View allAll Photos Tagged Transactional
LOCAL GOSSIP: Vicky enjoys a good yarn with her patrons, especially when the story is juicy. IMAGE: Liam Cavanagh
Are you looking to sell your house in Atlanta? Want a quick and hassle-free transaction? Look no further than We Buy Houses Atlanta! Whether you're facing foreclosure, going through a divorce, or simply need to move quickly, selling your house to a cash home buyer like 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta can be the ideal solution. In this ultimate guide, we'll explore the pros and cons of working with them, share tips for negotiating the best deal possible, and provide insights on how to prepare your house for sale. So let's dive right in and discover why choosing 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta might just be the perfect option for you!
The Pros of Selling Your House to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta
One of the major advantages of selling your house to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta is the speed of the transaction. Unlike traditional methods that can take months or even years, working with a cash home buyer allows you to close the deal in as little as a few days. This is especially beneficial if you're in a time-sensitive situation and need to sell your house quickly.
Another pro is the convenience factor. When you sell your house to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta, you don't have to worry about repairs or renovations. They buy houses in any condition, saving you both time and money on costly repairs that can eat into your profits when using other selling methods.
Additionally, there's no need for real estate agents or commissions when working with 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta. This means more money in your pocket at closing since you won't have to pay any fees or commissions typically associated with traditional real estate transactions.
Furthermore, selling to a cash home buyer eliminates the uncertainty and stress often associated with selling through traditional channels. With 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta, there are no financing contingencies or appraisals required – they make an offer based on their own valuation process and provide a straightforward buying experience.
Choosing 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta gives you flexibility in terms of moving out. You can negotiate a rent-back option where you can stay in your current home for some time after closing while making arrangements for relocation.
With these pros in mind, it's easy to see why many homeowners opt for the convenience and speed offered by 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta when it comes time to sell their property.
The Cons of Selling Your House to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta
While selling your house to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta may offer convenience and a quick sale, it's important to consider the potential drawbacks as well. Here are some cons to keep in mind:
1. Lower Sale Price: One of the main disadvantages of selling to cash home buyers is that they often offer lower prices compared to traditional buyers. They are looking for properties they can purchase at a discount in order to make a profit.
2. Limited Room for Negotiation: When dealing with 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta, you may find yourself with limited room for negotiation. Cash buyers typically have set pricing models and may not be willing to budge on their initial offer.
3. Risk of Scams: While there are reputable companies like Cash Pro Homebuyers, it's crucial to research and verify the credibility of any cash buyer you're considering working with. Unfortunately, there are scammers out there who prey on homeowners in distress.
4. Quick Closing Timeline: Selling your house quickly can be advantageous, but it can also mean added stress if you need more time or have unresolved issues before moving out.
5. Title Issues and Liens: If your property has title issues or liens attached, it could complicate the sales process when dealing with cash buyers like 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta as they typically prefer properties without such encumbrances.
While selling your house through a company like 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta offers certain benefits, it's essential to carefully evaluate all factors before making a decision about how best to sell your home
How to Get the Most Money for Your House When Selling to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta
When it comes to selling your house, getting the most money possible is likely a top priority. And if you're considering selling to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta, there are some strategies you can employ to maximize your profits.
First and foremost, it's important to do your research and understand the current market conditions in Atlanta. This will give you an idea of what similar properties are selling for and help you set a realistic asking price.
Next, consider making any necessary repairs or updates before putting your house on the market. While 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta does purchase homes in as-is condition, making improvements can increase its overall value and attract more potential buyers.
Additionally, staging your home can make a big difference in how much money you receive for it. By creating an inviting atmosphere that showcases the best features of your property, you'll be able to command a higher price from potential buyers.
Another strategy for maximizing profits when selling to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta is by negotiating effectively. Be prepared with solid reasoning behind your asking price and be willing to negotiate on certain terms while still protecting your bottom line.
Don't forget about marketing! Even though 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta specializes in purchasing homes quickly, it's still important to get the word out about your property through online listings and other advertising avenues. The more exposure your home receives, the greater chance of attracting competitive offers.
By following these tips and taking advantage of all available resources when working with 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta, you'll be well on your way to getting the most money for your house sale without compromising on convenience or speed!
Tips for Negotiating with 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta
When it comes to negotiating with 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta, there are a few tips that can help you get the most out of your sale. First and foremost, do your research. Understand the market value of your property and have a clear idea of what you are willing to accept.
Next, be prepared to negotiate on more than just price. While getting a fair cash offer is important, consider other factors such as closing date or any repairs that may need to be done. Being flexible in these areas can help create a win-win situation for both parties.
Communication is key when negotiating with 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta. Clearly express your expectations and listen carefully to their offers and terms. It's important to find common ground and work towards a mutually beneficial agreement.
Don't be afraid to walk away if the deal doesn't meet your needs. There are always other options available when selling your house, so keep an open mind and explore all possibilities.
Remember, negotiation is about finding a compromise that works for both parties involved. By following these tips, you'll be well-equipped to negotiate effectively with 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta and secure the best deal possible for your home sale without compromising on its true value.
How to Prepare Your House for Sale to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta
When selling your house to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta, it's important to ensure that your property is in its best condition to attract potential buyers. Here are some tips on how to prepare your house for sale:
1. Clean and declutter: Start by thoroughly cleaning every room in your house. Remove any personal items and clutter to make the space appear larger and more inviting.
2. Make necessary repairs: Take care of any minor repairs such as leaky faucets, broken tiles, or squeaky doors. These small details can make a big difference in the overall impression of your home.
3. Enhance curb appeal: The first thing potential buyers will see is the exterior of your home, so make sure it looks appealing. Trim bushes, mow the lawn, plant flowers, and touch up any peeling paint.
4. Stage strategically: Consider staging key areas of your home such as the living room and kitchen with tasteful furniture arrangements and décor that highlights their best features.
5. Highlight unique selling points: Identify what makes your house stand out from others in the area, whether it's a spacious backyard or updated appliances. Showcase these features during showings or through high-quality photographs.
6. Market effectively: Work with 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta professionals who have experience marketing properties quickly and effectively using various online platforms and traditional methods.
By following these tips, you can increase the chances of attracting potential buyers when selling your house to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta!
