London churches to receive the communion; but there being no one to officiate, the doors were shut. In 1567, a congregation assembling at Plumbers' Hall, that adopted a form used by the Protestants in their congregations during queen Mary's days, were interrupted by the sheriffs. Bishop Grindal did not condemn this book, but required them to conform. Several were imprisoned for more than a year. These differences and divisions were stimulated by the arts and practices of the papists, some of whom assumed the character of Protestant ministers. In 1567, a friar named Cummin was detected in Kent, assuming the character of a Puritan. In the following year, one named Heath, while preaching in Rochester cathedral, dropped a letter, which excited suspicion; on examination, it was found that he was a Jesuit in disguise. Among his papers was a licence from the pope, permitting him to preach any doctrine likely to cause divisions among Protestants.

During the period already noticed, the labour of the administration of affairs rested mainly upon sir William Cecil, but the queen did not yet fully appreciate the value of his counsels. The earl of Pembroke and others, attached to Romish principles, or influenced by selfish views, at times had the chief control; sufficiently, at least, on some occasions, to divert the queen from acting with that full decision which her critical position demanded. Therefore, in this first portion of her reign, there were efforts to conciliate the papists, which past experience must have sufficiently shown would be nugatory, and also, at times, hesitation and half measures on questions of foreign policy. These efforts must not be imputed to indifference respecting the errors of popery; it was ever the desire of Elizabeth to conciliate her people; and certainly no English Sovereign was ever so popular, so far as relates to her Protestant subjects. Among other measures for pleasing the people were the queen's "progresses," or visits to different parts of the country. These were begun in

the first period of her reign; in this manner she visited the university of Cambridge, in 1564, and that of Oxford, in 1566. On both occasions, she took much interest in the ceremonials, and when replying to the addresses, exhibited her attainments in the learned languages.

Some notice of the two most prominent characters among the English nobility and statesmen, who have been already mentioned, appears desirable; the earl of Leicester especially claims attention.

Robert Dudley was son to the duke of Northumberland, beheaded in queen Mary's reign. He was implicated, with the rest of his family, in the proceedings of the short reign of his sister-in-law, and was condemned with others; but not having taken an active part, he was pardoned. On the accession of Elizabeth he was immediately promoted by her, and became her principal favourite. He is said to have been born on the same day. They were companions in early youth, and the Dudleys had been favoured by her brother Edward. He obtained honours and large grants, evidently exercising great influence over the queen. He married Amy, the daughter of sir John Robsart, in 1550; her death took place in September, 1560, at Cumnor, where he had sent her to reside for a short time, at the house of Forster, one of his retainers. It was reported that she broke her neck by falling down a flight of stairs; but many believed that she was murdered by Forster, and sir Richard Varney, the principal attendant of Leicester; though no legal charge was ever brought forward.

Dudley thus became a widower at the time when there were two queens in Britain, both of whom were desired by their subjects to marry. With Elizabeth he was a great favourite. In 1564 she created him earl of Leicester, and recommended Mary to make him her consort. He was anxious to obtain the hand of his own queen, but did not succeed; his party urged the union, but the wiser councillors showed how

inexpedient it was. Thus, in 1566, when Cecil stated the reasons in favour of an union between the queen and the archduke Charles, and against the earl of Leicester, his arguments were, that by marrying the earl nothing would be increased in riches, estimation, or power; that it might countenance the slanderous speeches respecting the queen; that he would only plan to strengthen his party; that he was "defamed by the death of his wife;" that he was far in debt; that he would be likely to prove unkind or jealous. Truly an unamiable portrait, if not very much overcharged. A woman of judgment, like Elizabeth, might well hesitate to give Dudley her hand; though, for various reasons, it might suit her rather to favour, than to have opposed to her, a man who had so much influence with the nobility. Had there really been grounds for the slanderous speeches, Cecil would scarcely have adverted to them in the manner he did. In a communication from the French ambassador to his court, July, 1569, he states, that the principal nobility urged Leicester either to take proper measures for effecting a marriage with the queen, in which they were willing to aid him, or else to avoid that behaviour which led to public_remarks upon his conduct. Leicester said, that he hoped to bring about the union, and promised that if he found himself not likely to succeed, he would attend to their advice. A few days afterwards, the queen declared that she had no intention to marry the earl, and from that time they avoided the intimacy which had been remarked upon. Surely this contemporary evidence shows that there is no ground for the gross assertions of popish historians.

