heiress (Anne St. Leger) was now handed down one generation in the race of Grey, and destined to become the future wife of Thomas afterwards second marquess of Dorset. By an act of parliament passed in 1482, the estates of the duchy of Exeter were settled upon this projected marriage, a certain slice being at the same time apportioned off for the advantage of the queen's younger son the lord Richard Grey. On the 16th May, 1483, the council of the protector Gloucester directed "a lettre to the bisshope of Excestre to deliver the Duchesse of Escestre unto my lord of Buckingham," Gloucester taking the first opportunity to snatch this prize from the queen's family. By an act of Richard's parliament, the settlements made in favour of the heiress so singularly substituted were reversed, and in Nov. 1484 her father sir Thomas St. Leger was beheaded at Exeter. The quondam duchess was subsequently married to sir George Manners lord Roos, and it is in honour of the royal descent derived through her that the noble house of Manners displays on its shield a chief of France and England, and enjoys the title of Rutland once borne by her uncle Edmund of York, killed at the battle of Wakefield. That title (with the rank of earl) was first given to her son Thomas lord Roos by king Henry VIII. in 1525; and at the same time he bestowed the title of Exeter (with the rank of marquess) on Henry Courtenay earl of Devon, the grandson of king Edward IV. by his daughter Katharine.

Turning from this remarkable history-which has been developed for the first time by Mr. Nichols's researches, we may remark that king Edward was not less careful to provide for the future establishment of his own children. Alliances for the whole of his five daughters were contracted with the greatest princes of Europe: his eldest daughter Elizabeth, was betrothed to the dauphin of France; Cicely, the second, to James, heir apparent of Scotland; Anne to Philip comte of Charolais, son of Maximilian archduke of Austria; Mary to the king of Denmark; and Katharine to the infante John of Castille. All these alliances were arranged between the years 1474

and 1479; and in 1481 the prince of Wales was affianced to Isabella daughter of Francis duke of Britany. To Richard duke of York, the king's second son, was given the only daughter and heiress of John Mowbray duke of Norfolk, the representative of one of the sons of king Edward III. The princely child was in consequence created duke of Norfolk, earl Marshal and Warren, with all other the concomitant dignities of that house; and the marriage was solemnized at Westminster in January 1477-"the said Anne being then of the age of six years," and her baby husband not more than three! And though this young bride died in the course of a few years, her widower retained possession of her estates, in derogation to the claims of her heirs of blood-a royal prerogative which had been previously exercised when the earldoms of Lincoln and Salisbury were attached to the house of Lancaster, although not inherited by right of blood from the old Lacies and Longespés. This arrangement, however, was not without its fatal consequences; for, though the lord Berkeley, one of the coheirs of the house of Norfolk, was conciliated by the title of viscount in 1481, sir John Howard, a more able man, was thrown into active opposition, and afterwards materially contributed to the setting aside of king Edward's children.

We have entitled this article "The Reign of Edward the Fifth," and yet we have nearly occupied our space by the occurrences of the reign of his father. As we have already remarked, the reign of Edward V. was little else than the destruction of the arrangements of Edward IV. The princesses, one and all, lost their promised husbands; both the princes their lives: the queen's brother and son were sacrificed; and all the inferior supporters of her party were prosecuted to their destruction.

The Editor of the book before us does not affect to offer any important new lights on the much-discussed character and conduct of the chief actor in these tragedies. He justly remarks that the best history of the period is that by Mr. Sharon Turner, who during a long life devoted to historical studies was particularly attentive to

the career of Richard III. Mr. Nichols shows no ambition to add another name to the list of the paradoxical apologists of Richard; but he agrees in Mr. Sharon Turner's opinion that the usurper was carried beyond his first intentions, and attributes considerable influence to the ill advice of the duke of Buckingham. That nobleman had lived much about the court, whilst Gloucester was absent in the government of the North, and he was consequently able to convey false impressions and instil unjust suspicions of the designs of the king's maternal relatives.