FAQs About Selling Your House to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta
FAQs About Selling Your House to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta
Q: How does the process work when selling my house to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta?
A: The process is simple and straightforward. First, you contact us and provide information about your property. Then, we will schedule a time to visit your house for an inspection. After assessing the condition of your property, we will make you a fair cash offer within 24 hours. If you accept our offer, we can close on a date that works best for you.
Q: Will I need to make repairs or clean up before selling my house?
A: One of the advantages of selling to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta is that we buy houses in any condition. You don't have to worry about making any repairs or cleaning up before selling your house. We will take care of all those details after the purchase.
Q: How long does it take to sell my house to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta?
A: The timeline for selling your house can vary depending on your specific situation and needs. However, in most cases, we can close on a sale within 7-14 days. This quick turnaround time sets us apart from traditional real estate transactions.
Q: Will I have to pay any fees or commissions when selling my house?
A: No! When you sell your house directly to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta, there are no fees or commissions involved. We cover all closing costs and handle everything so that you can receive the full cash amount offered for your property.
Q: Can I trust 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta with such an important transaction?
A: Absolutely! With years of experience in the real estate industry and countless satisfied customers, we have built a reputation as trusted homebuyers in Atlanta. We prioritize transparency and honesty throughout the entire process.
Remember, if you're considering selling your house quickly without hassle or stress, 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta can provide you with a fair cash offer and a
7. Final Thoughts
Selling your house is a significant decision, and choosing the right buyer can make all the difference. When it comes to selling your house in Atlanta, 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta, specifically Cash Pro Homebuyers, offers numerous advantages that can simplify the process and provide a quick solution.
While there are pros and cons to selling your house to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta, it ultimately depends on your specific circumstances and priorities. If you're looking for a fast sale without the hassle of repairs or showings, this may be an excellent option for you. However, if getting top dollar for your property is vital or if you have ample time on your side, exploring other avenues might be more suitable.
To ensure you get the most money for your house when selling to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta:
1. Research multiple cash home buyers in Atlanta.
2. Seek recommendations from friends and family who have sold their houses.
3. Obtain multiple offers to compare prices.
When negotiating with 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta:
1. Be prepared with knowledge about local market conditions.
2. Understand what repairs or updates may affect the offer price.
3. Don't hesitate to negotiate terms that work best for you.
Preparing your house before selling it to 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta involves:
1. Thoroughly cleaning and decluttering the property.
2. Addressing any minor repairs or cosmetic issues.
3. Enhancing curb appeal by maintaining landscaping and improving exterior appearance.
As with any major transaction, understanding how 'We Buy Houses' Atlanta operates through FAQs can help alleviate uncertainties:
- How long does it take to sell my house?
The process typically takes less than 30 days once an agreement is reached.
- What fees should I expect?
With 'We Buy Houses' companies like Cash Pro Homebuyers in Atlanta, there are no commissions or closing costs involved; they cover those expenses.
- Will I need to make repairs or updates?
No, 'We Buy
-------- Original Message --------
Return-path:
Envelope-to: steve@igreatlakes.com
Delivery-date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 09:57:27 -0400
Received: from alnceg-momta01-mms.mycingular.net ([166.216.199.202]) by
srv.igreatlakes.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from
) id 1T7Riw-0004fk-8d for steve@igreatlakes.com;
Fri, 31 Aug 2012 09:57:27 -0400
Received: from [166.216.198.35] ([166.216.198.35:40831] helo=alnnms02)
by alnceg-momta01 (envelope-from ) (ecelerity
3.0.23.37692 r(37717)) with ESMTP id 92/69-08229-4C2C0405; Fri, 31 Aug
2012 08:57:24 -0500
X-Mms-Message-Type: m-send-req
X-Mms-Transaction-Id: abcdefg
X-Mms-MMS-Version: 1.0
To: steve@igreatlakes.com, tes40ace@photos.flickr.com
Subject: Special Ops-08/31 09:56
X-Mms-Message-Class: Personal
X-Mms-Priority: Normal
X-Mms-Delivery-Report: No
X-Mms-Read-Reply: No
Well, meeting up with a good troll friend wouldn't be complete without a troll transaction! Viv kindly let me adopt one of her bird trolls! Love him! :O)
American Transaction Processors Coalition DC Fly In
Patrick Greer Policy Director
(ATPC) 678-431-5137
patrick@atpcoalition.com
June 13th
1:00pm- Board Meeting (Whitmer & Worrall, 1401 H St NW, Washington, DC)
6:00pm- Board Reception (Van Scoyoc Associates, Penthouse, 800 Maine Ave SW, Washington, DC 20024
Michael P. Mills
Chief Operating Officer
American Transaction Processors Coalition
404.680.0176
michael@atpcoalition.com
1180 West Peachtree Street NW
Suite 1800
Atlanta, GA 30309
Angela Acampora
Angela@whitmerworrall.com
Had a very easy transaction and easy time working with Blake Burks. We would definitely come back to Crossroads as it was so easy to get a new Lincoln Navigator. -Rick and Donna Cox, Thursday, February 06, 2014
Mark Silk - Professor and Director of Greenberg Center for the Study of Religion in Public Life and Professor of Religion in Public Life at Trinity College and staff blogger at Religion News Service (@directorsilk). All Rights Reserved. Photo property of WNPR, Connecticut Public Radio. Photo by Chion Wolf. For usage terms, visit wnpr.org/syndication. Listen to the show.
Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi along with HH Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, President of the UAE witnessed a transaction made using the JAYWAN card, based on India's digital RuPay credit and debit card stack in Abu Dhabi
Pablo Arancibia Farías ‘Instancia de transacción mercantile minorista como factor determinante en la construcción de un imperio’, ('Instance of a mercantile transaction as a determining factor in the construction of an empire'), 2012, Tema ‘Pais’, (Theme ‘Country’), Museo de Arte Contemporáneo, MAC Quinta Normal, Santiago de Chile.
Representa el mapa de Cina. (It represents the map of China.)
