Part 24

Notwithstanding the dangers that surrounded the Court of Henry VIII., and the perilous proximity of relationship in which, by marriage, he stood toward that monarch, specially amid the complications that arose during the impeachments, trials, and sad deaths of the two Queens, his wife's relatives; yet neither Sir Thomas, nor Lady Arundell, seems to have been involved or suspected in any way, indeed, to the contrary, as he appears subsequently to have experienced Henry's favour, it being three years after Queen Katharine Howard's death, when he received the grant of the Priory of Slapton from that king.

All this points to his being a prudent man, keeping aloof from the dangerous intrigues continually arising, and he has been described as a wise administrator. He was grandson of Cicely Bonville, the great west-country heiress, and his mother Elizabeth names him as one of the executors to her will, and therein describes him as "her trusty and well-beloved son."

Before the reign of Henry VIII. closed, its last victim was led to the scaffold, the accomplished Earl of Surrey, and nephew of Sir Thomas. The Duke of Norfolk, his father, with cruel obduracy had presided over the trial of his niece the unfortunate Queen Anne Boleyn, and now the same fate had overtaken his son. The executioner was waiting for himself also, but the unexpected death of Henry occurred just in time to save him. The "Fair Geraldine" of the poet Earl was a cousin of Sir Thomas on his mother's side, being the daughter of Gerald Fitzgerald, Earl of Kildare, who married the Lady Eleanor, probably a younger sister of the Lady Elizabeth Grey, mother of Sir Thomas.

With the conclusion of the reign of Henry VIII., the larger and presumably, on the whole, happier portion of the life of Sir Thomas Arundell may be said to have ended. The child-king, Edward VI., in January, 1547, commenced his reign, and four short years only were destined to pass before Sir Thomas was laid in a traitor's grave.

In 1549 a distinguished office was conferred on him, one that his father had held before him, and of peculiar honour in his native county, that of Receiver General of the Duchy of Cornwall.

This year, however, the first cloud appeared over his hitherto fortunate career. Himself, with his brother Sir John Arundell of Lanherne, were both suspected of being implicated in the rebellion of their uncle Humphrey Arundell, Governor of St. Michael's Mount, "a man well-esteemed for military services." This was the religious insurrection, demanding the old ritual, and antagonistic to the reformed service of the Church, which began in Cornwall, and gathering strength as it advanced, laid ineffectual siege to Exeter, where, however, the citizens, during their captivity, were reduced to great straits. The insurgents then marched to meet Lord Russell, who was stationed with some force at Honiton, but he defeated them with considerable loss at Feniton (or Fenny) Bridges. They then retreated to Clyst-Heath, near Exeter, where--

"they had brought with them a crucifix upon a cart, covered with a canopy, and beset with crosses, tapers, banners, holy bread and water, as a representation of those things for which they fought."

At Clyst-Heath, Lord Gray with his troops, reinforced with those under Lord Russell, dispersed the ignorant priest-led rustics with great slaughter;--

"The dispersion of the insurgents was followed by the same conduct on the part of the royal army, as if they had put to route a foreign enemy in his own country, 'for the whole country was then put to the spoil, and every soldier sought for his best profit.'"

Sir Anthony Kingston, as Provost-Marshal of the king's army, was commissioned to try and punish the delinquents, and his cruel and brutal conduct was quite on an equality with that of the wretched Jeffreys on a similar errand a century afterward;--

"Gibbets were set up in various places, on which great numbers of the leaders of the rebellion were hanged. Others, and especially Arundell, the chief captain, were carried to London, and there executed. It was reckoned that about four thousand in all perished by the sword or by the hands of the executioner, of those engaged in this Devonshire (and Cornwall) insurrection."

Humphrey Arundell, their uncle, was conveyed to London and hanged at Tyburn in January, 1549-50. And then it is recorded in the Council book,--

"XXX. Jan., 1549-50. Sir Thomas Arundel, Knight, committed to the Tower by order of the board."

And further in King Edward's journal,--

"1549. Sir Thomas Arundel and Sir John (his elder brother) committed to the Tower for conspiracies in the west partes."

