Referred to
the judges.
Second set
of charges.
Charges of
malversa-
tion.
Suffolk
asserts his
innocence.
Jj2 Constitutional History. [chap.
John de la Pole as husband of the little heiress of the Beau-
forts ɪ ; he had advised the release of the duke of Orleans, and
had conspired with him to urge Charles VII to recover his
kingdom ; he had promised the surrender of Anjou and Maine,
had betrayed the king’s counsel to the French, had disclosed
to them the condition of the king’s resources, and had by secret
dealing with Charles prevented the conclusion of a lasting
peace, even boasting of the influence which he possessed in the
French court2 ; he had likewise prevented the sending of
reinforcements to the army in France, had estranged the king
of Aragon and lost the friendship of Brittany. On the 12th
of February these articles were read and referred to the judges,
and the discussion was adjourned at the king’s discretion.
The delay gave time for a fresh indictment to be drawn up.
On the 7th of March the lords resolved that Suffolk should
be called on for his answer ; and on the 9th eighteen additional
articles were handed in by the commons. These, which may
be regarded as a second and final indictment, chiefly comprised
charges of maladministration, malversation, misuse of his power
and influence with the king, the promotion of unworthy per-
sons, the protection of William Taillebois, and the sacrifice of
the English possessions in Normandy by a treacherous compact
with the king of France3. Suffolk was tlɪen brought from the
Tower and received copies of both the bills. On the 13th he
stated his own case in parliament : he denied with scorn the
charge that he had or could have planned the king’s deposition ;
as for the matters of fact contained in the eight articles, the
rest of the council were as much responsible as he ; his words
had been perverted to a meaning which they would not bear.
ɪ The marriage of the two children was celebrated after the arrest ; Rot.
Parl. v. 177.
2 This was possibly a reference to the language which he had used in
the Privy Chamber, when attempting to excuse himself from acting as
ambassador in 1444; above, p. 142 ; 'I have had great knowledge among
the parties of your adversaries in France,’ &c. ; Ord. vi. 33. Here, how-
ever, the speech is said to have been made in the Star Chamber. ‘ He
declared openly before the lords of your council here being, that he had his
place in the council house of the French king as he had here, and was there
as well trusted as he was here, and could remove from the said French
king the priviest man of his council if he would ; ’ Rot. Parl. v. 179.
3 Rot. Parl. v. 179-182.
XVIIi.] Submission of Suffolk. iɔɜ
The next day the chief justice asked tlɪe lords to advise the king;
but the question was again deferred, and it was not until the
17 th that the compromise was effected which would, as it was
supposed, save the duke and satisfy the commons. All the lords Compro-
‘ thenne beyng in Towne ’ were called into the king’s chamber ;
Suffolk was admitted and knelt before the king. The chancellor
reminded him that he had not put himself on his peerage in
regard to the first bill of impeachment, and asked whether he
had anything further to say in that matter. The duke replied He does not
® .. η. . j r . Putħi∏ιself
by a forcible repetition of his denial and a protestation of in- o∏ his trial,
. . , bitt submits
nocence, and then placed himself entirely at the king s disposal,
thus not acknowledging any fault but showing himself unwilling
to stand a regular trial. The chancellor then declared the
king’s mind : as to the greater and more heinous charges in-
cluded in the first bill, the king held Suffolk ‘ neither declared
nor charged ɪ ; ’ as to the second bill, the royal intention was to
proceed not by way of judgment, but on the ground of the duke’s
submission : accordingly the king, by his own advice, ‘ and not The king
reporting him to the advice of his lords, nor by way of judgment, abroad,
for he is not in the place of judgment,’ ordered him to absent
himself from the king’s dominions for five years from the ɪst of
May following. The lords lodged a protest against this way of ɑæ j'jst]1"f
dealing with an accused person, insisting that the royal act done
without their advice and counsel should not be construed to
their prejudice in time to come ; this protest, however, which
was presented by the viscount of Beaumont, one of Henry’s
faithful friends, was itself part of the scheme of compromise2.
It was clear that Suffolk could not be tried formally unless the
king and council were prepared to face the storm of popular
indignation which, however undeservedly, had been aroused
against the policy of peace ; nor, if the matter were allowed to
1 The expression is obscure and might be equivalent to ‘ not pɪ oven : ’ but,
taken with the context, it seems to signify that the king regarded these
charges as prima facie groundless, that he in fact ‘ ignored ’ or threw out
the indictment.
2 Rot. Park v. 182, 183 ; cf. Paston Letters, i. 115. Mr. Gairdner's
edition of these letters, and his prefaces, which furnish an absolutely in-
valuable sketch of the history of this period, leave scarcely anything to be
added, and comparatively little to be cleared up.