GIBXSWAP wants to bring this hard-won light to let users experience it faster and better. Adhering to the core concepts of compliance, security, and innovation, the protection of user assets is the primary criterion, and the decentralized transaction protocol based on the automated market-making mechanism aims to integrate the differentiated advantages of multiple basic public chains. The core point is to avoid the various drawbacks of decentralization to achieve the advantages of decentralization, to create a high-performance composite DEX ecosystem, and to maximize the rewards of participants with the "dual mining incentive" of liquidity mining and transaction mining. And through the fee repurchase and destruction mechanism, a self-driving value capture ecological closed loop has been realized. www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-OLxc_uBc8
Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi along with HH Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, President of the UAE witnessed a transaction made using the JAYWAN card, based on India's digital RuPay credit and debit card stack in Abu Dhabi
Such was the internal condition of the Court. The spring had meanwhile been marked by rejoicings for the peace with foreign powers, at last concluded. On Whit-Sunday a great procession proceeded from St. Paul’s to St. Peter’s, Cornhill, accompanied by a banner, and by crosses from every parish church, the children of St. Paul’s School joining in the show. It was composed of a motley company. Bishop Bonner—as vehement in his Catholicism as Gardiner, and so much less wary in the display of his opinions that his brother of Winchester was wont at times to term him “asse”—carried the Blessed Sacrament under a canopy, with “clerks and priests and vicars and parsons”; the Lord Mayor was there in crimson velvet, the aldermen were in scarlet, and all the crafts33 in their best apparel. The occasion was worthy of the pomp displayed in honour of it, for it was—the words sound like a jest—the festival of a “Universal Peace for ever,” announced by the Mayor, standing between standard and cross, and including in the proclamation of general amity the names of the Emperor, the King of England, the French King, and all Christian Kings.23
If soldiers had for the moment consented to proclaim a truce and to name it, merrily, eternal, theologians had agreed to no like suspension of hostilities, and the perennial religious strife showed no signs of intermission.
“Sire,” wrote Admiral d’Annebaut, sent by Francis to London to ratify the peace, “I know not what to tell your Majesty as to the order given me to inform myself of the condition of religious affairs in England; except that Henry has declared himself head of the Anglican Church, and woe to whomsoever refuses to recognise him in that capacity. He has also usurped all ecclesiastical property, and destroyed all the convents. He attends Mass nevertheless daily, and permits the papal nuncio to live in London. What is strangest of all is that Catholics are there burnt as well as Lutherans and other heretics. Was anything like it ever seen?”24
34Punishment was indeed dealt out with singular impartiality. During the spring Dr. Crome had been examined touching a sermon he had delivered against Catholic doctrine. Two or three weeks later, preaching once more at Paul’s Cross, he had boldly declared he was not there for the purpose of denying his former assertions; but a second “examination” had proved more effective, and on the Sunday following the feast of Corpus Christi he eschewed his heresies.25 “Our news here,” wrote a merchant of London to his brother on July 2, “of Dr. Crome’s canting, recanting, decanting, or rather double-canting, be this.”26 The transaction was representative of many others, which, with their undercurrent of terror, struggle, intimidation, menace, and remorse, formed a melancholy and recurrent feature of the day, the victory remaining sometimes with a man’s conscience—whatever it dictates might be—sometimes with his fears.
The King was, in fact, still endeavouring to stem the torrent he had set loose. In his speech to Parliament on Christmas Eve, 1545, after commending and thanking Lords and Commons for their loyalty and affection towards himself, he had spoken with severity of the discord and dissension prevalent in the realm; the clergy, by their sermons against each other, sowing debate and discord35 amongst the people.... “I am very sorry to know and hear how unreverently that most precious jewel, the Word of God, is disputed, rimed, sung and jangled in every ale-house and tavern ... and yet I am even as much sorry that the readers of the same follow it in doing so faintly and so coldly. For of this I am sure, that charity was never so faint amongst you, and virtuous and godly living was never less used, nor God Himself amongst Christians was never less reverenced, honoured, and served.”27
Delivered scarcely more than a year before his death, Henry’s speech was a singular commentary upon the condition of the realm, consequent upon his own policy, during the concluding years of his reign.
36
CHAPTER IV
1546Anne Askew—Her trial and execution—Katherine Parr’s danger—Plot against her—Her escape.
AS the months of 1546 went by the measures taken by the King and his advisers to enforce unanimity of practice and opinion in matters of religion did not become less drastic. A great burning of books disapproved by Henry took place during the autumn, preceded in July by the condemnation and execution of a victim whose fate attracted an unusual amount of attention, the effect at Court being enhanced by the fact that the heroine of the story was personally known to the Queen and her ladies. It was indeed reported that one of the King’s special causes of displeasure was that she had been the means of imbuing his nieces—among whom was Lady Dorset, Jane Grey’s mother—as well as his wife, with heretical doctrines.
Added to the species of glamour commonly surrounding a spiritual leader, more particularly in times of persecution, Anne Askew was beautiful and young—not more than twenty-five at the time37 of her death—and the thought of her racked frame, her undaunted courage, and her final agony at the stake, may well have haunted with the horror of a night-mare those who had been her disciples, and who looked on from a distance, and with sympathy they dared not display.
There were other circumstances increasing the interest with which the melancholy drama was watched. Well born and educated, Anne had been the wife of a Lincolnshire gentleman of the name of Kyme. Their life together had been of short duration. In a period of bitter party feeling and recrimination, it is difficult to ascertain with certainty the truth on any given point; and whilst a hostile chronicler asserts that Anne left her husband in order “to gad up and down a-gospelling and gossipping where she might and ought not, but especially in London and near the Court,”28 another authority explains that Kyme had turned her out of his house upon her conversion to Protestant doctrines. Whatever might have been the origin of her mode of life, it is certain that she resumed her maiden name, and proceeded to “execute the office of an apostle.”29
Her success in her new profession made her unfortunately conspicuous, and in 1545 she was committed to Newgate, “for that she was very38 obstinate and heady in reasoning on matters of religion.” The charge, it must be confessed, is corroborated by her demeanour under examination, when the qualities of meekness and humility were markedly absent, and her replies to the interrogatories addressed to her were rather calculated to irritate than to prove conciliatory. On this first occasion, for example, asked to interpret certain passages in the Scriptures, she declined to comply with the request on the score that she would not cast pearls among swine—acorns were good enough; and, urged by Bonner to open her wound, she again refused. Her conscience was clear, she said; to lay a plaster on a whole skin might seem much folly, and the similitude of a wound appeared to her unsavoury.30
For the time she escaped; but in the course of the following year her case was again brought forward, and on this occasion she found no mercy. Her examinations, mostly reported by herself, show her as alike keen-witted and sharp-tongued, rarely at a loss for an answer, and profoundly convinced of the justice of her cause. If she was not without the genuine enjoyment of the born controversialist in the opportunity of argument and discussion, she possessed, underlying the self-assertion and confidence natural in a woman holding the position of a religious leader, a fund of indomitable heroism.39 For she must have been fully conscious of her danger. It is possible that, had she not been brought into prominence by her association with those in high places, she might again have escaped; but, apart from the grudge owed her for her influence over the King’s own kin, her attitude was almost such as to court her fate. Refusing “to sing a new song of the Lord in a strange land,” she replied to the Bishop of Winchester, when he complained that she spoke in parables, that it was best for him that she should do so. Had she shown him the open truth, he would not accept it.