Buckingham was deeply imbued with the evil ambition of the age, which the advantages of his birth and position had rather inflamed than satisfied. He was the representative of one of the sons of king Edward III. and one of the only two dukes, besides the dukes of York and Gloucester, then living in England-the fourth being the duke of Suffolk, brother-in-law of the late king. Buckingham had married one of the queen's sisters; but that alliance seems to have failed to attach him cordially to her race. It had been the king's doing, not his own; and the pride of the Staffords was rather offended than flattered by such a connection. He had, however, a greater grievance. The Bohuns, of whom he was the heir, had held the great office of constable of England, which had been allowed by Henry VI. to his grandfather the former duke; but Edward IV. had given it, as we have already seen, successively to earl Ryvers and the duke of Gloucester. Since the death of Henry VI. Buckingham considered himself entitled to the entire inheritance of the Bohuns, which had been formerly divided between the house of Lancaster and his own, as representatives of the original coheirs; but such lands as had descended to Henry VI. were still retained by the Crown. To attain the accomplishment of his claims, he resolved, upon the death of Edward IV., to make immediate court to the duke of Gloucester: and the effect of his bargain was, to put it into a few plain words "If you will make me Constable, I will make you King." This project was to that extent successful. It is matter of public and not secret history how actively Buckingham pro

moted the elevation of Richard to the throne, by his personal exertions in the city of London.

Richard also performed his part of the bargain. The duke of Buckingham takes quite the lion's share among the "Grants" recorded in the volume before

us.

The government of all Wales and the bordering English counties was at once placed in his hands: and no sooner was Richard fixed on the throne than he surrendered to his aspiring cousin the whole of the Bohun lands then remaining in the possession of the crown, and the much-coveted office of constable of England. Why Buckingham so soon, and so suddenly, started off from the usurper is not certainly known. So far as it appears, it was not the king's fault, but rather the duke's own overweening presumption. What more he could have desired, unless he actually aimed at the crown itself, it is difficult to imagine. Before his new acquisitions could be confirmed by parliament, he had rebelled, and paid the penalty of his rebellion. Though, as his act of attainder states, "now late daies stondyng and beinge in as greate favoure, tender trust, and affection with the kynge our sovreigne lorde as ever eny subgiet was with his prynce and liege lorde, as was notarily and openly knowen by all this reame,-not being content therwith, ne with the good and politique governaunce of his said sovereigne lorde, but replete with rancour and insatiable covetice," he rushed on to his destruction.

There were others besides Buckingham who had a keen eye to their own aggrandisement in the elevation of Richard. And foremost among them was John lord Howard, that "Jocky of Norfolk," who afterwards was faithful to Richard "to the death" on the field of Bosworth. We have already mentioned how Howard's claims as a coheir were, like Buckingham's, detained by the crown, and had been assigned to the maintenance of the late king's younger son. Howard, therefore, had a direct personal interest in setting aside the children of Edward IV.: and that interest was immediately gratified by the usurper, who at once made him duke of Norfolk and earl marshal, and his heir apparent earl of Surrey. The claims of the other co

heir were at the same time recognised by the viscount Berkeley being elevated to the dignity of earl of Nottingham, which had also belonged to the Mowbrays.

*

Nor was Richard unsupported by others of the principal nobility. His brother-in-law the duke of Suffolk favoured his claim; and when he assumed the throne, by taking his seat upon the marble chair in Westminster hall, he was supported by the duke of Suffolk as well as the new duke of Norfolk, one on either hand. Edward Grey lord Lisle, the queen's brother-in-law, also took part with the usurper, and was rewarded by being raised to the dignity of a viscount. The earl of Northumberland, with whom Richard had been associated in the north of England, espoused his cause, and conducted a military force to London to support it. The rest of the old nobility acquiesced in his conduct, if they did not abet it. The queen's friends were at once silenced and crushed: and it was not long before her princely boys were also sacrificed to the fears of the usurper, though when that crime was accomplished is a mystery which no historic research is probably destined to reveal.