It is probable the Arundells, from religious motives only, sympathized with the views of the insurgents, and were not actual promoters or partakers in the movement, but on account of their kinship with the leader of the revolt they were doubtless subjects of considerable suspicion. There must, however, have apparently been other circumstances besides this, which were deemed to affect Sir Thomas unfavourably, for he does not appear to have been released from his durance in the Tower after his committal until the 4th of October, 1551, which would be a year and nine months subsequent.

Could it have been also for suspicion of aiding in the movement that led to the first humiliation of the Duke of Somerset, which occurred in the October preceding his committal to the Tower? It _may_ have been so,--or deemed so,--yet from what is left recorded, his presumed action seems to point to the contrary.

"One of the '_Metrical Visions_' of George Cavendish, the Gentleman Usher of Cardinal Wolsey, furnishes some biographical particulars of Sir Thomas Arundell, namely, that he was educated with Cardinal Wolsey, and was Chancellor to Queen Katharine Howard. He is also made to confess that 'I was the cheaf councellor in the first overthrowe of the Duke of Somerset, which few men did knowe.'

"With regard to his fate, there is a curious passage in a very rare book, bishop Ponet's '_Short Treatise on Politic Power_.' Writing of the Earl of Warwick, Ponet states, 'at the erles sute Arundell hathe his head with the axe divided from his shoulders.'"[43]

and commenting on the same subject,--

"Bishop Ponet in his '_Treatise on Politic Power_,' says in reference to his (Sir Thomas') arrest in 1549, 'he conspired with that ambitious and subtil Alcibiades, the Earl of Warwick, after Duke of Northumberland, to pull down the good Duke of Somerset, King Edward's uncle and protector,'--if this be correct it is singular he should have been afterwards re-arrested for conspiring with Somerset against Northumberland."[44]

[43] Note in _Machyn's Diary_, by J. G. NICOLLS.

[44] _The Chapel in the Tower_, by DOYNE C. BELL.

On such slender and second-hand evidence and apparently so improbable, as to his helping at first to pull down the Protector, not much may be said;--men's views and movements at the time often veered amid these intrigues for the possession or direction of the supreme power,--but Sir Thomas' after-implication with the Duke seems to refute it. That the Earl of Warwick (Northumberland) may have used his influence for the destruction of Sir Thomas, in the company of his rival,--the greater victim,--may be accepted without much scruple.

Sir Thomas was released from the Tower on the 4th of October, and in the meanwhile, events as to Somerset's overthrow, were now rapidly developing themselves to a conclusion.

Northumberland--the rival and enemy of the Protector--had given intelligence of a conspiracy in which Somerset, Sir Thomas Arundell, Sir Ralph Vane, and several others were concerned. Of course there was the inevitable informer, and in this case a certain knight, called Sir Thomas Palmer, has recorded against him this unenviable notoriety.

In Sir John Hayward's _Life and Reign of K. Edward VI._, we read,--

"Herewith Sir _Thomas Palmer_, a man neither loving the Duke of _Somerset_, nor beloved of him, was brought by the Duke of _Northumberland_ to the King being in his garden. Here he declared on St. George's day last before, the Duke of _Somerset_ being upon a journey towards the north, in case Sir _William Herbert_, Master of the Horse, had not assured him he should receive no harm, would have raised the people; and that he had sent the Lord _Gray_ before, to know who would be his friends: also that the Duke of Northumberland, the Marquis of Northampton, the Earl of Pembroke, and other lords should be invited to a banquet, and if they came with a bare company, to be set upon by the way; if strongly, their heads should have been cut off at the place of their feasting. He declared further that Sir _Ralph Vane_, had two thousand men in a readiness; that Sir _Thomas Arundell_ had assured the _Tower_, that _Seymor_ and _Hamond_, would wait upon him, and that all the horse of the _Gendarmorie_ should be slain."

This must have been the day on which the boy-king records in his journal,--

"11 Oct., 1551. Sir Thomas Arrondel had ashuerid my Lord that the Towre was sauf."

The "my Lord" here must have related to Somerset, which the King heard of in his conversation with Northumberland.