“Then the Bishop said he would speak with me familiarly. I said, ‘So did Judas when he unfriendlily betrayed Christ....’ In conclusion,” she ended, in her account of the interview, “we could not agree.”
Spirited as was her bearing, and thrilling as the prisoner plainly was with all the excitement of a battle of words, it was not strange that the strain should tell upon her.
“On the Sunday,” she proceeds—and there is a pathetic contrast between the physical weakness to which she confesses and her undaunted boldness in confronting the men bent upon her destruction—“I was sore sick, thinking no less than to die.... Then was I sent to Newgate in my extremity of sickness, for in all my life I was never in such pain. Thus the Lord strengthen us in His truth. Pray, pray, pray.”
40Her condemnation was a foregone conclusion. It followed quickly, with a subsequent visit from one Nicholas Shaxton, who, having, for his own part, made his recantation, counselled her to do the same. He spoke in vain. It were, she told him, good for him never to have been born, “with many like words.” More was to follow. If her assertion is to be believed—and there seems no valid reason to doubt it—the rack was applied “till I was nigh dead.... After that I sat two long hours reasoning with my Lord Chancellor upon the bare floor. Then was I brought into a house and laid in a bed with as weary and painful bones as ever had patient Job. I thank my God therefore.”
A scarcely credible addition is made to the story, to the effect that when the Lieutenant of the Tower had refused to put the victim to the torture a second time, the Lord Chancellor, Wriothesley, less merciful, took the office upon himself, and applied the rack with his own hands, the Lieutenant departing to report the matter to the King, “who seemed not very well to like such handling of a woman.”31 What is certain is the final scene at Smithfield, where Shaxton delivered a sermon, Anne listening, endorsing his41 words when she approved of them and correcting them “when he said amiss.”
So the shameful episode was brought to an end. The tale, penetrating even the thick walls of a palace, must have caused a thrill of horror at Whitehall, accentuated by reason of certain events going forward there about the same time.
The King’s disease was gaining upon him apace. He had become so unwieldy in bulk that the use of machinery was necessary to move him, and with the progress of his disorder his temper was becoming more and more irritable. In view of his approaching death the question of the guardianship and custody of the heir to the throne was increasing in importance and the jealousy of the rival parties was becoming more embittered. In the course of the summer the Catholics about the Court ventured on a bold stroke, directed against no less a person than the Queen.
Emboldened by the tolerance displayed by the King towards her religious practices and the preachers and teachers she gathered around her, Katherine had grown so daring as to make matters of doctrine a constant subject of conversation with Henry, urging him to complete the work he had begun, and to free the Church of England from superstition.32 Henry appears at first—though he was a man ill to argue with—to have shown singular patience under his wife’s admonitions. But daily controversy is not42 soothing to a sick man’s nerves and temper, and Katherine’s enemies, watching their opportunity, conceived that it was at hand.
Henry’s habits had been altered by illness, and it had become the Queen’s custom to wait for a summons before visiting his apartments; although on some occasions, after dinner or supper, or when she had reason to imagine she would be welcome, she repaired thither on her own initiative. But perhaps the more as she perceived that time was short, she continued her imprudent exhortations. And still her enemies, wary and silent, watched.
Henry appears—and it says much for his affection for her—to have for a time maintained the attitude of a not uncomplacent listener. On a certain day, however, when Katherine was, as usual, descanting upon questions of theology, he changed the subject abruptly, “which somewhat amazed the Queen.” Reassured by perceiving no further signs of displeasure, she talked upon other topics until the time came for the King to bid her farewell, which he did with his customary affection.
The account of what followed—Foxe being, as before, the narrator—must be accepted with reservation. Gardiner, chancing to be present, was made the recipient of his master’s irritation. It was a good hearing, the King said ironically, when women were become clerks, and a thing much to his comfort, to come in his old days to be taught by his wife.
43Gardiner made prompt use of the opening afforded him; he had waited long for it, and it was not wasted. The Queen, he said, had forgotten herself, in arguing with a King whose virtues and whose learnedness in matters of religion were not only greater than were possessed by other princes, but exceeded those of doctors in divinity. For the Bishop and his friends it was a grievous thing to hear. Proceeding to enlarge upon the subject at length, he concluded by saying that, though he dared not declare what he knew without special warranty from the King, he and others were aware of treason cloaked in heresy. Henry, he warned him, was cherishing a serpent in his bosom.
It was risking much, but the Bishop knew to whom he spoke, and, working adroitly upon Henry’s fears and wrath, succeeded in obtaining permission to consult with his colleagues and to draw up articles by which the Queen’s life might be touched. “They thought it best to begin with such ladies as she most esteemed and were privy to all her doings—as the Lady Herbert, her sister, the Lady Lane, who was her first cousin, and the Lady Tyrwhitt, all of her privy chamber.” The plan was to accuse these ladies of the breach of the Six Articles, to search their coffers for documents or books compromising to the Queen, and, in case anything of that nature were found, to carry Katherine by night to the Tower. The King, acquainted with44 the design, appears to have given his consent, and all went on as before, Henry still encouraging, or at least not discouraging, his wife’s discourse on spiritual matters.
