20 Constitutional History. [chap.
Richard
condemned
to imprison-
ment, Oct.
≡7, 1399∙
to single combat. The dukes of Surrey and Exeter, alarmed
by Bagot’s words, followed Aumâle’s example ; and the king,
fearing that the informer would do more harm than good,
remanded him to prison. The next day the lords, on the
advice of lord Cobham, agreed that the three dukes should be
arrested ; the unhappy Warwick, who still survived to bis own
shame, attempted to excuse his confession of treason, and finally
denied that he had made it, calling forth from the king a sum-
mary command to be silent. Lord Fitzwalter loudly pro-
claimed the innocence of Gloucester. Henry, remembering the
part which he had himself played in the events of the last
parliament, must have felt very miserable ; he seems however
to have determined that matters should not be driven to ex-
tremities, and put off the proceedings as well as he could from
day to day. Every step in the transaction seemed to make the
guilt of Aumâle more probable. On the 18th of October lord
Fitzwalter formally impeached him1 ; Surrey alone stood by
him ; the loud challenges of the lords and the shouts of the
commons threatened a civil war, and Henry only succeeded by
personal exertions in rescuing his cousin from imminent death.
During the lull that followed this storm, archbishop Arundel,
on the 23rd of October, determined to raise the question what
was to be done with Richard2. He charged the lords and all
who were present to observe strict secrecy ; and Northumber-
land put the question at once3. Twenty-two prelates, eight
earls, including the prince of Wales and the duke of York, and
twenty-eight barons and counsellors, declared their mind, that
the late king should be kept in safe and secret imprisonment ;
and on the 2 7th, Henry himself being present, the sentence of
perpetual imprisonment was passed on him 4. The commons, on
young, ‘ that princes had too little and religionshad too much;’ Chron.
P∙ I5∙
1 Otterboume, p. 222 ; Ann. Henr. p. 310.
2 Rot. Parl. iii. 426.
3 , Cornent leur semble que Seiroi t Ordeignez de Richard nadgairs roy,
pur Iuy mettre en Bnufe garde, sauvant la vie quele le roy voet que Iuy
soit sauvez en toutes maneres ?’ Rot. Pari. iii. 426.
4 Rot. Pari. iii. 427. The version of the sentence given in the Chronique
de la Trahison, as pronounced by the recorder of London, must be a fabri-
XVIII.]
Trial of the Appellants.
2i
the 3rd °f November, protested that they were not judges of Protest
parliament, but petitioners1, thus guarding themselves against commons,
the consequences of a possible reaction. In accordance with ° ' 3> ɪ399
this sentence Richard was, on the 29th of October, at midnight,
ɪemoved from the Tower2.
As soon as the sentence on Richard was declared, the outcry Proceedings
wasagain raised against the appellants of 1397; and on the agiɪɪɪst tiɪo
29th the proceedings were continued more quietly and formally. 29,1399.
The six survivors pleaded their own cause severally ; and bishop
JIerks took courage to present himself and disavow all partici-
pation in the murder of Gloucester3. The lords admitted dif-
ferent degrees of complicity in the appeal ; Aumale declared Pieas of the
that he had acted under constraint ; Surrey was a boy at the
time and had complied in fear for his life ; Exeter had done
what the others had done ; Dorset had been taken by surprise,
and had not dared to disobey the king ; Salisbury had acted in
fear ; Ie Despenser did not know how his name had got into the
bill, but when it was there he dared not withdraw it. Other
charges were included in the accusation ; the death of Gloucester,
t⅛e banishment of Henry, the repeal of the patent which secured
the Lancaster inheritance, and the other sentences of the parlia-
ment. These were distinctly disavowed with various degrees
of assurance. On the 3rd of November Sir William Thirning Sentence
pronounced the judgment of the lords4 : the excuses of the ap- X0v.θ3.n0
pellants were to some extent a confession of guilt ; but the cir-
cumstances of the case were exceptional ; the common law did not
furnish adequate machinery for deciding the questions at issue,
and to attempt to treat the matter as treason was usually treated
cation; John of Bourdeaux, who had been called king Kichard, was
condemned to be imprisoned, in a royal castle, and if any one rose in
jus favour, he was to be the first who should suffer death for the attempt ;
^bron. &c. ρ. 223; cf. Archacol. xx. 274.
Rot. Pail. iii. 427.
3 Ann. Henr. ρ. 313.
., ɪk* P- 313. Tlie formal proceedings are in the Rot. Parl. iii. 449-453 ;
hey are deficient in dates, but it would seem from them that the debate
renewed on Wednesday the 29th ; the answers of the accused were
01 ^ιe Thursday ; on the Friday the king consulted the prelate®,
e date of the judgment is given by the annalist.
Rot. ParI. iii. 451 ; Ann. Henr. pp. 315-320 ; λVal⅛. ii. 241.