was dreaded as a heretic by the whole body of the conservatives, whether laity or clergy. His popularity with the army which he had gained by his military successes, and the support of the enthusiastic but ungovernable Reformers, might have enabled him to make head as a leader in civil war, but would assist him little in carrying on the Government. Nor is it likely that the King could wholly place confidence in him. Able without being wise, the Earl possessed precisely the qualities which would be most dangerous to him if trusted with power in an arduous crisis.
Had the conservatives been prudent, they had a fair game in their hands; a power so great as to have compelled Henry VIII. to temporize with it would have recovered its influence with little difficulty in the necessary weakness of a minority. But, either their own hasty anxiety, or the headstrong ambition of one of their leaders, betrayed their interests prematurely, and secured the easy accomplishment of a Protestant revolution. In relating the story of the trial and execution of Lord Surrey, which historians have unanimously described as a gratuitous murder, it will be desirable for me to state with much nakedness the grounds on which I have formed a different opinion.
During the discussions on the succession which had preceded and occasioned the divorce of Queen Catherine, the Duke of Norfolk had been spoken of among those who were likely, in the event of the King's death, to succeed to the crown.[1] Any hopes which he might
- ↑ See Giustiniani's Letters from the Court of Henry VIII.
