Tavestoke were not summoned to this parliament, April 28, 1539.

P. 534. 1. 22. the opposite party-Bonner, &c.] This does not seem to agree with what is said after, p. 598. Hitherto he [Bonner] had acted another part-now began to show his nature, &c.

P. 592. 1. 4. but his friends complained to the king-he being a privy counsellor.] Gardiner, in his declaration of such true articles, &c. printed an. 1546, 8vo. says, he complained himself to the king; and expressly says, "when "Barnes was sent to the Tower, I was not of the privy"council." He seems not to have been much employed at this time, having been left out of the number of those that compiled the king's book, or not acting.

P. 608. 1. 1. Cranmer set out an order.] This order I have seen printed, 1541, amongst archbishop Parker's papers, but it was with the consent of the other archbishop and most of the bishops.

P. 695. 1. 5. the coronation of the prince of Wales.] I think creation is the usual term at this solemnity.

P. 699. 1. 19. to discover things-hitherto unknown.] This has been taken notice of by Lesley, a noted author, and your lordship's countryman; and the testimonies of my lord Paget, sir Edward Montague, and this Clark there appealed to, after follows: "Quæ testimonia cum juramento "perhibita, postquam diligenter et circumspectè perpensa "atq; examinata fuissent, Maria regina de sententia consi"liationum suorum, ad honorem Dei et regni, ad veritatis et

66

66

justitiæ patrocinium, et legitimæ in regnum successionis, ❝ad multa nefanda mala devitanda, quæ illa corruptione ex "illo figmento consecutura erant, jussit exemplar memo"riale supposititii testamenti, quod extabat in cancellariâ conscindi, expungi, aboleri tanquam indignum quod inter vera et incorrupta nobilissimi regni exemplaria locum ob"tineret." Jo. Leslæus, de titulo et jure sereniss. principis Maria Scotia reginæ, quo regni Angliæ successionem sibi juste vindicat. Rhemis, 1580, pp. 43, 44. I think it was published in English sooner.

66

P. 712. 1. 24. that Fisher and he penned the book.] It is true sir Thomas More was only a sorter, and Fisher could be no more than one of the makers, though some have asserted it to be his work alone. But as to sir Thomas More's testimony, I think it may with much more reason be taken from Roper his son-in-law, who married his beloved daughter, and knew his inward thoughts, than from a letter to a minister of state, where loquendum cum vulgo. Your lordship is a very able judge of style, and of the elegancy wherewith this book is wrote: your lordship has given us a specimen of the king's style, in the marginal notes of the last page of this volume, p. 550. I dare appeal to your lordship whether you think the style to be the same. The last words are so elegant, that I cannot forbear reciting them. "Cum qua nec pontifex Romanus, nec quivis alius prælatus "aut pontifex, habet quicquid agere, præterquam in suas "dioceses."

However, I am very willing the king should enjoy the honour of his book, provided I am allowed to enjoy my opinion.

Upon this occasion, I have only to add, that whereas this Life of sir Thomas More by Roper is somewhere cited, as printed, (if I am not mistaken,) I think I may be positive it was never printed. I have it in manuscript. Sir Thomas More's Life was twice printed, in 4to and in 8vo, and by different hands, but neither of them by Roper, though both of them have borrowed from him pretty freely.

P. 724. 1. 19. Gardiner-and three other priests—executed.] Gardiner was executed, the other three were pardoned, according to an account I have seen, MS. Their names are there said to be master More, master Heyhode, and master Roper.

COLLECTION OF RECORDS.

P. 279. Injunctions by Cromwell.] These injunctions, exhibited anno 1538, were printed by Barthelet cum priv. containing some small variations, which might have been

noted in the margin, (as some other little things might,) but they are not considerable.

P. 314. MSS. D. Stilling fleet.] I can do your lordship that right to say, that these MSS. are published with faithfulness enough; only they might have been quoted as my lord Salisbury's, to whom they belong; and are probably two of these six or seven volumes, said, p. 348. of this volume, to have been in the hands of my lord Burghley.

I shall not enter into the criticism of T. Cantuarien. to Leighton's paper. The meaning is more plain in Robertson's; for he not having subscribed his name at the end of his paper, the archbishop might add his own to attest it; and Robertson's name afterwards appearing at the beginning of his paper, the bishop might dash his own name, as it now stands, if done by the same hand.

HISTORY OF THE REFORMATION.
Vol. II. edit. 2.

P. 1. 1. ult. lost his mother the day after he was born.] The king's Journal, printed by your lordship, says, "within "few days after the birth of her son, died." Geo. Lilly, who lived at the same time, and near the place, says, "Duo"decimo post die moritur." Chron. And so the continuation of Fabian, Octob. 23. These seem to be the best authorities.

