The birth of Edward lowered the hopes of the Yorkists; but we have seen that the indisposition into which Henry soon afterwards sunk, rendered the recall of the duke of York into the cabinet a measure of necessity and gave him, for the time, a complete ascendency over his rival, who was committed to the tower. On this occasion York protested "that he did not assume the title or authority of protector, but was chosen by the parliament of themselves, and of their own free and mere disposition; and that he should be ready to resume his obedience to the king's commands, as soon as it was notified and declared unto him by the parliament, that Henry was restored to his health of body and mind."

By his marriage with the lady Cicely Neville, the duke gained the powerful support of her brothers, the earls of Salisbury and Warwick. These potent barons were easily induced to second their relative in his struggle for political ascendency after Henry's recovery. "It was during this period," says Sir James Mackintosh, "that the whole people seem gradually to have arrayed themselves as Yorkists or Lancastrians. The rancour of parties was exasperated by confinement to narrow circles and petty districts. Feuds began to become hereditary, and the heirs of the lords slaughtered at St Albans, regarded the pursuit of revenge as essential to the honour of their families, and as a pious office due to the memory of their ancestors." The king, in the midst of these distractions, laboured assiduously, but in vain, to calm the angry passions of his nobles, and establish unanimity in the national councils. The pageant of a public reconciliation was enacted, but the stratagems of the queen again excited the distrust of the Yorkists, and the duke returned in disgust to his castle of Wigmore, the ancient seat of the Mortimers. Salisbury went to Middleham in Yorkshire, and Warwick to his government of Calais. But," says old Hale, "although the bodies of these noble persons were thus separated asunder by artifice, yet their hearts were united and coupled in one." They planned a junction, the result of which, as we have elsewhere detailed, once more threw the government into their hands. A parliament which assembled at Westminster, after the battle of Northampton, annulled all the recent proceedings which had been levelled against the Yorkists; and a few days afterwards, Richard, duke of York, having returned from Ireland, whither he had fled after his defeat at Ludlow, entered London, and riding to Westminster, presented himself in the upper house, in an attitude, and under circumstances which unequivocally indicated the views and wishes by which he was now animated. Stepping forward to the royal throne, he laid his hand upon the cloth of state, and stood for a short time in that attitude, as if waiting for an invitation to place himself on it. But every voice was silent, the nobles stood mute, and neither by word nor sign manifested the slightest token of approbation. The duke, thereupon, somewhat disconcerted, withdrew his hand, and this movement was instantly applauded by the circle around him. The archbishop of Canterbury taking courage from these indications of right feeling on the part of the spectators, boldly inquired, whether he would not wait upon the king, who was now in the

"Then," says Comines, "considered as the most advantageous appointment at the disposal of any Christian prince, and that which placed the most considerable force at the disposal of the governor."

queen's apartment? To this question he indignantly replied, "I know no one in this realm who ought not rather to visit me." He then hastily withdrew, and took up his abode in that part of the palace which had been usually reserved for the accommodation of the king himself. Even the duke's party were not prepared for such a step as this; but Richard felt that he had now committed himself, and took his resolution accord ingly. On the 16th of October, 1460, his counsel delivered to the bishop of Exeter, the new chancellor, a writing, containing a statement of his claims to the crowns of England and France, with the lordship of Ireland. In this writing, having first derived his descent from Henry III., by Lionel, duke of Clarence, third son to Edward III., he observed, that on the resignation of Richard II., Henry, earl of Derby, the son of John of Ghent, the younger brother of the said Lionel, against all manner of right, entered on the crowns of England and France, and the lordship of Ireland, which by law belonged to Roger Mortimer, earl of March, great-grandson to the said Sir Lionel: whence he concluded, that of right, law, and custom, the said crown and lordship now belonged to himself, as the lineal representative of Roger Mortimer, in preference to any one who could claim only as the descendant of Henry, earl of Derby. We have already related in what spirit Henry received the first communication of York's pretensions; he concluded his address to the lords who waited upon him on this occasion, by commanding them "to search for to find in as much as in them was, all such things as might be objected and laid against the claim and title of the said duke." The lords devolved this duty upon the judges, who excused themselves from entering upon so delicate and dangerous a task, by observing that their office was not to be of counsel between party and party, but to apply the laws of the realm to such matters as came before them; that the present question was above law, and appertained not unto them, and that only the lords of the king's blood, and the high court of parliament, could decide it. The king's serjeants and attorney were then called upon for an opinion; and they also presented their excuses, alleging, that since the matter was so high, that it passed the learning of the judges, it must needs exceed their learning. But the apology was not received; the lords found that these officers were bound to give advice to the crown, and directed them as counsel for the king, to draw up an answer to Richard's claims. In the issue, the following objections-which we shall state in the words of Dr Lingard -were drawn up and sent to the duke:-" 1. That both he and the lords had sworn fealty to Henry, and of course he, by his oath, was prevented from urging, they by theirs from admitting, his claim. 2. That many acts passed in divers parliaments of the king's progenitors, might be opposed to the pretensions of the house of Clarence, which acts have been of authority to defeat any manner of title.' 3. That several entails had been made of the crown to heirs male, whereas he claimed by descent from females. 4. That he did not bear the arms of Lionel the Third, but of Edmund the Fifth, son of Edward III. And, 5. That Henry IV. had declared that he entered on the throne as the true heir of Henry III.' To the three first objections, the duke's counsel replied:- That as priority of descent was evidently in his

