was then sufficiently ripe or decided for an insurrection; or that he was watching events, with the purpose of adhering at last to the strongest. {168a} When Richard made his charge it should seem that he advanced from his right centre, because the ancient historians state that he “rode out _of the syde_ of the range of his battaile” (Hall, fo. 34; Grafton, fo. 851); “rode out _of the side of_ the range of his battel” (Holinshed, fo. 759). {168b} Sir William Stanley, whose services were so opportunely given, and of such inestimable value, was requited by Henry’s putting him to death, in 1496, on a very questionable and frivolous charge. See Chap. II. {169a} The historical authorities for this paper are Hall, Holinshed, Grafton, Baker, Speed, Stow, Dugdale, Sandford, and vol. vi. _Rot. Parl._ {169b} Hutton’s _Bosworth Field_, p. 75. {169c} _Ibid._ 129. {170} Baker, 235; Stow; Hutton, 143. Sandford’s _Genealogical History_, p. 410. A tablet has been recently (in 1856) put up on one of the new buildings near Bow Bridge, with an inscription treating the locality as if it were the supposed place of the final interment of Richard III.; but although it may perhaps be a disappointment to those who have caused the tablet to be placed there, to learn that the correctness of their theory is not admitted by others, still it is only proper to mention, that there does not appear to be any authority for such a supposition: indeed, after his remains had been pulled out of the grave and got rid of at the river, it is not likely that anybody would know or care what became of them. {171} William Catesby was a lawyer of eminence in the reign of Richard III., was one of his chief counsellors, and was the Speaker of the House of Commons in the only Parliament held in the reign of Richard III. He was a descendant from an ancient family at Lapworth, near Birmingham. He is usually called Sir William Catesby by historians; but is certainly only treated as an esquire, not as a knight, in the act of attainder of 1st Henry VII. (see _Rot. Parl._ 1st Henry VII. A.D. 1485, vol. vi. fo. 275, Appendix No. 3), and in the act of the reversal of the attainder in favour of his son and heir, George Catesby, in the 11th year of the reign of Henry VII. (see _Rot. Parl._ 11th Henry VIII. A.D. 1495, vol. vi. fo. 490; in which the latter is called the son and heir “of William Catysby Squier,” which seems tolerably conclusive of his not having been knighted). {172a} _Rot. Parl._ 1st Henry VII. (in November, 1485), vol. v. fo. 276. See Appendix No. 3. {172b} As if to make the injustice and mockery of such a proceeding the more glaring, the act of Parliament states the battle to have been fought in the first year of Henry’s reign (1485); but it might perhaps have perplexed Henry to have asked him at what exact date the first year of his reign commenced, and how men could commit treason against him before the commencement of it.