66

P. 34. 1. 4. the next day the seal was put into the lord St. John's hands.] 29 Junii sigillum magnum Will. Paw"let militi domino S. Jo. de Basing liberatum fuit. Pat. ❝ 1 Edw. VI. P. 4." Dugdal. Orig. Jurid.

P. 81. 1. 13. the lord Rich made lord chancellor on the 24th of Octob.] "Rich. Rich Miles dominus Rich constitu"tus cancellarius Angliæ 30. Nov. Pat. 1 Edw. VI. P. 3. "M. 14." Dugdal. ibid.

P. 119. 1. ult. there is another paper given in—but most of the fathers there cited are of the later ages, &c.] The fathers and canons cited in that paper are, Hermes, TertulVOL. III. P. 3.

M m

lian, Origen, Basil, Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, Chrysostome: the councils of Arles, Elvira, and Milevi. If any modern authorities are cited, I have not noted them.

P. 127. 1. 22. The bishops of London, Worcester, Chichester, and Hereford, gave in their answers once in one paper.] The bishops of London, Worcester, Chichester, and Hereford's answers related to another set of questions.

Ibid. 1. 29. Cranmer's hand is over every one of them.] Cranmer's hand is not over Richard Cox, nor W. Menevens. nor John Taylor's; who have subscribed their own

names.

Ibid. 1. 31. Dr. Cox hath set his hand and seal to his answer.] I can assure your lordship there is no mystery in this. Cox had sent in his paper folded, and closed with wax the foldings yet remain, according to which foldings the paper had been sealed, which is now torn, where it had been sealed, and some of the paper left upon the wax.

P. 182. 1. 9. Bucer and Fagius invited over to England, and sent to Cambridge, where Fagius died soon after.] This your lordship seems to place in the year 1548; whereas they did not leave Germany till April 1549, and Fagius died in November following. I have his will, proved Jan. 12, 1549.

P. 190. 1. 27. Thus had this matter been argued in books-written by Parker, &c.] Parker's book was not wrote till the reign of queen Mary, " ad leniendum suum in illa Marianâ persecutione mororem," as said in his Life; nor published till the reign of queen Elizabeth, and could have no relation to this reign.

P. 206. 1. 16. What his behaviour was on the scaffold, I do not find.] There is a pretty remarkable account of his death and behaviour in bishop Latimer's fourth sermon, edit. 1. p. 56. (left out of the following editions,) where, amongst other things, he says, "He [the admiral] dyed very "dangerously, yrksomelye, horryblye." And surely so he did, if the letters referred to by him on the scaffold were genuine, which Latimer says he saw.

P. 248. 1. 4. They were required to procure a resignation

of some colleges, and to unite them with others, &c.] There were no other colleges to be suppressed, besides Clare Hall, in order to found a new college of civilians, either by uniting it to Trinity Hall, or by augmenting the number of Trinity Hall to twenty fellows; as appears by king Edward's statutes, (drawn up before the visitors came down,) compared with his Injunctions, (all upon the Black Book,) drawn up after.

Indeed Trinity Hall was to be surrendered, in order to the union, or new foundation; wherein Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, then master, did good service: who refused to surrender; and that, I suppose, partly upon politic reasons. For had he parted with his old house, he would never have been made master of the new law college, though he were doctor both of the canon and civil law.

P. 249. 1. 4. from bottom. Mr. Cheek-was either put from the chair, or willingly left it to avoid the indignation of so great a man-as Gardiner was, &c.] Cheek was not put from the chair; nor did he part with it till after he was sent for by the king to instruct the prince; as appears from the Account of the Life of his successor, Nicholas Carr, p. 59, and otherwise.

P. 267. 1. 10. The confusions this year occasioned that change to be made in the office of daily prayers; where the answer to the petition, Give peace in our time, O Lord, was now made, Because there is none other that fighteth for us, but only thou, O God.] This, my lord, I do not well understand for this petition and answer stand in the first Liturgy of Edward the Sixth, fol. 4.

P. 318. 1. 17. the earl of Warwick-writ earnestly in his [Hooper's] behalf, to the archbishop, to dispense—with the oath of canonical obedience at his consecration, &c.] The oath of canonical obedience (as printed in the form of consecration, an. 1549.) is so unexceptionable, that there seems to be no ground for scruple; being only a promise of all due reverence and obedience to the archbishop, &c. It seems to have been the oath of supremacy, which at that time contained expressions more liable to exception, being a