CRAN- and sir Edward Mountague, who, with the rest of the judges, Abp. Cant. had given their opinion for defeating the queen's title, were MER, Six miles from London. restored. Stow's Annals, p. 613. likewise discharged; though Mountague did not come off without a fine. The princess Elizabeth, with a thousand persons of quality of both sexes in her train, rode from the Strand to Wanstead to congratulate her sister. And now the queen August 3. having got over the contest, disbanded her forces, consisting of about thirteen thousand men; and, being met by a numerous appearance of noblemen and ladies, made a solemn entrance into the city. When she came to the Tower, Thomas, duke of Norfolk; Gardiner, bishop of Winchester; Courtney, son and heir to Henry, late marquess of Exeter; and the duchess of Somerset, who were all confined in the Tower, presented themselves, and kneeled to her on the parade. She saluted them, and called them her prisoners. The next day, Courtney was created marquess of Exeter, and the other The deprived prisoners last mentioned pardoned and discharged. Two days bishops after, as Stow reports, Bonner and Tunstal were set at liberty, and restored to their sees. Day of Chichester, and Heath of Worcester, lately deprived, had the same good fortune. As to the time of Bonner's restitution, Stow was somewhat mistaken, as appears by the date of a commission issued by the queen for this purpose. By this instrument, bearing date September the 5th, 1553, John Tregonnel and William Roper, esqrs., Geoffry Glyn, William Cooke, and Henry Cole, doctors of law, &c., are constituted delegates, to which the marquess of Winchester, the earl of Arundel, the earl of Derby, the earl of Shrewsbury, sir Richard Southwell, sir Robert Southwell, sir Edward Carne, and sir Richard Read, are joined for more solemnity. The purport of this commission was to authorize the persons above-mentioned to inquire into the process against bishop Bonner. These delegates, having examined the proceedings, pronounced his deprivation void, and restored him to the dignity, jurisdiction, and profits of his bishopric. By the way, these commissioners were most of them laymen, and any two empowered to give sentence. Thus, bishop Ridley was set aside, of course. This prelate, 345. upon the queen's being proclaimed in London, went to wait on her at Framlingham-castle, where he was coldly received, as he might reasonably have expected. Regist. Bonner, fol. 331. Fox. On the ninth of August a funeral office was performed for king Edward. The dirige was sung in Latin. A mass of requiem was celebrated the next day, at which the queen and MARY. the court ladies offered. The corpse was buried at Westmin- Stow. ster; Day, bishop of Chichester, preached the sermon, and here all the service was in English. Saunders thinks the queen was too much governed by her affection upon this occasion; he blames her for recommending her brother's soul to the mercy of God, and having any share in the funeral solemnity; his reason is, because the king died out of the communion of the Church-he means the Church of Rome. He tells us she was better instructed afterwards, and consented, though with great regret, that her father should not be publicly prayed for 1. De Schism. p. 333. Anglic. at Paul's About this time Bourne, a canon of St. Paul's, preached at Paul's Cross. He was of a warm temper, and very averse to the reformation; he not only revived the old custom of praying for the dead, but likewise declared that Bonner, bishop of London, had been imprisoned and barbarously treated for preaching a sermon there about four years since. Some of 4 disorder the audience being exasperated with this passage, told him the Cross. bishop had preached abominable doctrine. Upon this others of the mob grew more mutinous, and were climbing the pulpit to pull him down. Bourne stepped back, and one Bradford, a preacher of note in king Edward's reign coming into his place, endeavoured to compose the people, and recover them to good behaviour. To this purpose, amongst other discourse, he cited the text in the epistle to the Romans, where St. Paul commands "every soul to be subject to the higher powers." But it seems passion was too strong for conscience at this time, for one of the audience launched a dagger at Bourne. It is true it missed him, but it was thrown with great force, as appeared by the rebound. Upon this, Bradford gave over Stow and his address, and with the assistance of one Rogers, another preacher, conveyed Bourne through the crowd with great difficulty, and lodged him in Paul's school. Upon this tumult an order of council passed, that the lord mayor and aldermen should call a common council the next day, and charge every householder within the liberties to take care their children, apprentices, and servants, should keep their parish churches on Sundays and holy days, and do nothing in disturbance of the public peace: and that every housekeeper should be obliged to answer for the behaviour of his family. Such was the amiable bigotry of ultra Romanism. Fox. MER, Aug. 13. The queen CRAN- The mayor and recorder were likewise commanded to set forth Abp. Cant. at the meeting, that on the twelfth instant the queen herself had declared to them, that notwithstanding her grace's persuasion as to religion continued as formerly, yet out of her royal clemency, her intention was not to force the consciences of her subjects, but leave them freely to their own recollection, and the instructions of godly preachers, which, through the divine assistance, she hopes may have a good effect. The mayor and aldermen were farther ordered to give notice to the curates within their respective wards to forbear preaching or public reading the Scriptures in their churches without a license from the queen. promises not to alter religion. Council Ex Biblioth. Armig. the queen's license forbidden. Council Book. A letter of the same import was directed to the bishop of R. Harley. Norwich, by which he was commanded not to suffer any person All preach in his diocese, either priest, deacon, or otherwise distinguished, ing without to preach or expound the Scriptures openly in any church, chapel, or other place, without special licence from the queen's highness. The same directions were probably sent to the rest of the bishops. Thus the pulpits were silenced, and the reformation in a manner