Footnote 612: Ibid., iv., 4858.[(back)]
Footnote 613: L. and P., iv., 4977.[(back)]
Footnote 614: Ibid., iv., 5376-77, 5470-71, 5486-87. For the arguments as to its validity see Busch, England under the Tudors, Eng. trs., i., 376-8; Friedmann, Anne Boleyn, ii., 329; and Lord Acton in the Quarterly Rev., cxliii., 1-51.[(back)]
Footnote 615: She made this statement to Campeggio in the confessional (L. and P., iv., 4875).[(back)]
Footnote 616: Ibid., iv., 5377, 5438; Sp. Cal., iii., 276, 327.[(back)]
Footnote 617: L. and P., iv., 3217. See this point discussed in Taunton's Cardinal Wolsey, chap. x.[(back)]
Footnote 618: Sp. Cal., iii., 882.[(back)]
Footnote 619: L. and P., iv., 4841.[(back)]
Footnote 620: Ibid., iv., 5154, 5177, 5211 (ii.); Sp. Cal., iii., 877, 882.[(back)]
Footnote 621: L. and P., iv., 5474. Yet there is a letter from Clement to Campeggio (Cotton MS., Vitellius, B, xii., 164; L. and P., iv., 5181) authorising him "to reject whatever evidence is tendered in behalf of this brief as an evident forgery". Clement was no believer in the maxim qui facit per alium facit per se; he did not mind what his legates did, so long as he was free to repudiate their action when convenient.[(back)]