The Press. — London, England, 1858-04-03 00:00:00

searching glare of history, it is like Melrose ‘ - they in the daytime, when the sunbeams 'ld but to flout" its ruins; but to the eye a romance, it is like the same edifice viewed beneath the " pale moonlight," when all its defects are withdrawn iuto the shade, and its beauties heightened and idealized. Mr. Fronde chosen to criticise the Cardinal exclu- Avely by the merciless light of facts. But we think that even so he has underrated him. 're were points in Pole's character which lenge admiration under every aspect. His elegance of mind, his literary power, and his ,larship demand a less reluctant acknow igment than Mr. Fronde has accorded !ni ; and we think it possible that the cy of his career may admit of a less un airable construction than the historian has led. It was of course necessary that Lenry should be exculpated, as well as that • one who ventured to rebuke him should ilified ; yet we know not if we are too self tplacent in fancying that we discern an ler and more creditable motive for Mr. ~ode's portraiture of Pole. We think it possible that, in drawing a character like the Cardinal, Mr. Fronde kept a close watch upon himself. None can feel more deeply the ro mance of a dying creed: none touch with more graceful reverence on the weakness of its lingering disciples, than he who has chosen for the labour of his life the vindication of the House of Tudor. We sometimes imagine that Mr. Fronde must have set himself this task as a species of penance, and that, in praising and condemning the characters of the period in an inverse proportion to bin own aympathy with their position, he is making a voluntary atonement for earlier expressions of opinion. The merits of Cromwell are perhaps mag nified to much about the same extent as those of Pole are diminished. We quote the following passage in preference to that in which Crom well is specially delineated, as well on account of the fine general truths which it expresses, as because it is evidently intend; i to convey Mr. Froude's idea of the class of men among whom Cromwell should be ranked : The intercession was bravely ventured ; hut it was in vain. The illegal acts of a minister who Lad been trusted with extraordinary powers were too patent for denial; and Cranmer himself was forced into a passive acquiescence, while the enemies of the Reformation worked their revenge, Heresy and truth, treason and patriotism ! these are words which in • war of parties change their meaning with the alternations of success, till time and fate have pronounced the last interpretation, and human opinions and sympa thies bend to the deciding judgment. But while the struggle is still in progress—while the partizans on either side ex claim that bush is with them, and error with their anta gonists, and the minds of this man and of that man are so far the only arbiters—those, at such a time, are not the least to be commended who obey for their guide the law as it in fact exists. Men there are who need no such di rection, who follow their own course—it may be to a glorious success, it may be to as glorious a death. To such proud natures the issue to themselves is of trifling moment. They live for their work or die for it, as their Almighty Father wills. Hut the law in a free country can not keep pace with genias. It reflects the plain sentiments of the better order of average men ; and if it so happen, PS in a perplexed world of change it will happen and must, that a statesman, or a prophet, is beyond his age, Slid in collision with a law which his conscience forbids him to obey, he bravely breaks it, bravely defies it, and either win s the victory in his living person, or, more often, wins it in his death. In fairness, Cromwell should have been tried ; hut it would have added nothing to his chances of escape. He could not disprove the accusations. He could bat have said that he had done right, not wrong—a plea which would have been but a fresh crime. But, in the deafening storm of denunciation which burst out, the hastiest vengeance was held the greatest jus►ice. Instead of criticising this passage at length, or offering any counter-estimate of our own, we shall content ourselves with extracting another portrait from Mr. Froilde's fourth volume which in our opinion exactly hits off the character here so loft►ly depicted : The excellent Paget, on the other hand, the cleverest of living men, the father of that whole race of English states men who, finding their lot cast for them in hard times, have trusted more to intellect than to virtue, improved the opportunny to give to hie friend Petre a lesson in diplo macy and on the character of the man with whom he would have to deal. With regard to the King himself, we have already expressed an opinion that Mr. Froude's idea of him does not differ so widely from that of other historians as ho seems to believe him self. It is widely enough removed from both Lingard and Mackintosh, who from different points of view have arrived at the same con clusion. But, in the absence of any strong searching Abbey gild but of roman( b en eath ' defects al beauties I has rhos sively by think the There we challenge elegance scholar h. ]cdgment them ; at policy of favourabl' adopted. Henry sh ' any one w be vilified complacer other and