and for my kingdom, and for my people, my honor and my blood in the dust. "I know I have the body but of a weak and feeble woman. But I have the heart and stomach of a king, and of a king of England too; and think foul scorn that Parma, or Spain, or any prince of Europe, should dare to invade the borders of my realm, to which, rather than any dishonor shall grow by me, I myself will take up arms, I myself will be your general, judge, and rewarder of every one of your virtues in the field. "I know already, for your forwardness you have deserved rewards and crowns, and we do assure you on the word of a prince they shall be duly paid you. In the mean time my lieutenant-general shall be in my stead, than whom never prince commanded a more noble or worthy subject, not doubting but by your obedience to your general, by your concord in the camp, and your valor in the field, we shall shortly have a famous victory over those enemies of God, of my kingdoms, and of my people." The queen's visit was a pleasant episode. It relieved the tedium of life in camp. Officers and soldiers, nobles, gentry, and commoners, acknowledged its inspiring influence. For two or three days she passed to and fro among the soldiery with a kind look for all, and here and there with cheering salutations. She received the compliments of her captains with that royal grace for which she was distinguished. By a kind word or a smile, by a wellturned pleasantry or a family reminiscence, she kindled to most intense fervor the personal devotion of those who kissed her hand. There was no lack of loyalty in the camp before, or of patriotism, or of martial spirit. But by her presence and princely courtesies, she sanctified and rejuvenated all these moral forces as if by magic; and the more, when she proudly declared that the intense affection of her people was her sufficient bulwark. When she retired to her house at Havering, "We will die for our queen!" was the sentiment of every heart. True, the Spanish forces were at this time in full retreat. It is true also that their passage northward was known. But it was not known, or supposed, that they had abandoned their enterprise; otherwise, the queen's speech would have been an unmasked farce. The prevailing opinion then was, that this northward movement was a feint, intended, it might be, to throw the country off its guard, and that the enemy would soon return to attempt a landing.1 Some, however, were jealous - and it was not without a reason that the Duke of Medina was sure of a shelter and a welcome from the trimming king who wore the Scottish crown, and would thus effect an easy passage from Edinburgh to the Tweed.2 1 Camden, 416. 2 Rapin, II. 137. Nares, III. 339. These facts are a sufficient comment upon the following passage, and upon its covert sneer. "The danger was now over..... ... The speech said to have been spoken by her at Tilbury might have been prepared for her as an address to the soldiers, if it had been necessary. But she certainly could not exhort them to fight, after the enemy had gone, and when she had resolved to disband her army immediately." (Lingard, VIII. 303, note.) When did Queen Elizabeth ever have a speech prepared for her? So strong was the apprehension that the Spanish Admiral would operate through Scotland, and with the king's consent, that the Lord Ashby, Elizabeth's ambassador there, sought to buy for his mistress the good offices of James to counteract the supposed plan of Medina. For this purpose he "offered him the title of a Duke in England, a yearly pension of five thousand pounds, a guard to be maintained at the queen's charge, and some other In this connection there is one topic "which we may not overskip." We have before stated that many Catholics denied the power of the Pope to cancel the obligations of a people to their sovereign, and that many of those in England holding that opinion also held firmly to their allegiance, in face of the Papal bulls of deposition against their queen. Others such as Campion, Persons, Throckmorton, Parry, Babington, and his associates, held a contrary doctrine, and considered Elizabeth queen only de facto. Such were chiefly - we think altogether - of the Jesuitical school. Their numbers were greatly overstated, probably, by the Jesuit priests. Certainly they were, when it was said that all the Catholics in England favored the invasion of the country and the dethronement of Elizabeth.1 Nor can we receive without serious abatement the statement of Ballard that foreign aid alone was wanting to secure a formidable insurrection. Mendoza himself was so far incredulous of his assurances, as to demand proof of their grounds. But notwithstanding the general loyalty of the English Catholics, there were so many, and known to be so many, of the Jesuitical faction, that the whole Catholic population were suspected by over-jealous minds. When, therefore, it became known that Spain was upon the eve of her nefarious errand, it was importunately urged upon Elizabeth that these intestine foes were more to be feared than the foreign; that therefore she should follow the example of her sire when in like circumstances, and dispose of the more promi matters." (Rapin, II. 137, note. Camden, 417.) 1 Strype's Annals, V. 603. nent of her Catholic subjects under some specious pretence, either by banishment or the block. She rejected this counsel, not only because she thought it both inhuman and impolitic, but because she had confidence in the loyalty of the great mass of her Catholic subjects, notwithstanding the sufferings they had endured under her government. At the same time, considering that there were grounds for this cautionary counsel, she had adopted a measure sufficiently prudential, but less exceptionable and offensive. By her direction, her Council had issued orders to the lieutenants of the shires to lodge in safe hold such Catholics as were most noted for their recusancy, and to commit others less obstinate, and men of conventional importance, to the custody of ecclesiastics and other loyal gentry, to be so far restrained as to preclude their correspondence with their religious sympathizers at home or abroad. This order had been obeyed so far as prudence seemed to require, but none of the chief Catholics had been molested. A few gentlemen had been sent to the palace of the Bishop of Ely, where they had the range of the Bishop's extensive grounds, and were no further restrained.2 The confidence of the queen in her Catholic subjects was not misplaced. They were as forward and zealous to furnish arms and money, to fight against the invaders, to defend the person of the queen, as were the Protestants. In this cause, the whole realm appeared "as with one heart and one body." Catholic gentry volunteered service in the navy and 2 Harleian Miscellany, I. 143. * Ibid., 142. 1 Wright, II. 359; Order of the Council. Camden, 406. Rapin, II. 136. 66 in the army, "desirous to take their fortune with the common soldiers." Some equipped ships at their own charge, yielding them to Protestant command. Some roused and equipped their tenants for the common defence,1 They were no less unwilling than the rest to see their native country in subjection to the ordinary cruelty found among strangers."2 Even those confined to the episcopal domain of Ely lacked not patriotic ardor, but wrote to the Council offering to stand in the fore-front of battle "to defend their undoubted sovereign lady and queen against all foreign forces, though sent by the Pope or his command." 3 We have had occasion to mention Anthony Brown, Lord Viscount Montague, a zealous Catholic, the only temporal peer who opposed the Act of Supremacy when propounded in the House of Lords, and that not only by his vote, but by a sharp, urgent, bold speech. We have mentioned him also as the first informant to the queen herself of the first Catholic plot against her life.5 Time had not abated his loyalty. With a gallant troop of horse, commanded by himself, his son, and his grandson, he appeared at the rendezvous at Tilbury, thus staking his own old blood and hoary head, the blood and heads of his whole house, in the service of his queen and country. It should be remembered, also, that to a known Catholic the queen intrusted the command of her fleet, the chief bulwark of her dominions. Right gallantly did he fulfil his trust. |