ceedings against the queen were under the consideration of the king and his advisers in the latter days of April, but were kept secret.

On May 1, the king departed suddenly from a tilting match at Greenwich, where he had been present with the queen. It has been said that his jealousy was excited by her conduct on that occasion, but a commission had been regularly prepared to inquire respecting her some days before. Scarcely had she retired to her apartments before she was arrested and conveyed to the Tower, where her brother, the husband of the infamous lady Rochford, was also imprisoned, with three others, on the charge of adultery with her. On her arrival at the Tower, Anne protested her innocence, and inquired whether she was to be imprisoned in a dungeon. Being informed by Kingston, the lieutenant of the Tower, that she should have the lodgings she had occupied before her coronation, the contrast of her present state overcame her; she was seized with a hysterical affection, which frequently returned before her trial, and evidently showed symptoms of a wandering mind. She was carefully watched, and herincoherent expressions taken down, that they might be repeated to the council; but they did not imply any guilty conduct.

The subject of her innocence soon became a party question between Papists and Protestants: it has been thoroughly discussed: so many documents have been brought forward, that a fair decision may now be arrived at. There is no reason to believe queen Anne Boleyn guilty of the crime laid to her charge; but her conduct had alienated the king's affections, and showed the levity of a mind injured by prosperity.

Her enemies hurried forward their plans, taking advantage of the king's arbitrary and hasty temper, while her friends had not time nor opportunity to investigate the accusations, or to interfere efficiently in her behalf. The charges against her were also urged so positively, that the friends of the Reformation were fearful of giving ground for allegations that they

countenanced crime. Cranmer was forbidden to appear at court till sent for; he wrote, however, to the king, pleading earnestly in the queen's behalf; but he could not avoid allowing her guilt if the charges were proved. Queen Anne herself wrote an able letter to the king; but while asserting her innocence, she expressed herself in a manner likely to excite the king's anger, so as to strengthen the attempts against her. It appears from her letter, that Anne felt little affection for Henry, but had not been able to resist the temptation of a crown. Her conduct, in listening to and encouraging his addresses, must ever be deemed deserving of censure, while it brought its own punishment.

The royal councillors seem, at first, to have designed to have dissolved the marriage, on the ground of a precontract between lord Percy and Anne Boleyn; but this was denied by that nobleman. Harsher measures were then pursued. On May 12, Norris and others, accused of improper conduct with her, were arraigned, and found guilty. On May 15, the queen herself was tried before a number of peers, over whom her uncle, the duke of Norfolk, her open and bitter enemy, was appointed to preside. He superintended all the proceedings against her, visiting her in the Tower, and telling her that Norris confessed his guilt a device well calculated to induce her to confess, if really in fault. She had no one to plead for her, and could only protest her innocence; but was found guilty by a majority of the peers, on worse than doubtful evidence. The lord mayor, who was present at the trial, did not hesitate to say, that all he could gather from what passed showed a determination to get rid of her. On the 17th, her brother, and the others accused as guilty parties, were executed. They declared their own innocence and that of the queen to the last, with the exception of Smeaton, a musician, who made some admissions, implying that he was guilty. He had been practised upon by a promise of pardon, if he would accuse the queen; but her enemies did not venture to

bring him forward as a witness against her, and his execution was hastened to prevent his retracting. Anne Boleyn was beheaded on the 19th. Two days before her death, there seems to have been some intention to allow her to live: her own statement, admitting an engagement with lord Percy before her marriage with the king, was formally exhibited before Cranmer, who, in his judicial capacity, thought himself justified by such a document to pronounce her marriage void. But this gleam of mercy passed away; probably the king saw, that suffering her to live might afterwards raise a question as to the validity of another marriage, which Henry, with brutal selfishness, had resolved to solemnize without delay.