Froude's possible tl Cardinal, himself. mance of more grim it s lingerir for the lat House of Mr. Frou( as a specit and conde in an inve with their atonement The me nified to n of Pole are passage in well is spe o f th e fine as because Mr. Froud a h em Crol The inters vain. The it with extisorl Cranmer him while the ene Heresy and t' which in a w alternations c the last Intel thies bend to is still in prol claim that ti gonista, and 1 far the only least to be c, as it in fact e rection, who glorious two such proud n moment. T Almighty Far not keep pm of the better in a perplexe that a states' etellwyilr THE PRESS, APRIL 3, 1858. religious or political prejudice, historians have painted Henry VIII. in colours only a little less favourable than Mr. Fronde. On the points wherein he differs we do not think that he has established his own views, even if ho has shaken theirs. What were the motives that principally actuated the King in the Reformation ? Public policy, replies Mr. Fronde. His jealousy of power, reply others. But who shall say how often the two may or may not have coincided? Then, again, was the destruction of the monasteries caused by a hatred of the monkish superstition, or by a longing for the monkish revenues? Neither perhaps would be a fair answer to the ques tion. Having alienated the ancient nobility by his quarrel with the Pope, it became evi dent to Henry that a new order of nobility must be created and endowed, attached to the Throne at once by interest and by gratitude. For this purpose the estates of the Church formed a convenient resource. And we be lieve the historian who assigns neither a higher nor a lower motive to the dissolution of the religious houses will be the least liable to error. It is certain to us that Henry had no spiritual sympathy with the Reformation. We doubt, indeed, whether he had any spi ritual sympathies at all. As much, indeed, is virtually admitted by Mr. Fronde when he says of him, referring to the Pilgrim age of Grace, that " he would yield " liberally to the substantial interests of " the people, but he would yield little to their " imaginative sympathies." Enthusiasm, or highwrought devotion, whether of a More or a Wishart, was foreign to his nature, and he could make no allowance for the susceptibili ties of either. His temperament was "high and dry." Such a prince was admirably cal culated to be an executive instrument of the Reformation—as those men often carry out great movements with the most practical suc cess whose zeal is tempered by a wholesome element of doubt. There is then some proba bility that the temporary overflow of enthu siasm will not be mistaken for the regular stream of public opinion, and that the vessel embarked upon the flood will not presently be stranded when the waters have subsided into the new channel forced out for them. We conceive, therefore, that Henry VIII. may have performed the work intrusted to him by Providence in the most effective manner, and yet be very far from being entitled to the cha racter of a warm Protestant on the one hand, or a reckless despoiler on the other. In his chequered career of matrimony the King's worst error was the first. We can see no legitimate excuse for his behaviour to Ca therine of Arragon. But on subsequent occa sions we really think Henry was to be pitied The only three cases with which we are con cerned are Anne Boleyn, Anne of Cleves, and Catherine Howard. Now, in the first instance, if the lady was innocent, we cannot doubt that Henry believed her to be guilty. In the second he was manifestly imposed upon by in terested parties ; and his conduct to the Queen, who seems to have acquiesced in his judgment with some composure, was certainly not worse than that of George IV. under similar circum stances. In the case of Catherine Howard there was no doubt about her guilt; and as she had lost her virtue before marriage, we need not suppose any peculiar properties in the King to account for her laxity afterwards. The case of Anne Boleyn cannot of course be got over quite so easily. If she was innocent, the n Henry was culpably precipitate. If she was guilty, then there is more ground for some of Mr. Froude's suggestions than as yet wo arc ready to allow. On the third point—namely, Henry's alleged cruelty—Mr. Fronde has laboured with less success, perhaps, than on any other. Not that Henry was really cruel in the proper sense of the word. He could not have been classed with butchers and surgeons, " which " is cruel by law." Cruelty is not a charac teristic of the English race. But he was cal lous to the suffering of (Alit 1.8, and he was ex cessively irritable himself That same jealousy of power which was inheleut in his family, aggravated by the existence of rival preten ions to the crown, was latterly, under the action of disease, increased to the mingled ferocity and suspicion of an old Greek tyrant. The executions of Lord Decree and Lady Salis bury were atrocious ; nor has Mr. Froude made any way towards reconciling us to the fate of Lord Surrey. Henry would not have used the Brazen Bull ; but neither the agony of relatives nor the claims of age or sex were permitted to stand between him and the effect of the most shadowy suspicions, the most remote dangers, or the merest caprice of justice. In justice both to ourselves and