Time was passing; the bill of articles against the Queen had been prepared, and Henry had affixed his signature to it, whether with a deliberate intention of giving her over to her enemies, or, as some said, meaning to deter her from the study of prohibited literature—in which case, as Lord Herbert of Cherbury observes, it was “a terrible jest.”33 That Katherine herself did not regard the affair, as soon as she came to be cognisant of it, in the light of a kindly warning, is plain; for when, by a singular accident, the document containing the charges against her was dropped by one of the council and brought for her perusal, the effect upon her was such that the King’s physicians were summoned to attend her, and Henry himself, ignorant of the cause of her illness, and possibly softened by it, paid her a visit, and, hearing that she entertained fears that she had incurred his displeasure, reassured her with sweet and comfortable words, remained with her an hour, and departed.
Though Katherine had played her part well, she must have been aware that she stood on the brink of a precipice, and the ghosts of Anne Boleyn and Katherine Howard warned her how little reliance45 could be placed upon the King’s fitful affection. Deciding upon a bold step, she sought his bed-chamber uninvited after supper on the following evening, attended only by her sister, Lady Herbert, and with Lady Lane,34 her cousin, to carry the candle before her. Henry, found in conversation with his attendant gentlemen, gave his wife a courteous welcome, entering at once—contrary to his custom—upon the subject of religion, as if moved by a desire of gaining instruction from her replies. Read in the light of what Katherine already knew, this new departure may well have been viewed by her with misgiving; and she hastened to disclaim the position the King appeared anxious to assign her. The inferiority of women being what it was, she said, it was for man to supply from his wisdom what they lacked. She being a silly poor woman, and his Majesty so wise, how could her judgment be of use to him, in all things her only anchor, and, next to God, her supreme head and governor on earth?
The King demurred. The attitude of submission may have struck him as unfamiliar.
“Not so, by St. Mary,” he said. “You are become a doctor, Kate, to instruct us, as we take it, and not to be instructed or directed by us.”
The plain charge elicited, it was more easy to reply to it. The King had much mistaken her,46 Katherine humbly declared. It had ever been her opinion that it was unseemly for the woman to instruct and teach her lord and husband; her place was rather to learn of him. If she had been bold to maintain opinions differing from the King’s, it had been to “minister talk”—to make conversation, in modern language—to distract him from the thought of his infirmities, as also in the hope of profiting by his learned discourse—with more of the same nature.
Henry, perhaps not sorry to be convinced, yielded to the skilful flattery thus administered.
“Is it even so, sweetheart?” he said, “and tend your arguments to no worse end? Then perfect friends we are now again,” adding, as he took her in his arms and kissed her, that her words had done him more good than news of a hundred thousand pounds.
The next day had been fixed for the Queen’s arrest. As the appointed hour approached the King sought the garden, sending for Katherine to attend him there. Accompanied by the same ladies as on the night before, the Queen obeyed the summons, and there, under the July sun, the closing scene of the serio-comic drama was played. Amused, it may be, by the anticipation of his counsellors’ discomfiture, Henry was in good spirits and “as pleasant as ever he was in his life before,” when the Chancellor, with forty of the royal guard,47 appeared, ready to take possession of the culprit. What passed between Wriothesley and his master, at a little distance from the rest of the party, could only be matter of conjecture. The Chancellor’s words, as he knelt before the angry King, were not audible to the curious bystanders, but the King’s rejoinder, “vehemently whispered,” was heard. “Knave, arrant knave, beast and fool,” were the epithets applied to the crestfallen official. After which, he was promptly dismissed.
Katherine, whether or not she divined the truth, set herself to plead Wriothesley’s cause. Ignorance, not will, was in her opinion the probable origin of what had so manifestly moved Henry to wrath. The advocacy of the intended victim softened the King’s heart even more towards her.
“Ah, poor soul,” he said, “thou little knowest how ill he deserves this grace at thy hands. On my word, sweetheart, he hath been towards thee an arrant knave, and so let him go.”35
For the moment, at least, the danger was averted, and before it recurred the despot was in his grave, and Katherine was safe. It is curious to observe that in the list of contents to the Acts and Monuments the danger of the Queen is pointed out, “and how gloriously she was preserved by her kind and loving Husband the King.”
48
CHAPTER V
1546The King dying—The Earl of Surrey—His career and his fate—The Duke of Norfolk’s escape—Death of the King.
THE King was dying. So much must have been apparent to all who were in a position to judge. None, however, dared utter their thought, since it had been made an indictable offence—the act being directed against soothsayers and prophets—to foretell his death. Those who wished him well or ill, those who would if they could have cared for his soul and invited him to make his peace with God before taking his way hence, were alike constrained to be mute. Before he went to present himself at a court of justice where king and crossing-sweeper stand side by side, another judicial murder was to be accomplished, and one more victim added to the number of the accusers awaiting him there. This was the poet Earl of Surrey, heir to the Dukedom of Norfolk.
Surrey was not more than thirty. But much had been crowded, according to the fashion of the time, into his short and brilliant life. Brought up during his childhood at Windsor as the companion of the49 King’s illegitimate son, the Duke of Richmond—who subsequently married Mary Howard, his friend’s sister—Surrey had suffered many vicissitudes of fortune; had been in confinement on a suspicion of sympathy with the Pilgrimage of Grace; and in 1543 had again fallen into disgrace, charged with breaking windows in London by shooting pebbles at them. To this accusation he pleaded guilty, explaining, in a satire directed against the citizens of London, that his object had been to prepare them for the divine retribution due for their irreligion and wickedness:
This made me with a reckless brest,To wake thy sluggards with my bowe;A figure of the Lord’s behest,Whose scourge for synne the Scriptures shew.
He can scarcely have expected that the plea would have availed, and he expiated his offence by a short imprisonment, chiefly of importance as accentuating his hatred towards the Seymours, who were held responsible for it.36
In the course of the same year he was more worthily employed in fighting the battles of England abroad, where his conduct elicited a cordial tribute of praise from Charles V. “Our cousin, the Earl of Surrey,” wrote the Emperor to Henry, on Surrey’s return to England, would supply him with an account of all that had taken place. “We will50 therefore only add that he has given good proof in the army of whom he is the son; and that he will not fail to follow in the steps of his father and forefathers, with si gentil cœur and so much dexterity that there is no need to instruct him in aught, and you will give him no command that he does not know how to execute.”37
Two years later Surrey was in command of the English forces at Boulogne, there suffered defeat, and was, though not as an ostensible result of his failure, superseded by his rival and enemy, the Earl of Hertford, brother of the Admiral and head of the Seymour clan.