On the 16 October, 1551, says Grafton,--

"being Fryday, the Duke was again apprehended, and committed to the Tower, on a charge of high treason."

And the King records,--

"This morning none was at Westminster of the conspiratours. The first was the Duke, who came later than he was wont, of himself. After diner he was apprehendid."

Sir John Hayward thus describes it,--

"and so after dinner, he (the Duke) was apprehended; Sir _Thomas Palmer_, Sir _Thomas Arundel_, _Hamonde_, _Nudigates_, _John Seymour_, and _David Seymour_, were also made prisoners, the Lord _Gray_ being newly come out of the country was attached. Sir _Ralph Vane_, being sent for, fled. Upon the first message it was reported that he said that his Lord was not stout, and that if he could get home he cared not for any; but upon pursuit he was found in his servant's stable at Lambeth covered with straw. He was a man of fierce spirit, both sudden and bold, of no evil disposition, saving he thought scantiness of estate too great an evil. All these were the same night sent to the Tower, except Palmer, Arundel, and Vane, who were kept apart in the Court, well guarded in chambers apart. After these followed Sir _Thomas Holdcroft_, Sir _Miles Partridge_, Sir _Michael Stanhope_ and others. The day following the Dutchess of _Somerset_ was sent to the Tower, also with her were committed one _Crane_, and his wife, and her own chamber woman. _Crane_ confessed for the most part as _Palmer_ had done, and further added that the Lord _Paget's_ house was the place, where the nobility being invited to a banquet, should have lost their heads, and that the Earl of _Arundel_ was made acquainted with the practice by Sir _Michael Stanhope_. This _Crane_ was a man, who having consumed his own estate, had armed himself to any mischief. All these were sworn before the Council, and forthwith upon the information of _Crane_, the Earl of _Arundel_, and Lord _Paget_ were sent to the Tower."

On the _same_ day, Machyn notes,--

"1551, xvj. day of October, was had to the Towre, Sir Thomas Arundell and Lady (with many others)."

and the King writes,--

"16 Oct. Arrondel was taken."

Twenty-seven peers took part in the trial of Somerset, his rival the Duke of Northumberland being one, and the Marquis of Winchester presided as Lord High Steward.

On the 2nd December following, narrates Grafton,--

"the sayd Duke was brought out of the Tower of London, with the axe of the Tower borne before him, with a great number of billes, gleves, holbardes, and polaxes attending upon him; and was had from the Tower by water, and having shot London bridge, at five of the clock in the morning, so came unto Westminster Hall, where was made in the middle of the Hall a new scaffold, where all the Lords of the King's Counsaill sate as his judges, and there was he arraigned and charged with many articles both of treason and felony. And when after much milde speeche, he had aunsered not guiltie, he in all humble manner put himselfe to be tryed by his peeres, who, after long consultation among themselves, gave their verdict that he was not guiltie of the treason, but of the felony."

The King says in his diary,--

"The Duke of Northumberland wold not agree that any searching of his death shuld bee treason. So the lordis acquited him of high treason and condemned him of treason feloniouse, and so he was adjudged to be hangid."

As the punishment was hanging, he "departed without the ax of the Toure"--which the people outside not understanding, "shouted harf a dousen times so loud that from the halle dore it was harde at Charing Crosse plainely, and rumours went that he was quitte of all."

But his adversaries had got him too safely for release on this side of the grave, once more he was to appear before his fellow-men when the axe, and not the halter as was adjudged him, was to finish all.

On Friday, the 22nd of January following, the Duke was, at eight in the morning, beheaded on Tower Hill.

It was not until five days after the execution of the Duke that Sir Thomas Arundell, and his companion Sir Ralph Vane were put on their trial.

The first to be tried was Sir Thomas' presumed confederate, Sir Ralph Vane. Machyn relates,--

"1551-2,--The xxvii. day of January was reynyd at Westmynster Hall, ser Raff a Vane knyght of tresun and qwyt of hytt, and cast of felony to be hangyd."

