treated the Queen that a successor might be named, at least appointed by an Act of Parliament. The Answer which they received on this occasion occupies but a short space upon the Journals, “ Martis, 16o Februarij, M1. “Comptroller and Mr. Secretary declared from the Queen's Highness "that she doubted not but the grave heads of this House did right well “consider that she forgot not the suit of this House for the Succession, the "matter being so weighty; nor could forget it; but she willed the young "heads to take example of the ancients.” . In 1566, a third effort was made. Camden, speaking of the Parliament which met in the beginning of November that year, says, “after they had passed a bill or two, they began to debate loudly about the Succession, for that the Queen as if she had vowed virginity, had now, in full eight years time thought nothing seriously of a husband: and on the one side the Papists propounded unto themselves the Queen of Scots, which had newly brought forth a son; on the other the Protestants, with different affections, propounded to themselves, some one man, and some and her; and every of them having respect to his own security and religion, presaged the storms of a most lamentable time, if she should die without a certain successor" a. In their Address at this time, the House of Commons having granted the Queen a subsidy, mixed the mention of the Succession with it. The close of this very Address is still preserved among the Royal Letters of the Lansdowne Collection. It is followed by two lines in cypher in the hand of Lord Burghley, after which come Queen Elizabeth's Remarks written in a hurried hand, as if in anger: "Let thes two concernings into one mening, and my counsell is all given; let not other regard them selves so holy as I have no corner left for me. Let them knowe that I knewe, thogh I followed not, that some of them wold my pure conscience better served me than ther lewde practises could availe with me. I knowe no reason whi any my privat answers to the Realme shuld serve for prologe to a subsidey vote; neither yet do I understand why suche audacitie shuld be used to make withoute my licence an Acte of my wordes; ar my wordes like lawiers bokes whiche nowe a dayes go to the wiar drawers to make subtall doings more plain? Is ther no hold of my speche without an Acte compel me to confirme? Shall my princely consent be turned to strengthen my wordes that be not of themselves substantives? Say no more at this time, but if thes fellowes wer wel answered and payed with lawfull coyne ther wold be fewer counterfaits amonge them" b. The following Letter from the Queen of Scots to the Lords of Eliza Camd. Hist. Eliz. fol. Lond. 1675. p. 83. beth's Council, was evidently written in the expectation that something would have been effected by the Debate and the Address. RICHT trusty and weilbelovit Cousingis we greit you hertlie weill. Quhair as we have understand be report of our familiar servitor Robert Malvile, the gude offers maid to our behuif be the Quene our gude sustir zour Soverane: we think our self oblista to do to hur quhatsoevir a gude suster and tender cousing aucht, quhair she findis sa greit thankfulnes: and that we culd not declair the affection we beir towert our said dearest suster bettir, nor be that quhilk we did quhen we luikit not to have broukit this lyff xijth houris in our lait sicknes: at quhilk tyme our meanyng wes that the speciall cair of the protectioun of our Sone suld rest uponn our said gude suster. We beleve ze have alwayes bene gude ministers to move zour Soverane to schaw hir awin reasonable favor to our avancement in that quhilk is richt, and firmlie luikis ze will sa continew. We tak oure self (as we doubt not bot ze knaw) to be the Quene zour Soverains nixt cousing, and, nixt herself and the lauchfull yssue of hir body, to have gretest interest of all uther to that quhilk hes bene, as is reportit, laitlie motionated in the Parliament Hous. And albeit we be not of mynd to preis our said gude Suster further then sall cum of hir awin gude plesor till put that mater in questioun. Zit be C caus in that cais we wilbe jugeit be the lawis of the Realme of England, we do effectuuslie require zou tọ have respect to justice with indifferency quhensoevir it sall pleis the Quene zour Soverane to put the same mater in deliberation. As to ws we will na wys insist thairin unto sic tyme as it sall pleis hir self to gif ws warning. We desir zou in the men tyme to have that opinion of ws, that as we meyn to continew all our lyfe in gude intelligence with the Quene zour Soverane and that Realme, sa gif ony Prince in earth wald offend the same, we wald withstand him at our uter power, and that ze can not advise our said dearest suster to extend hir favor towertis ony that sall recognosce it in a bettir sort. And so we commit zou to the protection of God. At Dunbar the xviij. day of November 1566. To the Lords of Zour gude Cousignace the Quenes Counsell. MARIE R. THE sickness spoken of in this Letter, in which Mary "looked not to have brooked this life twelve hours," is mentioned by Mr. Chalmers. He says, "On the 17th. October 1566 the Queen was seized with a dangerous fever, which during ten days brought her into a doubtful state; owing partly to her husband, and to her apprehension of some fresh conspiracy 99 Chalmers's Life of Mary Queen of Scots, edit, 8vo. 1822. pp. 296, 297. LETTER CLXXXIX. Queen Elizabeth to the Lady Hoby. [MS HARL. 7035. p. 161.] After a specimen of Queen Elizabeth's anger, it will not be ill-timed to place before the reader a specimen of her kindness in condolence, as conveyed in a Letter to the Lady Hoby upon the death of her husband. Sir Thomas Hoby went ambassador to France April 4th. 1566. Lord Burghley has the following entry relating to his death that year, in his Notes of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth. "July 13th. Sir Thomas Hobby died at Paris, and the Lady his wife, being then with child, brought his body afterward into England. She being great with child, which was born in England, and christened by the name of Posthumus." a MADAM ALTHOUGH We heare that since the death of your husband, our late Ambassador, Sr Thomas Hoby, you have received, in France, great and comfortable courtesyes from the French King, the Queen Mother, the Queen of Navarre and sundry others, yet we made accompt that all these layd together cannot so satisfye you as some testimony and sparke of our favour, with the application of the late service of your Husband, and of your own demeanour there: wherefore though you shall receive it somewhat lately in time, yet we assure you the same proceedeth only of the late knowledge of your return. And therefore we let you know that the service of your Husband was to us so acceptable, as next yourself and your children we have not Murdin's State Papers, p. 762. the meanest loss of so able a Servant in that calling. And yet since it hath so pleased God to call him in the entry of this our Service, we take it in the better part, seeing it hath appeared to be Gods pleasure to call him away, so favourably to the service of him, especially in the constancy of his duty towards God, wherein, we hear say, he dyed very commendably. And for your self, we cannot but let you know that we hear out of France such singular good reports of your duty well accomplished towards your husband, both living and dead, with other your sober, wise, and discreet behaviour in that Court and Country, that we think it a part of great contentation to us, and commendation of our Country, that such a Gentlewoman hath given so manifest a testimony of virtue in such hard times of adversity. And therefore though we thought very well of you before, yet shall we hereafter make a more assured account of your virtues and gifts, and wherein soever we may conveniantly do you pleasure, you may be thereof assured. And so we would have you to rest yourself in quietness, with a firm opinion of our especiall favour towards you. Given under our Signet at our City of Oxford the . . of September 1566: the eight year of our Reign. Your loving Friend ELIZABETH, R. |