Such was the record of the man who was to fall a prey to the malice and jealousy of the opposite party in the State. His noble birth, his long descent, and his brilliant gifts, were so many causes tending to make him hated and feared; besides which, even amongst men in whom humility was a rare virtue, he was noted for his pride—“the most foolish, proud boy,” as he was once described, “that is in England.” When he came to be tried for his life those of his own house came forward to bear witness to the contempt he had displayed towards inferiors in rank, if not in power. “These new men,” he had said scornfully—it was his sister who played the part of his accuser—“these new men loved no nobility, and if God called away the King51 they should smart for it.”38 None of the King’s Council, he was reported to have declared, loved him, because they were not of noble birth, and also because he believed in the Sacrament of the Altar.39
In verse he had likewise made his sentiments clear, comparing himself, much to his advantage, with the men he hated.
Behold our kyndes how that we differ farre;I seke my foes, and you your frendes do threten still with warre.I fawne where I am fled; you slay that sekes to you;I can devour no yelding pray; you kill where you subdue.My kinde is to desire the honoure of the field,And you with bloode to slake your thirst on such as to you yeld.
It was a natural and inevitable consequence of his attitude towards them that the “new men” hated and sought the ruin of the poet who held them up publicly to scorn; and if his great popularity in the country was in some sort a shield, it was also calculated to prove perilous, by giving rise to suspicion and distrust on the part of a sovereign prone to indulge in these sentiments, and thereby to render the success of his foes more easy.
The Seymours were aware that their time was short. With the King’s approaching death the question of the guardianship of the successor to the throne was becoming daily more momentous; and when pride and vanity on the part of the Earl, together with treachery on that of friends and kin, placed a dangerous52 weapon in the hands of his opponents, they were prompt to use it.
During the summer there was nothing to serve as a presage of his fate; and so late as August he took part in the magnificent reception accorded to the French ambassadors, successfully vindicating on that occasion his right to precedence over the Earl of Hertford, with whom he was as usual at open enmity.
A new cause of quarrel had been added to the old. The Duke of Norfolk, developing, as age crept upon him, an unwonted desire for peace and amity, had lately devised a method of terminating the feud between his heir and the Seymour brothers, so powerful, by reason of their kinship to Prince Edward, in the State. Not only had he revived a project for uniting his widowed daughter, the Duchess of Richmond, to Thomas Seymour, Lord Admiral, Katherine Parr’s former lover, but had made a further proposal to cement the alliance between the rival houses by marrying three of his grandchildren to Hertford’s children.
The old man’s scheme was not destined to succeed. Whether or not the Seymours would have consented to forget ancient grudges, Surrey remained irreconcilable, flatly refusing his consent to his father’s plan. So long as he lived, he declared, no son of his should ever wed Lord Hertford’s daughter; and when his sister—perhaps not insensible to Thomas Seymour’s attractions—showed an inclination to53 yield to the Duke’s wishes, he addressed bitter taunts to her. Since Seymour was in favour with the King, he told her ironically, let her conclude the farce of a marriage, and play in England the part which had, in France, belonged to the Duchesse d’Étampes, Francis I.’s mistress.
Mary Howard did not marry the Admiral, but, possibly sharing her brother’s pride, she never forgot or forgave the insult he had offered her; and, repeating the sarcasm as if it had been advice tendered in all seriousness, did her best to damn the Earl in his day of extremity. In a contemporary Spanish chronicle further particulars, true or false, of the quarrel are added. It is there related that, grieved at the tales that had reached him of his sister’s lightness of conduct, Surrey had taken upon himself to administer a brotherly rebuke.
“Sister,” he said, “I am very sorry to hear what I do about you; and if it be true, I will never speak to you again, but will be your mortal enemy.”40
The Duchess was not a woman to accept the admonition meekly, and it was she who was to prove, in the sequel, the more dangerous foe of the two.
The offence for which Surrey nominally suffered the capital penalty seems trivial enough. According to the story told by contemporary authorities—and it suits well with his overweening pride in54 his ancient blood and royal descent—he caused a painting to be executed wherein the Norfolk arms were joined to those of the royal house, the motto Honi soit qui mal y pense being replaced by the enigmatical device Till then thus, and the whole concealed by a canvas placed above it.
From an engraving by Scriven after a painting by Holbein.
HENRY HOWARD, EARL OF SURREY.
The very fact of the secrecy observed betrays the Earl’s consciousness that he had committed an imprudence. He was guilty of a worse when, notwithstanding the terms upon which he stood with his sister, he made her his confidant in the matter. The Duchess, in her turn, informed her father of what had been done, but to the Duke’s remonstrances Surrey turned a deaf ear. His ancestors, he replied, had borne these arms, and he was much better than they. Powerless to move him, his father, reiterating his fears that it might furnish occasion for a charge of treason, begged that the affair might be kept strictly private, to which Surrey readily agreed. Both men, however, had reckoned without the woman who was daughter to the one, sister to the other. Whether, as some aver,41 the Duchess took the step of betraying her brother directly to the King, or merely corroborated the accusations preferred against him by others—Sir Richard Southwell, a friend of Surrey’s childhood, being the first to denounce him42—the matter soon became known, the55 Earl was examined at length, and by the middle of December was, with his father, lodged in the Tower on the charge of treason, the assumption of the royal arms being viewed as an implied claim to the succession to the throne, and as a menace to the little heir. Hertford and his brother were at hand to exaggerate the peril to be feared from his ambition; and the affection of the populace, who, as he was taken through the city to his place of captivity, made great lamentation,43 was not fitted to allay apprehension. A month later the Earl’s trial took place at the Guildhall, crowds filling the streets as he went by. Brought before his judges, he made so spirited a defence that Holinshed admits that “if he had tempered his answers with such modesty as he showed token of a right perfect and ready wit, his praise had been the greater”; and though neither wit nor modesty was likely to avail to save him, it was not without long deliberation that the jury agreed to declare him guilty.
Their verdict was pronounced by his implacable enemy, Hertford; being greeted by the people with “a great tumult, and it was a long while before they could be silenced, although they cried out to them to be quiet.”44
The prisoner received what was practically sentence of death in characteristic fashion. His56 enemies might have vanquished him, but he could still despise them, still assert his inborn superiority to his victors.