Mr. Froude we shall give the King's character in his own words : Henry had many faults. They have been exhibited in the progress of the narrative : I need not return to them. But his position was one of unexampled difficulty; and by the work which he accomplished, and the conditions, in ternal and external, under which his t as k was allotted to him, he, like every other man, ought to be judged. He was inconsistent ; he can bear the reproach of it. He ended by accepting and approving what he had commenced with persecuting; yet it was with the honest inconsistency which distinguishes the conduct of most men of practical ability in times of change, and even by virtue of which they obtain their success. if at the commencement of the movement he had regarded the Eucharist as a "remem brance," he must either have concealed his convictions or he would have forfeited his throne; if he had been a sta tionary bigot, the Reformation might have waited fur a century, and would have been conquered only by an inter necine war. But as the nation moved the King moved, leading it, but not outrunning it ; checking those who went too fast, dragging forward those who lagged behind. The Conser vatives, all that was sound and good among them, trusted him because he so long continued to share their Conserva tism; and when he threw it aside he was not reproached with breach of confidence, because his own advance had accompanied theirs. Protestants have exclaimed against the six Articles Bill; Romanists against the Act of Supremacy. Philosophers complain that the prejudices of the people were needlessly violated, that opinions should have been allowed to be free, and the reform of religion have been left to be accomplished by reason. The Six Articles Bill was cruel ; yet the governing classes even among the laity were unanimous in its favour. The King was not converted by a sudden miracle ; he believed the traditions in which he had been trained; his eyes, like the eyes of others, opened but slowly ; and unquestionably, bad he conquered for himself in their fulness the modern principles of toleration, he could not have governed by them a nation which was itself intolerant. Perhaps, of all living Englishmen who shared Henry's faith, there was not one so little desirous in himself of enforcing it by violence. His personal exer tions were ever to mitigate the action of the law, while its letter was sustained : and England at its worst was a har bour of refuge to the Protestants compared to the Nether. lands, to France, to Spain, or even to Scotland. That the Humanists should have regarded hint as a tyrant is natural; and were it true that English subjects owed fealty to the Pope, their feeling was just. But, however desirable it may be to leave religious opinion unfettered, it is certain that, if England was legitimately free, she could tolerate no difference of opinion on a question of alle giance, so long as Europe was conspiring to bring her back into slavery. So long as the Romanists refused to admit without mental reservation that, if foreign enemies invaded this country in the Pope's name, their place must be at the side of their own sovereign, " religion " might palliate the moral guilt of their treason, but it could not exempt them from its punishment. • • • • Something, too, ought to be said of his individual exer tons in the detail's of State administration. In his earlier life, though active and assiduous, he found leisure for elegant accomplishments, for splendid amusements, for relaxations careless, extravagant, sometimes questionable. As his life drew onwards his lighter tastes disappeared, and the whole energy of his intellect was pressed into the business of the commonwealth. Those who have eXamined the printed State papers may form some impres sion of his industry from the documents which are his own composition, and the letters which he wrote anti received: but only persons who have seen the original manuscripts, who have observed th e traces of his pen in aide-notes and corrections, and the handwritings of his secretaries in diplomatic commissions. in drafts of Acts of Parliament, in expositions and formulsries, in articles of faith, in procla— mations, in the countless multitude of documents of ell sorts, secular or ecclesiastical, which contain the real his tory of this extraordinary reign, only they can realize the extent of labour to which be sacrificed himself, and which brought his life to a premature close. His personal faults were great, and he shared, besides them, in the errors of his age ; but far deeper blemishes would be hut as scars upon the features of a sovereign who in trying times sus tained nobly the honour of the English name, anti carried the commonwealth securely through the hardest crisis i n its history. Now really, after this, where is the affectation of seeming "to be unconscious that the cha " racter of the King, as presented in these " volumes, is something different from that " which modern tradition hus described to " him"? Different it is, no doubt. But the difference is no greater than may he expected between the operations of any two indepen dent minds. Our general estimate of his position in English history is not altered. There is but one sentence in the above sage from which it is necessary to above pas- record 4 our