Of Richard's favourite ministers, Lovell, Catesby, and Radclyffe, the two former occur in the present book as having received early promotion whilst their master was as yet Protector. To Lovell was given the castle and honour of Wallingford, and the office of chief butler of England, which had belonged to earl Ryvers. He afterwards became chamberlain of king Richard's household. Catesby was made chancellor of the earldom of March.

The incidents that belong to the usurpation of the throne by Richard are better known to our historians than those which attended his assumption

of the office of Protector, of which no authentic record has been preserved. All that is known is, that he assumed the office, but how or when we are .not informed. Mr. Sharon Turner was of opinion that Gloucester received his authority as Protector from a parliament of which the journals have been lost. He was led to form this supposition from the Croyland historian's phrase in senatu, when speaking of a discussion relative to the removal of the young king from the bishop of London's palace to the Tower (but which phrase must clearly be understood as implying a council only), and from having found among the Cottonian MSS. a speech delivered from the throne, to the three estates of the kingdom, as assembled in parliament, in the name of Edward V. and in his presence, as also before the duke of Gloucester." From the dates of certain documents that historian was further induced to assign this supposed meeting of parliament to the 19th of May, and to conjecture that the protectorate was inaugurated upon that day. Mr. Nichols (p. xiii.) has now ascertained, from the Patent Roll of this reign, that the office of Protector had been assumed by the duke of Gloucester at least so early as the 14th of the month: and, as for any meeting of parliament, it is clear that none took place. Writs for a parliament were issued in the name of Edward V. on the 13th of May, and it was to assemble after the customary interval of six weeks, viz. on the 25th of June; and the coronation of the young monarch was appointed to be celebrated two or three days before; but by that time Richard had matured his measures for seizing the throne, and the preparations for both solemnities were deferred, to be resumed only for the sake of the new monarch.

The speech to which Mr. Sharon

Turner referred is a very curious example of the politico-religious composition of an episcopal chancellor in the fifteenth century, and it is very carefully edited by Mr. Nichols in the present volume. It exists in three different states, or, to speak more precisely, the Chancellor sat down to his task at three several times, still working, in some measure, on the same materials. First he wrote a speech for the intended parliament of Edward V.: this is complete, but, as we have already seen, was never delivered. He next prepared a speech to open the parliament of Richard III., which it seems was originally intended to assemble on the 11th of November, 1483; this composition is imperfect, as it is probable that the meeting of parliament was again deferred before the right reverend chancellor had finished his composition. His third essay was actually delivered on the 23d of January following, as is proved by an abstract of its argument entered upon the parliament roll: but the speech itself is preserved only in an incomplete state. It is a point very strongly urged by Mr. Sharon Turner as one of the motives by which Richard was instigated, if not coerced, to set aside his nephew, that his authority as protector would have terminated with the young king's coronation, when he might have found himself in a situation of personal peril. But a passage of lord chancellor's Russell's speech conveys a very different impression :

In the meane tyme, (he says,) tylle rypenesse of yeres and personelle rule be, as by Godys grace they must onys be, concurrente togedyr, The power and auctorite of my lord protector is so behoffulle and of reason to be assented and establisshed by the auctorite of thys hyghe courte, that amonges alle the causes of the assemblynge of the parliamente yn thys tyme of the yere, thys ys the grettest and most necessarye furst to be affermed.

When this was written the chancellor knew that Edward's coronation was intended to be solemnised before the meeting of parliament; if, then, the "authority of the lord protector" was to be "established" by the parliament,

after the coronation, it is evident that Mr. Sharon Turner's view of the supposed effect of the latter ceremony must be incorrect.

As a further specimen of the chancellor's harangue, we add one other remarkable passage:

I see the policie of thys Reme in the tyme of holdynge of parliamentes grettly correspondente to the same maner of the Romanes. Thys ys the howse of the senate. The commons have ther apart. And lyke as yn thys house one tanquam consul makithe the questions, soo yn the lower howse in lyke wyse alle ys directed by the speker quasi per tribunum.

