office. There it appears, that information was brought against the bishop, that a hull of a ship was brought by one
Walkaden, and seized by the lord admiral’s deputy, in the haven’s mouth of Chichester: which was sold by the bishop of Chichester, or his officers, to a servant of his: and was afterwards broken up by one John Bulke, his
servant. For the which there was process served upon the said John Bulke, out of the court of admiralty. There it was pleaded, that the said bishop had nine or ten slyages of iron, pieces of cables, sails, and divers other things, fetched from a ship sunk at the shoals, twelve miles from the land, about a year and half past. And that there was no process against the said fetchers of the same, because they were poor men; and that it was thought his lordship would take order for it without suit. That although the said bishop had by charter wrakea maris, within his lordship’s manors, lands,
tenements, fees, and possessions; yet he might not meddle with the hull of the said ship, considering it was a pirate’s, and possessed and seized by the lord admiral before it came near the place where the bishop did claim that privilege. The other goods were let from the sea, twelve miles from the land. That the charter which the bishop shewed for the jurisdiction of admiralty, made in Harry the Sixth’s time, was resumed by the statute of resumption in the twenty-eighth year of his reign. And besides, that the queen’s majesty had now the lands where he did now so challenge the admiral’s jurisdiction, so that unless he had reserved the said jurisdiction when he departed with his lands to the queen, his said jurisdiction did pass away with the lands. This was the plea on the side of the lord admiral: what that on the bishop’s was, I find not. But the charter of Henry VI. before mentioned, granting the privilege of wrecks to this see, may be read in the Appendix.
This, it seems, had been a cause tried before, in king Henry the Eighth’s time, between a bishop of Chichester that then was, and sir Arthur Lisle, lord admiral: who was laying hands upon a wreck in the coast of Sussex.
Whereupon the bishop of Chichester claimed it as his right: and withal, to satisfy him therein, produced to him a copy of the foresaid patent from the said king Henry, granting to Adam the bishop all such privileges: who was bishop of Chichester anno 1445, 24 Hen. VI. Whereupon the said lord Lisle sent this letter to the said bishop.
“My lord,
“In my hertiest wise, I commend me unto you, plesyth yt you t’understond, that I have perused your graunt of your libertyes;
which is sure and good, as I am informed by lerned men. Wherfore I am very wel contented that you sell this late wrack, as yours; for I wyll not, in no wyse, be against you nor your church, to break any such your liberties or franchises, which by your graunt I perceive you have: and also of old tyme, accordingly to the tenour hereof, have occupyed and used. And thus fare your good lordship hartily well. From London, this vii of March.
Your own Arthur Lysley.
The wreck, about which the suit above mentioned was commenced, was, it seems, of a pirate’s ship: which the admiral made his plea for claiming it from the bishop. I find, indeed, the pirates were now very stirring upon our seas. Which gave occasion of the queen’s issuing out a proclamation, dated in June this year from Hampton-court, against them; who made good spoils of the goods of the king of Spain’s subjects, as well as of others. These seemed to be chiefly Flemings. She therefore minding to give as little offence as possible to that great and proud king, and that he might have no real cause of quarrelling with her, (as he sought occasion,) as she had therefore restrained sea-rovers by a strict proclamation the last year, so now by another she forbade any of her subjects on the coast of the sea to receive the commodities such pirates should bring to sell. It set forth,
“how that by a special proclamation last year given at Oteland, she had directed sundry good orders to her ports, for the removing and expelling of all pirates out of the narrow seas upon the coast of her realms. And that thereupon several evil persons were apprehended in her ports; and were, as it was notorious, executed of late times
as pirates. But that though no manifest pirates were then known to resort to any her majesty’s ports; yet it was supposed, that, by the fraud and greediness of some negligent officers in some small ports or creeks of the realm, certain goods and merchandises were secretly brought into those ports, as was said, from some ships of war of other countries; being upon the high seas, and out of the danger of her majesty’s castles or bulwarks to be stayed; and were thought to be by her majesty.
“For remedy, she eftsoons commanded all manner of persons to have a more earnest regard to the observation of all things
contained in the foresaid proclamation, upon several pains therein contained, and the same proclamation now publish and observe.”
And her majesty preently addeth, “that if any officer in any port or creek should have any knowledge or information given of any person that should buy, or any ways attain to any manner goods or merchandises, brought in otherwise than ordinarily and publicly by merchants’ ships, as lawfully trading merchandise; the said officers, for not apprehending the offender, and for not withstanding such frauds, to be deprived of their offices, and committed to prison without bail, if their offices be of her majesty’s gift: and if by grant of any corporation, the whole liberty of the corporation, for such misuses, shall he secured into her majesty’s hands, and be
extinguished, &c. Given at Hampton-court, the 6 of June, 1570, the 12 of her reign.”
Notwithstanding, complaint was made, about the latter end of the year, by the Spanish ambassador in Paris, to the English ambassador there, of pirates, haunting the narrow seas, (especially about the Isle of Wight,) that robbed the king’s ships. It was true; but the crimes were committed by some belonging to the prince of Orange: as Cecil wrote to Walsingham: a thing the English could not help. But Mr. Horsey, governor of the Isle of Wight, was despatched with authority to set forth certain ships, either to take them, or to drive them from the coasts. For he confessed to Wal-singham privately, that they were too much favoured lucri causa. But, however, he might avow truly, as he added, that the queen did not favour them.
CHAPTER 3.
Orders and injunctions for preventing frays and fightings in London. Constables to carry staves. The queen’s daily learned studies. Secretary Cecil created lord Burghley. His troubles. Sir Tho. Smith becomes secretary in his place. Walsingham
ambassador in France, his complaint. Sir Nicolas Throgmorton;
his death; disease and character. Earl of Sussex. Mr. Thomas Cecil’s letter to him: who had recommended him to the queen. Sir Francis Englefield’s presumptuous letter. Bishop Sandys
nominated for London: his excuse; and acceptance: his.first visitation. The Italian church in London. Fox’s second edition of his Martyrology.
NOW for more domestic affairs, and observations of divers persons of character or quality. This year, or near it, a notable proclamation was set forth by the lord mayor of London, for the regulation and good order of that great metropolitical city, not only upon the queen’s charge to him to preserve peace in that her chief city, but also because lately there had been great frays and rightings, and murders too, committed in and about the said city, by cudgels, called bastinadoes, and other weapons. The latter
forbidden to be drawn, and the former to be carried, by a very strict and well-penned proclamation published in print. Which all constables, for their better direction and remembrance, were to have in their houses: and they enjoined to carry a white staff. It was entitled, For the suppressing of frays, and fray-makers, and disturbers of the queen’s peace.
“It began with the mention of a law of king Edward I. in the third of his reign; wherein he did enact, that the peace of the holy church and of the land should be well guarded, kept, and maintained in all points; and that egal justice should be done, as well to the rich as to the poor, without respect of persons. And that king Richard II. in his parliament the first of his reign, did in like manner well and straitly command, that peace in his realm should be surely observed and kept: so that all his lawful subjects might from thenceforth safely and peaceably go, come, and dwell, according to the law and usage of the realm; and that justice and right should be indifferently ministered. It set forth likewise, that the queen’s most excellent