“Of what have you found me guilty?” he demanded. “Surely you will find no law that justifies you; but I know that the King wants to get rid of the noble blood around him, and to employ none but low people.”45
On January 19, not a week after his trial, the poet, King Henry VIII.’s latest victim, was beheaded on Tower Hill. It was not the fault of Henry’s advisers that his aged father did not follow him to the grave. To have cleared Surrey out of their path was much; but it was not enough. The Duke’s heir gone, there were many eager to share amongst themselves the Norfolk spoils; Henry was ready to send his old servant to join his son; and only the King’s death, on the very night before the day appointed for the Duke’s execution, saved him from sharing Surrey’s fate. On January 28, 1547, nine days after the Earl had been slain, Henry was dead.
The end can have taken few people by surprise. Whether it was unexpected by the King none can tell. His will was made—a will paving the way for the misfortunes of one of his kin, and preparing the scaffold upon which Lady Jane Grey was to die; since, tacitly setting aside the claims of his elder sister, Margaret of Scotland, and her heirs, he57 provided that, after his own children, Edward, Mary, and Elizabeth, the descendants of Mary Tudor, of whom Jane was, in the younger generation, the representative, should stand next in the order of succession to the throne. It was the first occasion upon which Lady Jane’s position had been explicitly defined, and was the prelude of the tragedy that was to follow. Should the unrepealed statutes declaring the King’s daughters illegitimate be permitted in the future to weigh against his present provisions in their favour, his great niece or her mother would, in the event of Prince Edward’s death, become heirs to the crown.
For Henry the opportunity of cancelling, had it been possible, the injustices of a lifetime was over. “Soon after the death of the Earl of Surrey,” writes the Spanish chronicler, “the King felt unwell; and, as he was a wise man, he called his council together, and said to them, ‘Gentlemen, I am unwell, and cannot tell when God may call me, so I wish to put my soul in order, and to reward my servants for what they have done.’”
The writer was probably drawing upon his imagination, and presenting rather a picture of what, in his opinion, ought to have taken place than of what truly happened. It quickly became patent to all that the end was at hand; but, though the physicians represented to those about the dying man that it was fitting that he should be warned of his condition,58 most of them shrank from the task. At length Sir Anthony Denny took the performance of the duty upon himself, exhorting his master boldly to prepare for death, “calling himself to remembrance of his former life, and to call upon God in Christ betimes for grace and mercy.”46
What followed must again be largely matter of conjecture, the various accounts being coloured according to the theological views of the narrator. It is possible that, feeling the end near, and calling to mind, as Denny bade him, the life he had led, Henry may have been visited by one of those deathbed repentances so mercilessly described by Raleigh: “For what do they do otherwise that die this kind of well-dying, but say to God as followeth: We beseech Thee, O God, that all the falsehoods, forswearings, and treacheries of our lives past may be pleasing unto Thee; that Thou wilt, for our sakes (that have had no leisure to do anything for Thine) change Thy nature (though impossible) and forget to be a just God; that Thou wilt love injuries and oppressions, call ambition wisdom, and charity foolishness.”47 Into the secrets of the deathbed none can penetrate. Some say the King’s remorse, for the execution of Anne Boleyn in particular, was genuine; others that he was haunted by visionary fears and terrors. In the Spanish chronicle quoted above, it59 is asserted that, sending for “Madam Mary,” his injured daughter, he confessed that fortune—he might have said himself—had been hard against her, that he grieved not to have married her as he wished, and prayed her further to be a mother to the Prince, “for look, he is very little yet.”
The same authority has also drawn what one must believe to be an imaginary picture of a final and affecting interview between Katherine and her husband, “when the good Queen could not answer for weeping.”48 His account is uncorroborated by other evidence, and it is impossible to believe that she can have felt genuine sorrow for the death of a man whose life was a perpetual menace to her own.
According to Foxe, when Denny, the courageous servant who had warned him of his danger, asked whether he would see no learned divine, the King replied that, were any such to be called, it should be Cranmer, but him not yet. He would first sleep, and then, according as he felt, would advise upon the matter. When, an hour or two later, finding his weakness increasing, he sent for the Archbishop, it was too late for speech. “Notwithstanding ... he, reaching his hand to Dr. Cranmer, did hold him fast,” and, desired by the latter to give some token of trust in God, he “did wring his hand in his as hard as he could, and so, shortly after, departed.”49
60
CHAPTER VI
1547Triumph of the new men—Somerset made Protector—Coronation of Edward VI.—Measures of ecclesiastical reform—The Seymour brothers—Lady Jane Grey entrusted to the Admiral—The Admiral and Elizabeth—His marriage to Katherine.
WITH the death of the King a change, complete and sudden, passed over the face of affairs. So long as Henry drew breath all was uncertain; security there was none. The men who were in favour to-day might be disgraced to-morrow, and with regard to the government of the country and the guardianship of the new sovereign all depended upon the state of mind in which death might find him. Happening when it actually did, it left the “new men,” the objects of Surrey’s contempt, triumphant. Norfolk was in prison on a capital charge; his son was dead. Gardiner had fallen into disgrace at the same time as the Howards, and, though averting a worse fate by a timely show of submission, had never regained his power, his name being omitted by Henry from the list of his executors, all, with the exception of Wriothesley the Chancellor, adherents of the Seymours and for the61 most part pledged to the support of the Protestant interest. Henry had acted deliberately.
“My Lord of Winchester—I think by negligence—is left out of Your Majesty’s will,” said Sir Anthony Browne, kneeling by the King’s side, and recalling to the dying man the Bishop’s long service and great abilities. But Henry refused to reconsider the question.
“Hold your peace,” he returned. “I remembered him well enough, and of good purpose have left him out; for surely, if he were in my testament, and one of you, he would cumber you all, and you should never rule him, he is of so troublesome a nature.”50
Gardiner removed, there was no one left of sufficient influence to combat the Seymours. Their day was come.
The King’s death had taken place on Friday, January 28. The Council, for reasons of their own, kept the news secret until the following Monday, when, amidst a scene of strong emotion, real or simulated, the fact was made known to Lords and Commons, Parliament was dissolved, and the Commons dismissed, the peers staying in London to welcome their new sovereign. On February 1 a fresh and crowning success was scored by the dominant party, and Hertford—Wriothesley’s being the sole dissentient voice in the governing body—was made Protector and guardian of the King. That afternoon62 Edward received the homage of the Lords spiritual and temporal, and the new reign was inaugurated.