The post of favourite, and his own haughty temper, placed Leicester in collision with other courtiers and statesmen; but Elizabeth kept all these towering spirits in some degree of order, while she made one balance another. The licentious character of Dudley cannot, however, be doubted; about 1572, he privately married the widowed lady Sheffield, but afterwards denied

the marriage, and in 1578 married lady Essex. Yet, with these charges of licentiousness, and many dark surmises of oppressions and poisonings, Leicester maintained outward decorum, favoured the Puritans, and was looked up to by them as their protector. Unquestionably, there is much mystery about his character; he evidently was implicated in many of the plots and intrigues of those days, even against Elizabeth, yet he contrived to extricate himself, while others went on till

they suffered. At one period he was in some degree connected with the popish plots against the queen; he repeatedly betrayed the state secrets to the French ambassador, and was easily led to join in the endeavours to displace Cecil, fomented by the foreign popish powers. Subsequently, the papists circulated a libellous account of his actions, which represents him as one of the most complete monsters that ever lived. Turner justly remarks upon the mystery respecting Leicester, and thinks that he desired this should be the case. It is evident, that he was a man of consummate abilities and unbounded ambition, wholly unrestrained by principle. He sought to obtain power without scrupling the means, but being crafty and circumspect, he avoided the common fate of ambitious statesmen. It must be allowed that he was a bad man, yet probably not so bad as he has been described. Elizabeth, no doubt, found him a supporter of her power, while he knew how to flatter and please in her hours of amusement.

Thomas Ratcliffe, earl of Sussex, was another leading character among Elizabeth's councillors. At her accession, he was lord deputy of Ireland, where he checked the eager desires of the papists to begin a persecution, which at last was only prevented by queen Mary's death. Elizabeth appointed him president of the north, a post of difficulty from the state of Scottish affairs. He distinguished himself in suppressing a rebellion in the northern counties. He was honest, brave, and loyal, employed in all difficult services, yet not suffi ciently valued or rewarded, owing to the intrigues of

Leicester, with whom he was personally at variance; so that the queen, more than once, found it difficult to keep them from breaking out into deadly feuds. He died in 1583, universally regretted as one of the few statesmen of undeviating integrity.

These and others who have been already referred to, were some of the leading nobles of the court of Elizabeth, whom the bard graphically describes, though with perhaps somewhat of poetic phraseology, when he says,

Girt with many a baron bold,

Sublime their starry fronts they rear;
And gorgeous dames, and statesmen old,
In bearded majesty appear.

In the midst a form divine,

Her eye proclaims her of the British line;
Her lion port, her awe-commanding face,
Attemper'd sweet to virgin grace.

What strings symphonious tremble in the air!
What strains of vocal transport round her play!

The native population of Ireland were in hostility to their English lords during the whole of this period. One of them, claiming to be the rightful earl of Tyrone, assumed the title of O'Neal, in the close of queen Mary's reign; thereby laying claim to the sovereignty of Ulster. So determined was his opposition to England, that he condemned one of his followers to death for eating English biscuit. But when the earl of Sussex gathered a force against him, Shan O'Neal submitted, and attended the court of Elizabeth with a band of native followers, to make excuses for past violence. The queen promised that justice should be done respecting his claims to the earldom of Tyrone. But on his return, he listened to the popish priests, and proclaimed himself a chastiser of heretics, burning the cathedral of Armagh because Protestant worship had been celebrated there. Sir Henry Sidney, then lord deputy, marched against him with some natives, who had feuds with Shan O'Neal. The latter sought an alliance with the Scots, lately settled in Ulster ;

Y