Of this resolute and brave man, says Hayward,--

"He was charged with conspiring with _Somerset_, but his bold answers termed rude and ruffian-like, falling into ears apt to take offence, either only caused, or much furthered his condemnation. 'The time hath been,' said he, 'when I was of some esteem, but now we are in peace which reputeth the coward and couragious alike.'"

He strongly denied that he had practised treason against the King, or any of the Lords of the Council, and added that "his blood would make Northumberland's pillow uneasy to him." The 'qwest' were not long in disposing of him, and the King comments,--

"27 Jan., 1551-2. Sir Rafe Vane was condemned of felony in treason, aunsering like a ruffian."

The next day was appointed for Sir Thomas Arundell to appear before his judges. It was apparent they must have had very slender or unsatisfactory evidence, and it is cruel to read with what pertinacity they were required to decide on his case.

It is probable that, like the Duke of Somerset, he was taken from the Tower to Westminster Hall by water, and imagination can easily depict the various phases of the scene. Aroused early on the morning of the twenty-eighth of January, in mid-winter almost, it may be in cold and pitiless weather, escorted by the Lieutenant of the fortress, Sir John D'Arcy, and accompanied by his officers, down to the well-guarded boat waiting for him, under the shadow of the great arch that spans the Traitor's Gate, the way lit by the feeble light of a lantern, which, as they seated themselves in the little craft, faintly revealed the portcullis raised for the occasion, and the dark waters of the Thames, just discernible through it, made visible by the flickering gleam thrown upon its surface, rippling to the inconstant night-breeze. Then their emerging from the gloomy portal, the prisoner sitting silent and motionless in the stern, the officers and halberdiers ranged on each side, and in front the heads-man's official, with the dread axe resting on his shoulder. Then their passage down the quiet river, with no sound to break the solitude, but the measured splash of the oarsmen steadily rowing him to his doom. Then their landing at Westminster in the just-breaking light of morning, and the sad little procession wending its way up to the main door of the vast Hall, its dim, cavernous roof, scarcely distinguishable by the cluster of twinkling points of light gathered in its centre, where, arrayed in all the picturesque costume of the age, emphasized by the scarlet cloaks of the judges, were congregated a large body of legal and civic functionaries, the solemn array of the jurors of the 'qwest,' and a throng of anxious citizens, assembled to decide whether he was guilty, or not guilty,--if he should live or die.

But the 'qwest' had not so easy a matter before them, in the disposing of his case, as they had the day before with that of Sir Ralph Vane. The evidence was presumably of slight or doubtful character, and so the day passed by and evening arrived, but no decision was arrived at. Sir Thomas had to endure this prolonged suspense, and was taken back to the Tower again, to wait through the anxious night, and then the following morning, go through the same dread ordeal, and appear once more before his judges, to learn his fate.

The 'qwest' of the jury appear to have thoroughly and sturdily debated the guilt or innocence of the prisoner, and not being able to agree, were thereon subjected to the usual inhuman treatment of being starved in cold and darkness into agreement,--if such it may be called,--or rather a decision, one way or the other. And so they "sate shut up" in a house all that live-long night, and it was not until day-break the next morning that "they did cast him,"--the dissentients probably being wearied into compliance. "When Sir Thomas--who perhaps may justly have had latent hope that their disagreement might end favourably for him--stood before his accusers for the second time, his doom was decided on, and he heard the fearful result that "they had acquitted him of treason, and cast him of felony, to be hanged."

Machyn thus describes the assiduous process of his condemnation,--

"1551-2. The xxviij. of Januarij was reynyd sir Thomas Arundell, Knyght, and so the qwest cold nott fynd ym tyll the morow after, and so he whent to the Towre agayn, and then the qwest wher shutt up tyll the morow withowt mett or drynke, or candylle or fyre, and on the morow he came a-gayne and the qwest qwytt ym of treasun, and cast hym of felony to be hangyd."

