In striking contrast to Cromwell’s vigorous policy in Ireland and Wales, was his conciliatory attitude towards Scotland. The strength and proximity of this country, and the weak defences of the northern marches of England, were a constant source of alarm, which was rather increased than diminished by Henry’s strained relations with those continental powers who were on the best of terms with James. It was obvious that in case of a foreign invasion of England from the Continent, the enmity of Scotland would be the only thing lacking, to render disaster certain. It is also not improbable that an attack from the north would have been welcomed by some of Henry’s more disaffected subjects. In his speech in the Parliament of 1523 Cromwell had advocated a policy of unification with Scotland: from this principle he never departed, but he saw that it was now no time to gain his ends by force. He therefore adopted a pacificatory attitude towards Scotland at the opening of his ministry, and consistently followed it until the end. He began by persuading his master to make every effort to strengthen the rather precarious truce which, owing to French mediation, had been concluded between the Commissioners of the two countries upon the Borders, Oct. 1, 1533[363]. Anxious to show all possible courtesy to the Scottish delegates who were finally sent to London to open negotiations, the King prepared for them a house, which had been occupied by the Grand Master of France, and, contrary to his custom with most ambassadors, supplied it with choice wines and provisions[364]. The Scots were not slow to realize the strength of their position, and in proportion as Henry’s desire to conclude a permanent peace increased, their movements grew more and more deliberate. After long delays, which exasperated the King greatly, an alliance was finally made, to continue during the joint lives of the two sovereigns, and one year longer. During the two following years Henry continued his pacific policy by making James a Knight of the Garter, and by sending an embassy to induce him to abandon the Pope. The latter plan was doubtless a suggestion of Cromwell’s; a mention of the ambassadors Barlow and Howard occurs in his ‘remembrances,’ and Barlow later wrote him continual reports of his progress. The mission was unsuccessful in attaining its purpose; but there were no signs that James’ leaning to Rome would render him an active enemy of England[365].
The year 1537 brought with it new developments of Scottish policy. James had gone abroad to marry Madeleine of Valois, an alliance highly displeasing to Henry, after all his efforts to counteract his nephew’s tendency to lean upon the goodwill of Francis. The King proceeded to express his vexation in an emphatic manner, and, contrary to the advice of his Council, refused to permit James to return to Scotland from France through England[366]. James’ marriage and Henry’s outspoken wrath stultified all Cromwell’s efforts to bring about a cordial personal feeling and a lasting peace between the two sovereigns. The Scots’ King was forced to travel by sea; but events took place on the voyage which filled Henry with suspicion. Twelve Englishmen boarded the Scottish ship when it touched at Scarborough for provisions, welcomed James, and promised their aid if he invaded England. This episode was repeated at another town further north, and it was even reported that the Scottish King had boasted, that if he lived a year longer, ‘he would himself break a spear on one Englishman’s breast[367].’ Such incidents must have been unpleasant, coming as they did just after a serious northern revolt had with difficulty been quelled, and while the Borders were still in a wild and lawless state. But any thoughts James may have entertained of an invasion were interrupted by the sudden death of his young French Queen. Henry perhaps had hoped that his nephew would come to him with offers of peace and a petition for the hand of the Princess Mary, but, if so, he was rudely disappointed. In October it was announced that James was engaged to marry a second French wife, Mary of Guise[368]; and though Henry, at that time a widower, made every effort to prevent the match by putting himself forward as a rival to his nephew, his proposals were courteously set aside[369]. That the King of France should have distinctly preferred a Scottish to an English alliance when the choice lay open, stung Henry to the quick; but he was quite aware that he could not afford just then to quarrel with Francis or James, and he may have regretted that he had not taken his minister’s advice to conciliate the latter. The history of Henry’s relations with his nephew from this time until Cromwell’s fall, yields ample proof of the complete triumph of the English minister’s pacificatory policy. Attempts made in the past to stir up Border jealousies were completely abandoned, and England seemed almost suspiciously desirous to show every courtesy to her troublesome northern neighbour. A letter of Cromwell to Sir Thomas Wharton[370], deputy Warden of the West Marches, directs him to hand over to the Scottish officers an arrant traitor who had made his escape to England, even if the Scots failed to ‘doo the semblable.’ Actions as gracious as this were a new thing on the Borders: the usual policy in the past had been for each nation to give shelter to the outlaws who had fled to it from the other. The news that David Beton, Abbot of Arbroath, had been raised by the Pope to the cardinalate and was working at the Scottish Court in the interests of Rome, made Henry still more anxious to preserve friendship with his nephew, and to preclude all chances of his being induced to join a continental league against England[371]. So in January, 1540, we find him sending Ralph Sadler, Cromwell’s old friend, to James, to counteract, if possible, the effect of the visit of Beton[372]. By the capture of certain letters in a Scottish ship which had been wrecked on the Northumbrian coast, Henry had been furnished with the means of misrepresenting the objects of the Cardinal at his nephew’s Court. Sadler was instructed to hint that Beton was plotting to usurp all the authority of the King of Scotland, and to advise James to be on his guard. The ambassador was further directed to conciliate the Scottish King by a present of six geldings, to assure him of Henry’s friendship, and to suggest that James augment his revenue by suppressing the monasteries in his kingdom as his uncle had done in England. Finally Sadler was to represent to the Scots’ King the advantages of an alliance with England over one with France, and to request him to ponder on the desirability of eradicating the ancient enmity of the two peoples, especially in view of the fact that he might some day himself succeed to his uncle’s crown. The result of the mission taken as a whole was satisfactory. Though James refused to accede to any of Henry’s more definite requests, and would not listen to any proposals to abolish the old religion or to suppress the monasteries, he still assured Sadler that no alliance he made on the Continent would lead him to break with England, and further enlarged on the benefits that would result from a meeting with his uncle, though he puzzled the envoy by suggesting that Francis should also be present[373]. The mission of Sadler marks the last stage of the relations of England and Scotland during Cromwell’s ministry; and the fact that war between the two countries broke out so soon after his fall, furnishes a final reason for believing that it was by the able and unceasing efforts of the Privy Councillor that an open rupture was so long averted.
Lastly, a few words remain to be said on the subject of the government of Calais. If the name of that town were graven on the heart of Mary Tudor at her death, from the grief which its loss during her reign caused her, it must have been also graven upon the minds of her father and his minister, from the trouble its maintenance gave them during the last seven years of the latter’s power. In March, 1533, Arthur Plantagenet, Viscount Lisle, was nominated successor to that learned soldier, Lord Berners, as Deputy there, and took the oaths at the town, on the 10th of June[374]. The choice was certainly unfortunate, and Lisle’s unfitness for his new position was destined soon to be made evident. He seems to have been a man completely lacking in the qualities necessary for a good ruler of such a place as Calais was in those days: he possessed small discrimination in judging what things he could deal with by his own authority, and what things it was necessary to report to head quarters. Hence there are many mild rebukes among Cromwell’s letters to him[375], in some of which he chides him for bothering the King about such a trivial thing as a private quarrel between two minor officials in Calais, while in others he ‘mervayles not a litel’ that he should be so negligent as not to make immediate report of sacrilegious preaching. Calais was by no means an easy post to manage; Henry and Cromwell kept its officers and garrison exceedingly short of money; the soldiers wrangled and mutinied, and religious conferences amongst the townspeople sometimes took most violent forms, and not seldom resulted in dangerous riots. Placed as a sort of spy on the movements of Francis and the Emperor, in a town, the government of which on a small scale presented all the difficulties of that of a great kingdom, the Deputy was in a position which demanded resources greater than his own.
The first part of Lisle’s administration seems to have been comparatively uneventful. Cromwell, always keenly alive to the necessity of having the country in an adequate state of defence, at once caused him to repair all breaches in the ramparts, a task which Lisle set about without competent men or supplies; and the immediate result of his ill-judged attempts to lay a new foundation for one of his walls was the fall of the small part of the old fortification which was yet standing[376]. Lisle was of course continually busied in preventing his neighbours, French and Flemish, from meddling with the King’s Pale, especially throughout the year 1536, when the war between Francis and the Emperor broke out afresh[377]. He tried to keep the town well victualled and in good defence, and was zealous to do as he was bidden by Cromwell, though seldom successful, for he lacked ability. After 1537 he was confronted with a new and more difficult problem.
