or at all events to bring back a statement of some kind, no matter what, provided it was true.[1]
It is clear, from what subsequently passed, that the chancellor was acting under directions from the King; and that the object was, if possible, to prevent the completion of the attainder, and escape another execution. The peers at first acquiesced cordially; but as they had been responsible for the marriage, so especially they resented its consequences; the privy council Monday, held a meeting on Sunday: Monday, Jan. 30.on Monday a resolution was passed in the Upper House to wait upon the King with a request, or rather with a demand,[2] that the prosecution should be left to themselves and the Commons. They would implore his Highness to consider, with his general good sense, the liability of all men to misfortune, to remember the importance of his life to the realm, and not permit his distress to prey upon his health. Finally, should the bill be passed after hearing the Queen's defence, they would desire him to spare himself the trouble of appearing in person to listen to the recitation of it; and to convey his assent by letters patent under the great seal.[3]
- ↑ Lords Journals, vol. i. p. 171. After the Act was passed, the King again made an effort in the Queen's favour. 'The King, after the vote of Parliament in her condemnation, wishing to proceed more humanely and more according to forms of law, sent some of his council with a deputation from the Houses to propose to her to come to the Parliament chamber to defend herself. She refused, however; she submitted herself to the King's mercy and good pleasure, and confessed that she had deserved to die.'—Chappuys, Feb. 25, 1542.
- ↑ 'Quædam alia minime contemnenda eorum animis occurrerunt regiæ itidem majestati exponenda, aut potius a suâ Majestate omnino flagitanda.'—Lords Journals, ibid.
- ↑ 'Ne nova tam flebilis historiæ
