defeat those which he now formally preferred against the Duke, which seemed almost like duplicates of the impeachment which the Duke had preferred against him. First, that he had conspired with Gondomar to take the Prince into Spain, there to convert him to the Romish faith; that, whilst in Spain, the Duke had flattered the King of Spain with the hopes of this conversion; that he had absented himself from Divine service at the embassy, and had attended the Romish rites, adoring their sacraments--a course which induced the Spanish court to ask greater concessions from King James.[298] These articles, with others of less import, were followed by an impeachment from the House of Commons, who were fearful that Bristol might not be able to substantiate the charge of treason, of which they clearly saw the weakness, from the absence of motives and of proofs.[299] On the eighth of May, therefore, “a large impeachment” was drawn up against him; it was framed by six of the ablest lawyers in the house;[300] and related to the Duke’s engrossing of offices--his holding at the same time the posts of Lord Admiral and of Warden of the Cinque Ports--his not guarding the narrow seas--his lending a ship called the “Vanguard” to the French King--his selling offices and honours--his waste of the Crown revenues--and, finally, his giving physic to King James at the time of his sickness,[301] applying a plaster to his chest; and that both the potion and the plaster were of a nature unknown “to surgeons, apothecaries, and physicians, and had been followed by dangerous consequences.” Footnote 297: Brodie, ii. p.89. Footnote 298: Brodie. Footnote 299: Heylyn, 143. Footnote 300: Heylyn, in his life of Laud, recites these names--Glandville, Herbert, Sheldon, Pym, Wansford, and Sherland; the prologue made by Sir Dudley Digges, and the epilogue by Sir John Eliot.--Heylyn, 143. Footnote 301: Inedited letter in the State Paper Office, 1623, vol. 28.