And Hayward soliloquizes over the unhappy event,--

"Sir _Thomas Arundel_ was with some difficulty condemned, for his cause was brought to trial about seven of the clock in the morning, and about noon the jurors went together, and because they could not agree, they were shut in a house all the residue of that day and all the night following. The next morning they found him guilty. Unhappy man! who found the doing of anything or nothing dangerous alike."

and the little King mechanically notes in his diary,--

"29th Jan., 1551-2. Sir Thomas Arundel was likewise cast of felony in treason, after long controversie, for the matter was brought in trial bie seven of the cloke in the morning 28th day; at none the qwest went together; they sate shut up together in a house, without meat or drinke, bicause they could not agree, all that day and all night; this 29th day in the morning they did cast him."

So the first act of the coming tragedy was completed, and then after they had made sure of the destruction of their victim, they were equally assiduous that he should have ample religious consolation, in order that he "may dye well,"--and so give colour to the assumption that he was rightly convicted; and seemingly seek to justify the cruel sentence, awarded under such manifest difficulty, arising from the slight grounds of the accusation preferred against him.

Therefore the very same day of his condemnation, the 29th of October,

"the Council issued orders to the Lieutenant of the Tower, 'that Doctour Bill may from tyme to tyme resort to Sir Rauff Fane for his instruction to dye well; and that Doctour Parker may resort from tyme to tyme to Sir Thomas Arundell for the lyke purpose."[45]

Both these spiritual advisers were evidently Protestants, holding office in the Reformed Church. Dr. William Bill was successively Master of St. John's and Trinity Colleges, Cambridge, and afterward Provost of Eton, Dean of Westminster, and Almoner to Queen Elizabeth. Dr. Matthew Parker was Chaplain to Edward VI., Dean of Lincoln, and afterward Archbishop of Canterbury. What faith Sir Ralph Vane professed may not be related here, but from his bold and resolute character it may be surmised to have been of an easy-going kind, and the clerical consolers sent to administer to him in his necessity might have been as acceptable as any other.

Not so to Sir Thomas Arundell; his religious adherence as a staunch Catholic was doubtless well known, and to him, the intrusion of the men named, in his hopeless distress, would have been adding still further cruelty to his sentence, by depriving him of that last preparation and final rites of the church he belonged to, which one of her own confessors could alone afford him.

Application was therefore made for this privilege, and so we find that,--

"on the 11th of February, Mr. Perne was allowed to resort to Sir Thomas Arundell, to instruct hym to dye well."[45]

[45] BELL'S _Chapel in the Tower_.

To die well,--such was, apparently, the condition most sought for, to appear penitent, and if possible to ensure this, the strong religious point was waived, and one,--probably of the ejected religious of the previous reign,--was "allowed" admittance to the death-sentenced prisoner. The monk who came was presumably William Peryn, Prior of the Black-friars, and a distinguished preacher; he probably attended Sir Thomas in his last moments.

The last scene of this mournful progression was now at hand. On the 22nd February the Lieutenant of the Tower received instructions to give notice to--

"Sir Thomas Arundell, and Sir Rauf Vane that they should against Friday next, prepare themselves to dye, according to their condempnation."

But another and melancholy privilege had now to be sought for, and that was to change the ignominious method of hanging,--the punishment accorded for treason-felony,--to the less degrading death by beheading. Some influence had to be used, but it was granted. The same method of death was also extended to Sir Michael Stanhope. No alteration, however, was accorded--if sought for--with regard to the execution of the "ruffian," Sir Ralph Vane, and Sir Miles Partridge; they were to perish at the same hour at the gallows, which was probably set up beside the scaffold on Tower Hill.

Cavendish in his _Metrical Visions_, thus refers to this circumstance in the last stanza of that one relating to Sir Thomas Arundell,--

"To be hanged though my judgment ware, Yet to do me honour they changed my sentence, And to leese my head to ease me of my care:-- But death was the thing of all their pretence Which they desired;--such was their conscyence There I make an end, and I without redresse As here ye may see me, a symple body hedlesse."

Then came the final order on the 23rd to the King's Solicitor--

"To make a warrant for the beheading Sir Thomas Arundell, and Sir Michael Stanhope, and to perform the process of hanging of Sir Rauf Vane and Sir Miles Partridge, who are appointed to be executed on fryday next between ix. and xi. before noone."

The warrant was duly made out and dated the 25th,--the next day Friday, the 26th February, was fixed for their execution. Machyn thus describes the event,--