Valerie in the seconde boke of the memorable dictes and dedys of Rome rehersythe that, thowe the Tribunes of the peuple might not presume to entre withyn the courte of the Senatours, yet schulde they have setes withoute to examine what were decried by the nobles, suche decrees to be not avayleable unto the tyme they were ratified by the peuple. See the passynge of every act made in a parliament, and alle is oo thynge, that that the Romaynes did in ther tyme, and that that we do nowe in

thys the kynges most hyghe and soverayne

courte. Audiunt insule, attendunt populi de longe. The princes and lordes have the fyrst and principalle undrestondynge and knowlege of every gret thynge necessarye to be redressed, the lower peuple and commens herkene and attende uppon them. And when they agre eche to other [in their acts, then no]thynge can be

better.

The MS. Harl. 433, from which the text of this volume of the Camden Society is derived, is one of the most valuable authorities for the reign of Richard III., and as such has already been published to a slight extent by Rymer, and employed by Mr. Sharon Turner and our other historians: and we think that the Camden Society cannot devote itself to a better object than that of printing a further selection from it, accompanied by indexes as complete as those given in the present volume, for by that means alone can a variety of minute and multifarious particulars be rendered easy of reference, and thus eventually fall into their proper places in history and biography.

GENT. MAG. VOL. XLIII.

2 L

THE next letter will be found especially remarkable. The Dean assures Motte that he did not intend that any other bookseller than he should be concerned in the publication of his works. He intimates his determination to entrust the care of his posthumous writings to Mr. Pope, and expresses his hope that all his avowed productions should at some future time be issued in a collected edition. This was at last accomplished by Motte's successor, Charles Bathurst, under the editorship of Dr. Hawkesworth, in the year 1768.

Dublin, Jul. 15th, 1732.

S", I received your letter but two days ago, and will first answer the material part of it. Upon my word, I never intended that any but y'self should be concerned as printer or bookseller in any thing that shall be published with my consent while I am alive, or after my death by my executors. As to my posthumous things I shall intrust them to Mr. Pope, but with a strong recommendation that you alone may be employed: Supposing and being assured of your honest and fair dealing, which I have always found. I am likewise desirous that some time or other all that I acknoledge to be mine in prose and verse, which I shall approve of, with any little things that shall be thought deserving, should be published by themselves by you during my life (if it contains any reasonable time), provided you are sure it will turn to your advantage. And this you may say to Mr. Pope, as my resolution, unless he hath any material objections to it, which I would desire to know. For I ever intended the property as a bookseller should be onely in you, as long as you shall act with justice and reason, which I never doubted in the least; and I conceive that Mr. Pope's opinion of you is the same with mine.

I am so well recovered of my lameness, that I can ride in gambadoes and hope in some time to come to my stirrups. Iride twice or thrice a week about ten miles at a time, and I begin to walk the town, but with halting a little. I tryed your remedy

a good while, onely not with red lead; but I use at present onely a soap playster. If I should be able before summer is spent to ride with stirrups, and get more strength in the sinew above my left heel, so as to be able to get in and out of a ship and a boat without danger of a new wrench, by severall of which my cure hath been much put back, I did propose to go over and pass a month at Amesbury,* and then the winter with Mr. Pope; but God knows whether I shall find it possible. Pray thank Mrs. Motte in my name, for her kind remembrance, with my humble service. I had lately a letter from my Cozen Launcelot, in answer to one I sent by Mr. Jackson, who I believe forgot to give her a small present I troubled him to carry over it was only a piece of gold that goes here for 40sh, but with you is worth something less.

I received the box with the Bibles and Dr. Felton's books. The Bibles I think are very good; I hope you have included the charge of carriage to Chester, for I shall send you a Bank bill in two or three days of 8b. 12. 6d. If there be any more for the carriage, Mr. Jackson shall pay you. I desire my humble service and thanks to Dr. Felton; I have deliverd the three books as he has directed. I will write to Coz Launcelot soon.

I am your assured friend and very humble serv1.