i4o Constitutional History. [chap.
Parliament ment of Г447 was summoned to meet at Cambridge. By a
of Bury, v
Feb. ι447. second writ it was transferred to Bury S. Edmund’s, a place
where Suffolk was strong and Gloucester would be far away
from his friends the Londoners. There it met on the ɪoth of
February1. The archbishop announced the cause of summons—
to provide the king with money for a visit to France which was
in contemplation2. William Tresham, knight of the shire for
Northamptonshire, and a friend of the duke of York, was chosen
Forces eoɪ- speaker. A large force was encamped in the neighbourhood,
the spot. and it was perhaps known that some proceedings in parliament
relating to Gloucester’s conduct were to be expected. Neither
the duke nor the cardinal seems to have been present at the
Arrestof opening of the session. On the 18th of FebruaryGloucester
Gloucester. i . o . j .
arrived with about eighty horsemen and was met a mile out of
the town by Sir John Stourton the treasurer and Sir Thomas
Stanley the controller of the king’s household, who l>ade him
retire at once to his lodgings. As soon as he reached the
North Spital, where he was to lodge, and had supped, he was
arrested by the viscount of Beaumont, who appeared attended
by the duke of Buckingham, the marquess of Dorset, and the
earl of Salisbury. Several other persons were arrested at the
same time ; and on the following days a large number of the
Hisdeath. duke’s Servantswere imprisoned 3. Onthe 23rd duke Humfrey
died in his lodging, called S. Saviour’s, outside the north
gate4 : the next day his body was viewed by the members
ɪ Rot. Pari. v. 128. The last day of the session was March 3; ib. p.
135. The credit for £100,000 was given on that day.
2 This visit, which never took place, occupies a prominent place in the
negotiations of these years, as ‘ Personalis Conventio ; ’ Rymer, xi. pp.
87 sq.
3 See an account by a contemporary writer in English Chron. ed. Davies,
pp. 116-118.
4 ‘ Fecit eum rex .. . arestari, poniqne in tain arcta custodia quod prae
tristitia decideret in Iectum aegritudinis, et infra paucos dies postering
Seeederet in fata;’ Regist. Whethamstede,!. 179. Cf. Gregory, p. 188;
Chr. Giles, p. 34; Fabyan, p. 619. The French contemporary historian
Mathieu de Coussy asserts that he was strangled, ap. Buchon, xxxv. p.
102 ; the same writer (xxxvi. 83) says that the murder was ascribed by
some to the duke of York, who indeed was the only person who was
likely to profit by it. But this is most improbable. Hardyng, who wrote
in the Yorkist interest, says, p. 400 :—
XVIII.]
Gloucester's Death.
I4i
of the parliament, after which it was taken to be buried at
S. Alban’s. Such little business as could be done in parlia-
ment was hurried through ; no grants were asked for ; and in
March the king went down to Canterbury. It would be vain Oterarity
to attempt to account positively for Gloucester’s death ; it may question,
have been a natural death, produced or accelerated by the
insult of the arrest ; it may have been the work of an underling
who hoped to secure his own promotion by taking a stumbling-
block out of his master’s path : if it were the direct act of any
of the duke’s personal rivals, the stain of guilt can hardly fall
on any but Suffolk. It is impossible to suppose that Henry
himself was cognisant of the matter, and it is hard to suspect
Margaret, a girl of eighteen, although she had already made
herself a strong partisan, and there may have lurked in her that
thirst for blood which marked more or less all the Neapolitan
Angevins. It cannot be supposed that the cardinal would in Impoen-
the last year of his life reverse the policy on which he had cardinal’s
acted for fifty years and deal such a fatal blow to the house 0f gullt∙
Lancaster ; or that the marquess of Dorset, who had more to
fear from the duke of York than from the duke of Gloucester,
would connive at a deed so contrary to the interest of the
Beauforts. It is just possible that the council, which must The council
*, ... responsible
have ordered the arrest, may, by some division of respon- for the
sibility which would blunt the edge of individual consciences,
have connived at the murder. It is almost as probable that
the duke was really guilty of treason and was put out of the
way to save the good character of others who would be impli-
cated if he were brought to trial. It is most probable that The secret
Suffolk knew more of the secret than any other of the lords, hy Suffolk.
The keeper of the privy seal, Adam Moleyns, bishop of Chiches-
ter, must have sealed the warrant for the arrest ; and in his
‘ Where in parlesey he dyed incontinent
For hevynesse and Iosse of regiment ;
And ofte afore he was in that sykenesse
In ρoynt ofz-death, and stode in sore distress ;
. he so dyed in full and hole creaunce
As a christen prince of royall blonde full clere,
Contryte in herte with full greate repentaunce.’
Cf. Stow, p. 386.