Footnote 801: L. and P., v., 805.[(back)]
Footnote 802: Ibid., v., 989.[(back)]
Footnote 803: Ibid., v., 1046.[(back)]
Footnote 804: Ibid., v., 989. This was in May during the second part of the session, after the other business had been finished; redress of grievances constitutionally preceded supply.[(back)]
Footnote 805: Annates were attacked first, partly because they were the weakest as well as the most sensitive part in the papal armour; there was no law in the Corpus Juris Canonici requiring the payment of annates (Maitland in Engl. Hist. Rev., xvi., 43).[(back)]
Footnote 806: L. and P., v., 723.[(back)]
Footnote 807: Ibid., v., 898.[(back)]
Footnote 808: Ibid., v., 832.[(back)]
Footnote 809: Ibid., v., 886.[(back)]
Footnote 810: L. and P., v., 150. This letter is misplaced in L. and P.; it should be under 23rd March, 1532, instead of 1531. The French envoy, Giles de la Pommeraye, did not arrive in England till late in 1531, and his letter obviously refers to the proceedings in Parliament in March, 1532; cf. v., 879.[(back)]