imprisonment. They reminded him of his promise of safe-conduct, which was known all through Moravia and Bohemia. Huss had started from Prague ready to answer the charges made against him, and he deserved an open and fair hearing, even as he himself had openly and without fear preached the divine law.
On the other hand, foreign influences as well as the council’s were brought to bear to urge upon the king the duty of giving Huss short shrift. In a communication addressed to him by Ferdinand, king of Aragon, Ferdinand expressed his great wonder that Sigismund had not put the prisoner to death straight off. He called upon the king to proceed without delay to mete out the punishment due to the iniquitous John Huss, of whom he had heard and whom God had condemned. By so doing he would gain for himself an eternal reward. Would not the king without parley put to death even a wife, a mother, or a child who should attempt to persuade him to worship false gods? Was it not written that a heretic, after he has been warned the second time, should be avoided?
As for Huss himself, the hope which Sigismund’s arrival had started must soon have given way to something like despair. He must have felt that he was hoping against hope. He had felt assured he could accomplish much, if he saw the king face to face. He sent requests to him for a personal audience, but received no reply. If he might only “talk with the king about matters concerning the good of Christianity and his own good,” he would be most glad. Deeper became his disappointment as he found “that the king had forgotten him,” not communicating to him a single word: it was the bitterest of disappointments. Should he be sentenced before being allowed to speak a word with him? If that was to the king’s honor, it was the king’s lookout. As for the council, he pleaded that, were he granted a hearing, the king might at least be present and occupy a seat where
