The History of England in Three Volumes, Vol. I., Part B.: From Henry III. to Richard III.
David Hume · en
But the spectacle the most shocking to every one, who retained any
sentiment either of honor or humanity, still remained. The earl of
Rutland appeared, carrying on a pole the head of Lord Spenser, his
brother-in-law, which he presented in triumph to Henry as a testimony of
his loyalty. This infamous man, who was soon after duke of York by
the death of his father, and first prince of the blood, had been
instrumental in the murder of his uncle, the duke of Glocester;[**] had
then deserted Richard, by whom he was trusted; had conspired against
the life of Henry, to whom he had sworn allegiance; had betrayed his
associates, whom he had seduced into this enterprise; and now displayed,
in the face of the world, these badges of his multiplied dishonor.
* Walsing. p. 363. Ypod. Neust. p. 556.
** Dugdale, vol. ii. p. 171.
{1401.} Henry was sensible that, though the execution of these
conspirators might seem to give security to his throne, the animosities
which remain after such bloody scenes, are always dangerous to royal
authority; and he therefore determined not to increase, by any hazardous
enterprise, those numerous enemies with whom he was every where
environed. While a subject, he was believed to have strongly imbibed all
the principles of his father, the duke of Lancaster, and to have adopted
the prejudices which the Lollards inspired against the abuses of the
established church: but finding, himself possessed of the throne by so
precarious a title, he thought superstition a necessary implement of
public authority; and he resolved, by every expedient, to pay court to
the clergy. There were hitherto no penal laws enacted against heresy; an
indulgence which had proceeded, not from a spirit of toleration in the
Romish church, but from the ignorance and simplicity of the people,
which had rendered them unfit either for starting or receiving any new
or curious doctrines, and which needed not to be restrained by rigorous
penalties. But when the learning and genius of Wickliffe had once
broken, in some measure, the fetters of prejudice, the ecclesiastics
called aloud for the punishment of his disciples; and the king, who was
very little scrupulous in his conduct, was easily induced to sacrifice
his principles to his interest, and to acquire the favor of the church
by that most effectual method, the gratifying of their vengeance against
opponents. He engaged the parliament to pass a law for that purpose: it
was enacted, that when any heretic, who relapsed, or refused to abjure
his opinions, was delivered over to the secular arm by the bishop or
his commissaries, he should be committed to the flames by the civil
magistrate before the whole people.[*] This weapon did not long remain
unemployed in the hands of the clergy: William Sautré, rector of St.
Osithes in London, had been condemned by the convocation of Canterbury;
his sentence was ratified by the house of peers; the king issued