In the spring of 1538, Cranmer heard that there were seven or eight persons in Calais, who manifestly denied Christ. His Commissary there, John Butler, asserted that this report was false, but in a later epistle advised the Archbishop that there were three papists in the town, who slandered those who applied themselves to God’s word; the letter went on to suggest that Cromwell be requested to write to Lisle to have them punished[378]. The minister, however, had heard of the existence of ‘certayn Sacramentaryes’ or deniers of transubstantiation there, before this report arrived, and had written the Deputy a severe reproof for not informing him about them[379]. The state of foreign affairs at that moment was such as to render it indispensable for the King to preserve the appearance of being zealous for orthodoxy, and he had called on his efficient minister to aid him in his attempts to extirpate heretical doctrines. The rebuke which the latter had administered to the Deputy seems in this case to have been undeserved, for Lisle, who apparently was more on the watch than usual this time, had certainly sent home information about the Sacramentaries before he received Cromwell’s epistle: the two letters perhaps crossed on the way. That of the Deputy reported the arrival in Calais of a young English priest, lately come from Germany, who had uttered opinions about the Eucharist which the King would not tolerate, and which had shocked the good people of Calais beyond measure. This young priest can have been none other than Adam Damplip, originally a strong papist, who (according to Foxe) had been chaplain to Fisher, and at the Cardinal’s execution had left England and travelled in France, Germany, and Italy. His sojourn in foreign lands must have altered his opinions completely, for when he came to Calais his doctrines were so ‘advanced’ and heretical, that as a result of a warning of Cromwell’s, in his letter to Lisle of May 14[380], a decree was made out by the Council of the town that Butler, the Commissary who had given Damplip licence to preach, would be held responsible for any false opinions that the priest expressed[381].
Determined as he was to extirpate unlawful and treasonable doctrines both at home and abroad, Cromwell was too much absorbed in the maintenance of his foreign policy, and the prevention of the pressing dangers which threatened the country from without, to pay much attention to Damplip at Calais during the latter part of 1538 and 1539. He was far more anxious to have the town well victualled and defended, in case of a sudden attack from France or Spain. Damplip himself, however, had gone over to England to answer to the charges brought against him before Cranmer[382]. The result of the examination seems to have been very favourable to him, and the Archbishop, in a letter to Cromwell about it, supported the position which the priest had taken up in only denying Transubstantiation while admitting the Real Presence[383]. But the accusations from Calais against the Sacramentaries did not cease. Lisle and the Council, now thoroughly roused, kept sending in depositions against Damplip, until Cromwell, in May, 1539, rebuked them for uncharitable behaviour, saying that the affair was being made too much of, and that the King was busy about other things[384]. Exhortations to ‘charyte and myld handeling’ were not Cromwell’s usual style; and in this case at least they were superseded within ten days by instructions of a very different nature. The cause of the sudden change is doubtless to be found in the debate on the Six Articles, just then at its height. Cromwell saw the trend things were taking, and understood that as the doctrine of Transubstantiation was evidently about to be confirmed at home, it would be extremely dangerous for him to urge leniency towards those who opposed it at Calais. He consequently sent another letter to Lisle[385], in which he retreated from his former position, and ordered the Commissary and the parish priest of Our Lady Church to be sent in custody to England. The subsequent appearance of these men before the Privy Council seems to have resulted in their acquittal, and a public recantation in the Market Place at Calais was deemed sufficient to prevent a recurrence to the heresy. The recall of Lord Lisle in the spring of 1540 was probably less due to his inefficiency in handling the affair of the Sacramentaries, than to the many proofs he had given of general incompetence. He was committed to the Tower, where he remained a close prisoner till January, 1542, when a message was sent to him that he was pardoned and restored to favour. The story is that his joy at hearing this news was so great, that he died of excitement that same night[386].
That Calais was not lost to England under the incompetent management of Lisle (whose actions from first to last were too much influenced by the whims of a foolish wife), was solely due to the guidance which he received from Cromwell. The brilliant success of the great minister’s administration in England was fully equalled by the wisdom and skill of his dealings with her immediate neighbours and dependencies. In every case the dominant principle of his policy had been the same; the completion of the work begun by Henry VII.—the elevation of the Crown to absolute power on the ruins of every other institution which had ever been its rival. In attaining this end, which (as we must not forget) was one that commended itself to most patriotic Englishmen of the time, Cromwell had been confronted by a multitude of problems of great difficulty and infinite diversity: he handled them all with uniform success; and the monarchy, under his guidance, passed safe through one of the gravest crises in the history of the realm, finally to emerge triumphant, absolute, supreme in Church and State.