[410] 1. v. c. v.
[411] Blomefleld"s Norfolk, vol. i. p. 657. I know not how far this privilege was supposed to be impaired by the statute 34 E. III. c. 11; which however might, I should conceive, very well stand along with it.
[412] Stat. 23 E. III.
[413] [Note XV.]
[414] I have been more influenced by natural probabilities than testimony in ascribing this effect to Wicliffe"s innovations, because the historians are prejudiced witnesses against him. Several of them depose to the connexion between his opinions and the rebellion of 1382; especially Walsingham, p. 288. This implies no reflection upon Wicliffe, any more than the crimes of the anabaptists in Munster do upon Luther.
Every one knows the distich of John Ball, which comprehends the essence of religious democracy:
"When Adam delved and Eve span, Where was then the gentleman?"
The sermon of this priest, as related by Walsingham, p. 275, derives its argument for equality from the common origin of the species. He is said to have been a disciple of Wicliffe. Turner"s Hist. of England, vol. ii.
p. 420.
[415] Stat. 1 R. II. c. 6; Rot. Parl. vol. iii. p. 21.
[416] 30 E. I., in Fitzherbert. Villenage, apud Lambard"s Perambulation of Kent, p. 632. Somner on Gavelkind, p. 72.
[417] Rymer, t. vii. p. 316, &c. The king holds this bitter language to the villeins of Ess.e.x, after the death of Tyler and execution of the other leaders had disconcerted them: Rustici quidem fuistis et estis, in bondagio permanebitis, non ut hactenus, sed incomparabiliter viliori, &c. Walsingham, p. 269.
[418] Rot. Parl. vol. iii. p. 100.
[419] 5 R II. c. 7. The words are, riot et rumour _n"autres semblables_; rather a general way of creating a new treason; but panic puts an end to jealousy.
[420] 12 R. II. c. 3.
[421] Rot. Parl. 15 R. II. vol. iii. p. 294, 296. The statute 7 H. IV.
c. 17, enacts that no one shall put his son or daughter apprentice to any trade in a borough, unless he have land or rent to the value of twenty shillings a year, but that any one may put his children to school. The reason a.s.signed is the scarcity of labourers in husbandry, in consequence of people living in _Upland_ apprenticing their children.
[422] Blomefield"s Norfolk, vol. iii. p. 571.
[423] Rymer, t. v. p. 44.
[424] Gurdon on Courts Baron, p. 596; Madox, Formulare Anglicanum, p.
420; Barrington on Ancient Statutes, p. 278. It is said in a modern book that villenage was very rare in Scotland, and even that no instance exists in records of an estate sold with the labourers and their families attached to the soil. Pinkerton"s Hist. of Scotland, vol. i. p.
147. But Mr. Chalmers, in his Caledonia, has brought several proofs that this a.s.sertion is too general.
[425] Barrington, ubi supra, from Rymer.
[426] There are several later cases reported wherein villenage was pleaded, and one of them as late as the 15th of James I. (Noy, p. 27.) See Hargrave"s argument, State Trials, vol. xx. p 41. But these are so briefly stated, that it is difficult in general to understand them. It is obvious, however, that judgment was in no case given in favour of the plea; so that we can infer nothing as to the actual continuance of villenage.
It is remarkable, and may be deemed by some persons a proof of legal pedantry, that Sir E. c.o.ke, while he dilates on the law of villenage, never intimates that it was become antiquated.
[427] 8 H. V. c. 1.
[428] This prince having been sent to Antwerp, six commissioners were appointed to open parliament. Rot. Parl. 13 E. III. vol. ii. p. 107.
[429] Rymer, t. vi. p. 748.
[430] Matt. Paris, p. 243.
[431] Matt Westmonast. ap. Brady"s History of England, vol. ii. p. 1.
[432] Rot. Parl vol. ii. p. 52.
[433] Rymer, t. vii. p. 171.
[434] Rot. Parl. vol. iv. p. 169.
[435] Rot. Parl. vol. iv. p. 174, 176.
[436] Ibid. p. 201.
[437] I follow the orthography of the roll, which I hope will not be inconvenient to the reader. Why this orthography, from obsolete and difficult, so frequently becomes almost modern, as will appear in the course of these extracts, I cannot conjecture. The usual irregularity of ancient spelling is hardly sufficient to account for such variations; but if there be any error, it belongs to the superintendents of that publication, and is not mine.
[438] Rot. Parl. 6 H. VI. vol. iv. p. 326.
[439] Rot. Parl. 8 H. VI. vol. iv. p. 336.
[440] Rot. Parl. vol. v. p. 241.
[441] Paston Letters, vol. i. p. 81. The proofs of sound mind given in this letter are not very decisive, but the wits of sovereigns are never weighed in golden scales.
[442] This may seem an improper appellation for what is usually termed a battle, wherein 5000 men are said to have fallen. But I rely here upon my faithful guide, the Paston Letters, p. 100, one of which, written immediately after the engagement, says that only sixscore were killed.
Surely this testimony outweighs a thousand ordinary chroniclers. And the nature of the action, which was a sudden attack on the town of St.
Albans, without any pitched combat, renders the larger number improbable. Whethamstede, himself abbot of St. Albans at the time, makes the duke of York"s army but 3000 fighting men. p. 352. This account of the trifling loss of life in the battle of St. Albans is confirmed by a contemporary letter, published in the Archaeologia (xx. 519). The whole number of the slain was but forty-eight, including, however, several lords.
[443] See some account of these in Paston Letters, vol. i. p. 114.
[444] Rot. Parl. vol. v. p. 284-290.
[445] Hall, p. 210.
[446] The ill-will of York and the queen began as early as 1449, as we learn from an unequivocal testimony, a letter of that date in the Paston collection, vol. i. p. 26.
[447] Upon this great question the fourth discourse in Sir Michael Foster"s Reports ought particularly to be read.
[448] Hale"s Pleas of the Crown, vol. i. p. 61, 101 (edit. 1736).
[449] Rot. Parl. vol. v. p. 351.
[450] Id. p. 375. This entry in the roll is highly interesting and important. It ought to be read in preference to any of our historians.
Hume, who drew from inferior sources, is not altogether accurate. Yet one remarkable circ.u.mstance, told by Hall and other chroniclers, that the duke of York stood by the throne, as if to claim it, though omitted entirely in the roll, is confirmed by Whethamstede, abbot of St. Albans, who was probably then present. (p. 484, edit. Hearne.) This shows that we should only doubt, and not reject, unless upon real grounds of suspicion, the a.s.sertions of secondary writers.
[451] The abbey of St. Albans was stripped by the queen and her army after the second battle fought at that place, Feb. 17, 1461; which changed Whethamstede the abbot and historiographer from a violent Lancastrian into a Yorkist. His change of party is quite sudden, and amusing enough. See too the Paston Letters, vol. i. p. 206. Yet the Paston family were originally Lancastrian, and returned to that side in 1470.
[452] There are several instances of violence and oppression apparent on the rolls during this reign, but not proceeding from the crown. One of a remarkable nature (vol. v. p. 173) was brought forward to throw an odium on the duke of Clarence, who had been concerned in it. Several pa.s.sages indicate the character of the duke of Gloucester.