The name is absent

Ю4              Constittdional History.            [chap.

of Warwick and the earl Marshall was settled by the promo-
tion of the latter to be duke of Norfolk¹. Although duke
Humfrey seems to have escaped animadversion in parliament,
Gloucester he was severely taken to task in council². Beaufort, it may
quarrels                  ∙*                   ...        _z-□_η

wɪth Beau- be safely assumed, was unsparing in his strictures ; Gloucester
^{4 5} seems to have retaliated by an attack on the bishop’s adminis-
tration during his absence : and the result was an open quarrel
between uncle and nephew, which peremptorily recalled Bedford
to England.

Gloucester’s 332. Duke Humfrey had come home deep in debt, as was
expenses.                             .....

to be expected, and the council had treated him with unwise
liberality; in May they had given him the wardship of the
Mortimer estates during the minority of the duke of York³,
and in July had allowed him to boɪrow the large loan just
mentioned. But he was not satisfied. The Tower of London
had during the absence of the duke been garrisoned by Beau-
fort with men drawn from the estates of the duchy of Lancaster,
which were largely under his control⁴. Gloucester, on the 29th
of October, ordered the Lord Mayor of London to prevent his
Riotin uncle from entering the city⁵. A riot followed on the 30th, in
which the Archbishop of Canterbury and the duke of Coimbra,
Iiimselfa grandson of John of Gaunt, had to mediate between
Boaufort    ₁]_lc conflicting parties. It was finally resolved that Bedford

Bedford.    should arbitrate, and on the 31 st the chancellor wrote to him

Loansbytheimploring him to return if he would save the state⁵. On the
Gloucester. 5th of November, at Guildford, the council, acting on the order
of the last parliament, allowed the protector to borrow £5000
of the king, to be repaid when Henry should reach the age of
fifteen. This was charged on the tenth last granted by the
clergy, although the government was at the very time being
carried on by the voluntary loans of the lords of the council⁷.

ɪ Rot. Parl. iv. 262-274.

² Ordinances, iii. 174; Monstrelet, liv. ii. c. 32.

³ Ordinances, ɪii. 169. The duke was allowed further to borrow 90c0
marks of the king on July 9, 1427; Rymer, x. 374.

⁴ Beaufort’s force was from Cheshire and Lancashire. Cf. Monstrelct,
liv. ii. c. 36.                                      ³ Chrom London, p. 114.

³ The letter, dated Oct. 31, is giren by Hall, p. 130.

' Ordinances, iii. 179. The loan of July 1427 was assigned cn tlɪe

XVIii.] Quarrel of Beauforl and Gloucester. ɪoɔ

Probably this was done in Beaufort’s absence. It was time Bedford
that Bedford should return ; he left France on receipt of his Dec. ι.₁i₃.
uncle’s Ietter₁Ianded at Sandwich on the 20th of December¹,
and came up to London on the ɪoth of January.

333. The two brothers had not met since the death of Henry Treaty ₀f
V and Gloucester was not able to resist the personal influence between
of Bedford. It is probably to this period that we should refer brothers,
an interesting document, preserved among the letters of bishop
Beckington, duke Humfrey’s chancellor². In this treaty of
alliance, as it professes to be, the duty of fraternal unity is
solemnly laid down, and a contract published which is to disarm
for the future the tongues of meddlers and detractors. Seven
articles follow, by which the dukes undertake to bear true
allegiance to the king ; next to the king to honour and serve
each other, to abstain from aiding each other’s enemies, to re-
veal to each other all designs that are directed against either,
to refuse belief to calumnious accusations, to form no alliances
without common consent or in prejudice of their common
alliances. These latter articles were no doubt called for by
Gloucester’s treatment of the duke of Burgundy. Queen
Katharine also appears to have joined in the contract.

On the Tth of January, 1426, was issued³ a summons for Pariiament
,             summoned

parliament to meet on the 18th of Iebruarv at Leicester: the to Leicester,
.             ,             ₁                           .                      ^v                   ∙1     1 1 Feb, 1426.

intervening weeks were spent in an attempt to reconcile duke
Humfrey with the chancellor. On the 29th of January, arch-
bishop Chichele, the earl of Stafford, lords Talbot and Crom-
well, and Sir John Cornwall, were sent to the duke, with
elaborate instructions from Bedford and the council, which had
met at S. Alban’s ⁱ. It was proposed that the council should
reassemble at Northampton on the 13th of February to prepare
business for the parliament. At this council Gloucester was Gloucester
first invited and then urged to attend, as he valued the unity attend the
of the lords and the common good of the subjects ; the enmity ^cιjluιcil'
between the duke and his uncle must of necessity come before
customs, the duchy of Lancaster, and the proceeds of wardships ; Bymer,
^x∙.375> Ordinances, ɪɪi. 27¹∙             .              ¹ Gregory, p. ι6o.

³ Heckington’s Letters, ed. Williams, i. 139-145.

fiords’ Keport, iv. 863.                    ⁴ Ordinances, iii. 181--187.

<<   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   >>

More intriguing information