court to the Bishop's court, from the Bishop's court to that of the Archbishop, and no further.'[1]
The Act was carried through Parliament in February, but again, as with the Annates Bill, the King delayed his sanction till the post could reach and return from the Vatican. The Bishop of Paris wrote that there was hope that Clement might yet give way, and entreated that the King would send an 'excusator,' a person formally empowered to protest for him that he could not by the laws of England plead at a foreign tribunal; and that with this imperfect recognition of his authority the Pope would be satisfied.
Chastillon, the French ambassador, had an interview with the King, to communicate the Bishop's message.
'The morning after,' Chastillon wrote, 'his Majesty sent for me and desired me to repeat my words before the council. I obeyed; but the majority declared that there was nothing in them to act upon, and that the King must not put himself in subjection. His Majesty himself, too, I found less warm than in his preceding conversation. I begged the council to be patient. I said everything that I could think of likely to weigh with the King. I promised him a sentence from our Holy Father declaring his first marriage null, his present marriage good. I urged him on all grounds, public and private, to avoid a rupture with the Holy See. Such a sentence, I said, would be the best security for the Queen, and the safest guarantee for the unopposed suc-
