Page:Divorce of Catherine of Aragon.djvu/302

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.
284
The Divorce of Catherine of Aragon

underhand dealings with the Scots. He had been indicted at Carlisle for treason in June, and had been sent to London for trial. He was brought to the bar before the Peers, assisted by the twelve Judges. An escape of a prisoner was rare when the Crown prosecuted; the Privy Council prepared the evidence, drew up their case, and in bringing a man to the bar made themselves responsible for the charge; failure, therefore, was equivalent to a vote of censure. The prosecution of Dacre had been set on foot by Cromwell, who had perhaps been informed of particulars of his conduct which it was undesirable to bring forward. The Peers looked on Cromwell as another Wolsey—as another intruding commoner who was taking liberties with the ancient blood. The Lady Anne was supposed to have borne malice against Dacre. The Lady Anne was to be made to know that there were limits to her power. Dacre spoke for seven hours to a sympathetic court; he was unanimously acquitted, and the City of London celebrated his escape with bonfires and illuminations. The Court had received a sharp rebuff. Norfolk, who sate as High Steward, had to accept a verdict of which he alone disapproved.[1] At Rome the acquittal was regarded as perhaps the beginning of some commotion with which God was preparing to punish the King of England.[2]

More serious news arrived from Ireland. While the English Catholics were muttering discontent and waiting for foreign help. Lord Thomas Fitzgerald, "the youth of promise" whom Chapuys had recommended to Charles's notice, had broken into open rebellion, and had forsworn his allegiance to Henry

  1. Chapuys to Charles V., July 27, 1534.—Calendar, Foreign and Domestic, vol. vii. p. 389.
  2. Cifuentes to Charles V., Aug. 1, 1534.—Spanish Calendar, vol. v. p. 229.