Blackm. p. 875.

favour, it followed that the right to the crown was his, which right could not be defeated by oaths or acts of parliament, or entails. Indeed, the only entail made to the exclusion of females, was that of the seventh year of Henry IV., and would never have been thought of, had that prince claimed under the customary law of descents. That the reason why he had not hitherto taken the arms of Lionel, was the same as had prevented him from claiming the crown, the danger to which such a proceeding would have exposed him. And, lastly, that if Henry IV. pronounced himself the rightful heir of Henry III., he asserted what he knew to be untrue. As, however, the principal reliance of his adversaries was on the oaths which he had taken, and which it was contended were to be considered as a surrender of his right by his own act, he contended that no oath contrary to truth and justice is binding. That the virtue of an oath is to confirm truth, and not to impugn it; and that as the obligation of oaths is a subject for the determination of the spiritual tribunals, he was willing to answer in any such court all manner of men, who had any thing to propose against him." The lords resolved that the title of the duke of York could not be defeated; but proposed a compromise by which Henry acknowledged York as heir-apparent, notwithstanding the existence of the infant prince of Wales. On the adjustment of this important affair, the king and the duke went in state to St Paul's, to make their thanksgivings. But the spirit of Margaret was not so easily subdued as that of her husband. Instead of obeying the order which York procured, requiring her instant presence in London, that warlike dame hastened to join Northumberland and Clifford in the north. The duke of Som

erset and the earl of Devon marched to her standard; and the coalition thus formed assembled a most formidable force at York. On receiving intelligence of these proceedings, York hastened, with a small body of men, to Sandal castle, near Wakefield, leaving his son and heir, the earl of March, to follow more at leisure with fresh supplies. Here his best advisers wished him to remain until the arrival of the expected reinforcement, but in opposition to such wise counsel he rashly determined to hazard a battle. It is said by some authors that the bitter taunts of the enemy provoked him to this rash step; but others with more probability suggest that Richard found himself driven to the necessity of risking an engagement by want of provisions; whatever it was that dictated the line of conduct which he now pursued, he seems to have forgotten that precaution which had hitherto been one of his characteristics, and to have rushed headlong and blindfold on certain destruction. On the last day of the year 1460, he drew out his troops on Wakefield common, and was instantly hemmed in on all sides by the greatly superior force of the enemy. A horrid scene of carnage ensued. The Yorkists fought with the fury of despair; but their desperate and unyielding courage availed them not. Within half an hour of the onset, nearly 3000 of York's followers lay dead on the field, while their leader himself and Salisbury, covered with wounds, had fallen into the hands of their assailants. Salisbury was decapitated the next day at Pontefract. Authors differ respecting the fate of York, Whethamstede affirms that he was taken alive, and his dying moments embittered by the brutal derision of his enemies, who, placing him upon an ant-hill for a throne, with a crown of grass round his temples,

hailed him,—' King without a kingdom! prince without a people !' Others affirm that he was killed in the fight, but add that his inanimate remains were treated with the most brutal indignity; that Clifford bore his reeking head upon a pole into the presence of the queen, exclaiming," Madam, your war is done; here is the ransom of your king !" and that the unfeeling woman laughed aloud at the fearful spectacle, and ordered her brutal ally to attach the bloody head to one of the gates of the city of York.5 In the pursuit, Clifford overtook Richard's youngest son, the earl of Rutland, a boy in his twelfth year. His tutor,

a venerable priest, was hastening with him from the field of conflict towards Wakefield, in hopes of finding shelter for his young charge in that town. They were stopped on the bridge, and Clifford, attracted by the rich garments of the boy, asked "Who is he?" Unable to speak through terror, the poor boy fell on his knees, and began to implore mercy; and his faithful preceptor, thinking to save him, exclaimed,— "He is the son of a prince, and may, peradventure, do you good hereafter!" "The son of York!" shouted the bloody Clifford. "Then as thy father slew mine, so will I slay thee, and all thy kin !" And plunging his dagger into the heart of the young prince, he bade the tutor bear the tidings of what he had seen to the boy's mother.

