CHAP. his homage: and in a meeting at Huntingdon III. agreed with the earls of Arundel and Warwick, Dec. 10. and the lord Thomas Mortimer, "to depose

"Richard, and take the crown under his own custody." It was afterwards pretended that in adopting this resolution they had no design to deprive the king of the royal dignity in earnest, but merely to intimidate him by reducing him for a few days to the condition of a private individual. But whatever might be their real intention it was defeated by the opposition of the earls of Derby and Nottingham, who though they were willing to pursue the favourites unto death, would never consent to deprive the king of his crown.97. In the mean time the duke of Ireland at the head of five thousand men rapidly advanced towards the Thames. His first object was to pass that river, probably in consequence of secret instructions from Richard: but the appellants, acquainted with his motions, marched in the night by different roads from the neighbourhood of London; and occupied all the Dec. 20. passes before his arrival. He first made his appearance at Radcot. The width of the bridge had been diminished, so that only one man could cross at a time; three barriers were raised athwart the remainder; and the earl of Derby with a powerful force lay behind it. He turned immediately, to seek another passage, but was

97 See the charges against the duke (Rot. Parl. iii. 376) with his answer (ibid. 379).

III.

met in the front by the duke of Glocester, and CHAP. followed by the earl of Derby, who on his departure had crossed the bridge. In this emergency the duke threw off his armour; plunged into the river; and, quitting his horse, swam to the opposite bank. It was growing dark, and a report fortunately prevailed that he had been drowned. Molyneux, one of his valets, and a boy were killed; a few perished in the waters; the rest were stripped completely naked; and told that they might return home. After a lapse of some weeks it was announced, that the duke had escaped to Ireland.98

The appellants, on their return to London, Arrests of took from the mayor the keys of the city, and his friends required an audience of the king, who had re

tired into the Tower. The intimidated monarch Dec. 26. yielded to all their demands. A proclamation was issued for the arrest of the fugitive archbishop, duke, and earl: eleven of the royal confidants were secured in different prisons: and ten lords and knights, with the ladies Poynings, Mohun, and Molyneux, were dismissed from court and compelled to give security for their appearance before the next parliament. That Richard in his distress might not have a single person to whom he could unbosom himself, even his confessor, the bishop of Chichester, was forbidden to come into his presence.99

98 Rot. Parl. 236. Knyght. 2701-2703. Wals. 332.

99 Knyg 2705. Wal. 353. Otterburne, 174. Rym. vii. 566, 567, 568.

CHAP.

III.

ments.

1388.

Jan. 1.

Feb. 3.

In the writs which had already been issued for the convocation of parliament, the king had inImpeach structed the sheriffs to return such knights of the shire, as had not taken any part in the late quarrel. These writs were now recalled: and new ones were issued in the accustomed style.100 As soon as the parliament had been opened by the chancellor, the duke of Glocester rose, knelt to the king, and complained that he had been suspected of aspiring to the crown: but Richard immediately interrupted him by strongly asserting his own conviction of the innocence of his uncle. The lords appellants then exhibited thirty-nine articles of impeachment against the five appellees: the latter, with the exception of sir Nicholas Bramber, who was in prison, were called, but did not answer to their names; and judgment was immediately prayed against them for their default. But the decision was put off till the next day: and all the judges, with the exception of sir William Skipwith, were arrested on their seats in court, and committed to separate cells in the Tower, 101

Feb. 4.

66

upon

"the

The next morning the king called sages of the common and civil law," to give to the lords their opinion respecting the bill of impeachment; who unanimously declared that it was in all its parts informal and illegal. The peers, however, resolved to proceed: they were

100 Rym. vii. 566. Rot. Parl. iii. 400.

101 Rot. Parl. iii. 228-236. Knyght, 2706, Wals, 334.

bound, they said, by no other law than the law CHAP. and custom of parliament; the kingdom of England had never been governed by the civil law; nor would they, in the exercise of their jurisdiction, be guided by the practice of the lower courts. With the assent of the king the appeal was declared to be "good and effectual accord"ing to the law and course of parliament." The appellants again demanded judgment: but the house adjourned till the next day, when the demand was repeated, and the primate instantly rising, observed, that in obedience to the canons, which forbade the clergy to interfere in judgments of blood, he and the other prelates should depart but that, before their departure, they would protest that their absence should neither create any prejudice to their own rights as peers, nor detract from the effect of such judgment as might be given by the temporal lords without their concurrence. All the bishops and abbots immediately left the house.102

Eight days were spent in examining the act of impeachment. It gave a detailed history of the conduct of the appellees from the commencement of the late parliament: attributed to them several projects too absurd to deserve belief: and averred that their constant aim had been to compass the destruction of the lords commissioners, the appellants, and their associates. Of the thirty-nine articles contained in

102 Rot. Parl. 236, 257. 244.

Feb. 5.

III.

Judg

ments.

Feb. 15.

CHAP. this instrument, fourteen were declared to amount to treason: the accused were found guilty of them all: and the duke, the earl, and Tresilian were separately adjudged to suffer the death of traitors, and to forfeit their property to the king. The fate of the archbishop, on account of the novelty of the case, was reserved for future deliberation; and in the mean time, his temporalties were confiscated. But of these victims three were already beyond their reach. The earl of Suffolk had arrived at Paris. He was kindly received by the French king, but died of despair before the end of the year. The duke of Ireland had found an asylum in Holland; and the archbishop was still concealed in Northumberland.103 But Tresilian, who had disguised himself, and occupied a lodging in front of the Feb. 19. palace, was betrayed by a servant, brought before the lords, and hurried away to execution. Feb. 20. The next day the same fate befel sir Nicholas Bramber, who in vain protested his innocence, and offered wager of battle to his accusers.

103 The duke died at Lovain in 1392, of a wound received in hunting a wild boar. The archbishop, at the request of the government, was translated by the pope from York to St. Andrews. But as the Scots did not admit the authority of Urban, he sailed to Flanders, accepted a small curacy, and served it till his death. The bishop of Ely the chancellor, was translated to York, Fordham of Durham to Ely, Skirlaw of Bath and Wells to Durham, and Ergham of Salisbury to Bath and Wells. By these translations the friends of the appellants were exalted, those of the king depressed. Rym. vii. 574 -577. All these changes took place during the sitting of parliament. Rot. Parl. 237, 238. Knyght, 2709.