stifled by the regal supremacy; and, to make the expedient operate more effectually, a proclamation was set forth, prohibiting all preaching or expounding of Scripture in any churches or elsewhere, except in the university schools, without the queen's license: and, because the proclamation seems nicely drawn, and great care taken in the manner of expression, I shall transcribe it for the reader, together with the form of the queen's license to preach. Records, num. 68. That the queen pushed her prerogative in this proclamation, and carried the regale even beyond the stretch of the statutes in the two last reigns, is pretty apparent'. For the clergy, being legally empowered to preach in their respective parishes, it is difficult to conceive how the silencing them could be warrantable, unless they had been convicted of some disabling The legality offence, or suspended ab officio by their ordinary. To say the of the proclamation queen was head of the Church, and the fountain of all spiritual jurisdiction, is not sufficient to disentangle the case: for the crown is acknowledged the fountain of all temporal jurisdiction, and yet it is not within the power of the king or queen to shut up the courts of justice, to stop the course of law, or so much as to hinder any qualified person from pleading at the bar; and therefore, if the clergy had continued to preach, and taken no examined. 1 Something like a precedent occurred under Ed. VI..Vide ante, page 262 notice of the proclamation, they could not have been legally MARY. punished. For when a man is settled in an office for life, he cannot be legally discharged the exercise of that office without proof of such misbehaviour as reaches to a forfeiture. And since there was no breach of duty in preaching, prior to this proclamation, it will follow there could be none after it. For, in the reign of king James I., it is resolved by the two chief justices, the chief baron, and another judge of the exchequer, "that the king by his proclamation cannot create any offence which was not an offence before; for then he may alter the law of the land by his proclamation in a high point. For if he may create an offence where none is, upon that ensues fine and imprisonment. They resolve farther, that the king has no prerogative but what the law allows him that the law of England is divided into three parts, common law, statute law, and custom; but the king's proclamation is none of them." By this Coke's resolution, queen Mary's silencing the pulpits was altogether pt. 12. illegal. Reports, fol. 76. 346. This proclamation discovered the strength of the queen's inclination, and gave a gloomy prospect to the reformed: however, some of the parochial clergy, thinking themselves either obliged in conscience, or at liberty by law, broke through the order, and continued their preaching: as for the rest, they acquiesced in the juncture, and went no farther than reading the Common Prayer, which was not prohibited. The other party, who stood affected to the Roman Catholic religion, concluding upon the countenance of the court, set up the altars, and officiated in the Latin service formerly received. This forwardness pleased the queen: whereas those who kept to the worship established, and declined over-running the laws, had a mark of dislike set upon them. Saunders blames The Roman the Roman Catholic clergy for officiating too hastily upon the queen's favour. He complains that many of them, who were censured by involved in the late schism, never considered what censure and disabilities they lay under from the canons, and what objections there lay against the bishops that ordained them; but rushed through the discipline of the Church, and pressed up to the holy altars, without thought or reverence; and, for a punishment of this criminal negligence, he seems to believe the blessing of the queen's reign was shortened, and the face of Saunders de religion changed. Catholic clergy Saunders. Schism. CRAN MER, Council The queen being resolved to set up her own way of worship, Abp. Cant. modelled the ministry accordingly: for this purpose, the broad seal was taken from Gooderick, bishop of Ely, and Gardiner of Winchester was made lord chancellor; and, to strike a terror into the other party, and make them more passive to the court measures, some of the most eminent prelates and Several of clergy were committed: for instance, Ridley was sent to the the reformed bishops comTower, and Cox, dean of Christ Church, to the Marshalsea; mitted. Hooper, bishop of Gloucester, and Coverdale, bishop of Exeter, were brought before the council, and committed to the Fleet; and Latimer, late bishop of Worcester, appearing before the lords of the board, was, for his seditious demeanour, as the council-book words it, committed close prisoner to the Tower. Northum berland's trial. The next remarkable occurrence is the death of the duke of Northumberland, who, on the eighteenth of August, together with William Parr, marquess of Northampton, and John, earl of Warwick, the duke's eldest son, were arraigned at Westminster-hall, before Thomas, duke of Norfolk, then lord high The duke of steward. When the duke was brought to the bar, he acknowledged himself the queen's subject, and made strong professions of his allegiance, owned he had misbehaved himself, and that he did not intend to make any defence as to matter of fact; but, being bred to the law, he desired the judgment of the court in two points: "First, whether a man acting by authority of the prince's council, and by warrant of the great seal of England, and doing nothing without the same, might be charged with treason for any thing which he might do by warrant thereof. "Secondly, Whether any such persons as were equally culpable in that crime, and those by whose letters and commandments he was directed in all his doings, might be his judges, or pass upon his trial as his peers." To the first question, the court, by advice of the judges, answered, “that the broad seal, pleaded by the duke, was not the seal of the lawful queen of the realm, nor passed by authority, but the seal of an usurper, and therefore could be no warrant to him." The answer to his second question was, "that if any persons were as deeply concerned in the revolt as himself, yet, in regard there was no attainder upon record against them, they were qualified by law to sit upon any trial, and |