Owen Tuvor.

DIED A. D. 1461.

QUEEN CATHERINE, widow of Henry V., soon after the death of her gallant and accomplished husband, bestowed her hand upon Sir Owen Tudor, a simple Welsh knight, whose graceful manners and great personal beauty had captivated the fair and royal matron. Sandford bears witness to the good taste at least which Catherine displayed in the selection of this husband; for he tells us that Sir Owen was so "absolute in all the lineaments of his body, that the only contemplation of it might make a queen forget all other circumstances." Catherine indeed seems to have forgotten, or disregarded many circumstances which should have deterred her from a union so much beneath her in dignity, and so likely to prove the forerunner of family discord. She was a Frenchwoman, however, and cared little for the objections which were urged against her gratifying her own feelings in the disposal of her hand a second time. When Tudor's kindred and country were objected to amongst other things, she expressed a desire to see some of his kinsmen. Whereupon," says Wynne, "he brought to her presence John Ap Meredith and Howell Ap Llewellyn Ap Howell, his neare cozens, men of goodly stature and personage, but wholly destitute of bringing up and nurture, for when the queen had spoken to them in divers languages, and they were not able to answer her, she said that they were the goodliest dumbe creatures that ever she saw.' Three sons were the fruit of this union. The two elder, Edmund and Jasper, were created earls of Richmond and Pembroke by their half-brother, "with pre-eminence," says Fuller, "to take place above all earls, for kings

have absolute authority in dispensing honours." The younger entered into a religious community and died a monk. Upon the death of Catherine-which happened in 1437-Tudor was committed to prison for contempt of the royal prerogative, in marrying a tenant of the crown without previously obtaining the royal license. The hardy Welshman soon made escape from his confinement, but was afterwards retaken and committed to the castle of Wallingford. Miss Roberts has given a passage from a manuscript chronicle in the Harleian library, which, as she observes, goes far to disprove the ostentatious account so industriously circulated by Henry VII. and his partizans, respecting the royal descent of that monarch's paternal ancestor. It runs thus: "This same year one Oweyn, no man of birth neither of livelihood, broke out of Newgate against night, at searching time, through help of his priest, and went his way, hurting foule his keeper. The which Oweyn had privily wedded the Queen Katherine, and had three or four children by her, unweeting the common people till that she was dead and buried." Sir Owen perished at last upon the scaffold, having been taken prisoner by young Edward after the battle at Mortimer's cross, and instantly sacrificed to the revengeful feelings which then filled the conqueror's bosom.

Tiptoft, Earl of Worcester.

BORN A. D. 1428.-DIED A. D. 1470.

JOHN TIPTOFT, earl of Worcester, one of the few literary ornaments of England in the 15th century, was born at Everton in Cambridgeshire, and educated at Baliol college, Oxford, where, as his contemporary John Rous of Warwick informs us, he greatly distinguished himself by his application to study and progress in the literature of the age. Upon the death of his father, Lord Tiptoft, in the twenty-first of Henry the Sixth's reign, he succeeded, while yet a minor, to the great estates of his family, and at the age of twenty-two was elevated to the earldom of Worcester. Three years later he was appointed lord-treasurer of England, and in the twenty-seventh year of his age he was commissioned with some other noblemen to guard the channel,—a task which he performed with equal honour to himself and advantage to his country. Withdrawing himself for a time from public life, he visited the Holy land, and returning by Italy, spent some time in Padua, then the great seat of learning for Europe, and graced by the presence of Ludovicus Carbo, Guarinus, and John Phrea, an Englishman, all famous for their learning. On this occasion, Phrea dedicated two of his works to the noble and accomplished young Englishman, of whom, amongst other complimentary things, he says: "Those superior beings whose office it is to be the guardians of our island of Britain, knowing you to be a wise and good man, an enemy to faction, and a friend of peace, warned you to abandon a country which they had abandoned, that you might receive no stain from associating with impious and factious men.' This is quite in the style of the age; but

Leland, p. 477,