Queen Anne, before her death, became calm; she suffered with steady firmness, founded on religious feeling. She besought the favourable opinion of those present, but did not again protest her innocence; this showed a spirit of forgiveness towards her enemies, with a desire to avoid every thing that might excite the king's displeasure towards her infant daughter. Mortified pride, and inordinate affection for Jane Seymour, appears to have hurried Henry forward in putting queen Anne to death; but there is good reason to believe, that in addition to the falsehoods of lady Rochford and others, the efforts of the Romish party were exerted in various ways to hasten the catastrophe, and prevent time for reflection, which might have produced a different result. How uncertain is human grandeur! The 1st of May had seen Anne a queen, in the full enjoyment of rank and state; on the 19th she laid headless on the scaffold! That day the king hunted in Epping Forest, where he sat at his noon-tide repast, earnestly listening for the report of a cannon, ordered to be fired when the catastrophe was over. The signal sound at length boomed on his ear, when he rose, exclaiming, "It is done! up, and let us follow the sport." On the following morning the king married Jane Seymour. It is too plain that he did not

wish Anne to be proved innocent of the allegations of her enemies; and let it again be fully stated, that the value of the Reformation, and its results to England, no way depend upon the conduct and character of those who overthrew the tyranny of popery.

The conduct of Henry in this instance increased the dislike towards him on the continent, especially among the Protestants. Melancthon and Bucer, who had been about to proceed to England, relinquished their journey, while both parties in England were awed into deeper submission by such arbitrary proceedings. The parliament assented to the king's mandates, that the princess Elizabeth should be set aside from the succession to the throne; and even passed a law, empowering Henry to declare his successor. It is supposed that the object sought hereby was to enable the king to set aside his daughters, if he had no more sons, by appointing his illegitimate son, the duke of Richmond, to the succession; but very soon afterwards the duke died. Although England was thus in the power of an autocrat, still there had been no suppression of public liberty. As yet, Englishmen, as a nation, had never possessed liberty as a nation. Hitherto the contest had been between the king and the nobility. The former now prevailed, but not without the aid of the people; the commonalty of England enjoyed greater privileges in this reign than in any other since the conquest: but as yet they were by no means freemen, nor were their rights duly regarded.

The dissolution of the monasteries was not accomplished without some risings among the populace, excited by the monks and the ignorant priests, who felt that the progress of Scripture light exposed them to the loss of their customary influence. These insurrections prevailed mostly in the northern counties, where the monastic establishments had so engrossed the revenues of the benefices, that the greater part did not exceed four or five pounds per annum; they were consequently held by ignorant and needy persons.

The archbishop of York declared, that in his whole jurisdiction there were not twelve priests able to preach. The first rising was in Lincolnshire, where Mackerel, prior of Barlings, availed himself of an unpopular tax, and induced the commons to rise, heading them himself, with another leader, under the name of captain Cobler. They soon dispersed on the promise of pardon. In Yorkshire, there was a more formidable insurrection. The insurgents amounted to 30,000, commanded by Robert Aske. The body proceeded with some semblance of discipline, under banners displaying the wounds of Christ; they occupied York and other principal towns. The duke of Norfolk was sent against them, with orders to negotiate till the king himself could bring up a larger force. He secretly favoured the cause of the insurgents, but succeeded in prevailing upon them to desire pardon, and persuaded the king to grant an amnesty.

These insurrections were promoted by the intrigues of cardinal Pole. He was grandson of the duke of Clarence, who was put to death by order of his brother Edward IV., by his daughter Margaret, who married sir Richard Pole. From his early youth he was trained to learning, and highly favoured by Henry VIII. This favour continued till the question of the divorce was agitated. Pole opposed the annulment of the marriage, which displeased the king, and excited suspicion; for in failure of the descendants of the daughter of Edwardiv., the Poles were next in succession to the throne. However, the king did not withdraw his favour from Pole, till the question respecting the supremacy arose. Then, without any communication with Henry, he wrote a book in defence of the papal authority, which was completed in 1535. This work, written on the continent, while the author was subsisting on a liberal allowance from Henry, contained an abusive, slanderous attack upon the king and Anne Boleyn, respecting whom he made statements wholly unsupported by any authorities, but which, although resting on no foundation,