On the 20th of the same month the coronation took place with all magnificence. On the previous day the nine-year-old King had been brought “through his city of London in most royal and goodly wise” to Westminster, the crafts standing on one side of the streets to see him pass, priests and clerks on the other, with crosses and censers, waiting to cense the new sovereign as he went by. The sword of state was borne by Dorset, as Constable of England, and his daughter, the same age as the King, was probably a witness of the splendid pageant and watched her cousin as, in his gown of cloth of silver embroidered in gold and with his white velvet jerkin and cape, he rode through the city.51
At the coronation on the following day Dorset again occupied a prominent place, standing by the King and carrying the sceptre, Somerset bearing the crown. Cranmer, with no longer anything to fear from his enemies, performed the ceremony and delivered an address that can have left no doubt in the minds of any of his hearers, if such there were, who had clung to the hope that a moderate policy would be pursued in ecclesiastical matters, of what was to be expected from the men who had in their hands the little head of Church and State. As God’s63 Vice-regent and Christ’s Vicar, Edward Tudor was exhorted to see that God was worshipped, idolatry destroyed, the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome banished, and images removed, the hybrid ceremony being concluded by a solemn high mass, Cranmer acting as celebrant.
Signal success had attended the inauguration of the new régime. Dissentients were almost nonexistent. Wriothesley, now Earl of Southampton, remained the solitary genuine adherent of the old faith belonging to the Council. His lack of caution in putting the great seal into commission without the authority of his colleagues afforded them an excuse for ousting him from his post of Chancellor; he was compelled to resign his office, and received orders to confine himself to his house, whilst Hertford, become Duke of Somerset, took advantage of his absence to obtain letters patent by which he became virtually omnipotent in the State.
The earlier months of his government were chiefly devoted to carrying through drastic measures of ecclesiastical reform, in which he was aided by conviction in some, and cupidity in others, of his colleagues, eager to benefit by the spoliation of the Church. With the education of the King in the hands of the Protector, they could count upon immunity when he should come to an age to execute justice on his own account, and the work went swiftly forward. Gardiner, it was true, offered a64 determined opposition. If he had pandered to his old master, he vindicated his character for courage by braving the resentment of the men now in power, and paid for his boldness by imprisonment.
By September the internal affairs of the kingdom were on a sufficiently settled footing to allow the Protector to turn his attention to Scotland. Crossing the border with an army of twenty thousand men, he conducted in person a short campaign ending with the victory of Pinkie, after which, to the surprise of those who expected to see him follow up his success, he hurried home.
His hasty retreat was ascribed to different causes. Some supposed him eager to be again at his post, with the prestige of his victory still fresh. By others it was imagined that he feared the intrigues of his enemies, and in especial of his brother the Admiral. Nor would such uneasiness have been without justification. So long as their combined strength was necessary to enable them to stand against their enemies, the two had made common cause. Somerset was popular in the country; the nobles preferred the Admiral. For both a certain distrust was entertained by those who felt that “their new lustre did dim the light of men honoured with ancient nobility.52” The consciousness of insecurity kept them at one with each other. Become all-powerful in the State, jealousy and passion sundered them.65 Ambitious, proud, and resentful of the Duke’s assumption of undivided authority, Seymour had quickly shown an intention of undermining his brother’s position in the country, with his hold upon the King, and the Protector may reasonably have felt that it was neither safe nor politic, so far as his personal interest was concerned, to remain too long at a distance from the centre of government.
To the jealousies natural to ambitious men other causes of dissension had been added. These were due to the position achieved by Seymour some months previous to the Scotch campaign by his marriage with the King’s widow.
The conduct of Katherine at this juncture is allowed by her warmest partisans to furnish matter for regret. Little information is forthcoming concerning her movements at the time of the King’s death; nor does any blame attach to her if she regarded that event in the light of a timely release, an emancipation from a condition of perpetual unrest and anxiety. In any case the age was not one when overmuch time was squandered in mourning, real or conventional, for the dead; and, judging by the sequel, it is possible that, even before the final close was put to her married life, she may have been contemplating the recovery of her lost lover. It is said that when the Lord Admiral paid her his formal visit of condolence she not only received him in private, but candidly confessed how66 slight was her reason to regret a man who had done her the wrong of appropriating her youth.53
If the conversation is correctly reported, Seymour would augur well of the Queen’s willingness, so far as was possible, to make up for lost time. But he was not himself inclined to be hurried. Intent upon securing every means within his power to assist him in the coming struggle for pre-eminence, he did not at once convince himself that it was his best policy to become the husband of the King’s step-mother, and that a more advantageous alliance was not within his grasp.
Other matters were also occupying his attention; and it was now that Lady Jane Grey, unfortunately a factor of importance in the political world, was brought prominently forward and that her small figure comes first into view in connection with the competition for power and influence.
Although allied with the royal house, and in a position to share in some sort Surrey’s contempt for the parvenu nobility of whom the Seymours were representative, Dorset and the King’s uncles, agreed upon the crucial matter of religion, were on good terms; and Henry was no sooner dead than it occurred to the Admiral that he might steal a march upon his brother and secure to himself a point of vantage in the contest between them, by obtaining the custody for the present, and the disposal in the future, of the marquis’s eldest daughter.
67He lost no time in attempting to compass his purpose. Immediately after the late King’s death—according to statements made when, at a later date, Seymour had fallen upon evil times—Lord Dorset received a visit from a dependant of the Admiral’s, named Harrington, and the negotiations ending in the transference of the practical guardianship of the child to Seymour were set on foot.
Harrington was, it would seem, the bearer of a letter from his master, containing the proposal that Lady Jane should be committed to his care; and found the Marquis, on this first occasion, “somewhat cold” in the matter. The messenger, however, proceeded to urge the wishes of his principal, supporting them by arguments well calculated to appeal to an ambitious man. He reported that he had heard Seymour say “that Lady Jane was as handsome as any lady in England, and that, if the King’s Majesty, when he came of age, would marry within the realm, it was as likely he would be there as in any other place, and that he [the Admiral] would wish it.”54
Such was Harrington’s deposition. Dorset’s account of the interview is to much the same effect. Visiting him at his house at Westminster “immediately after the King’s death,” he stated that Seymour’s envoy had advised him to be68 content that his daughter should be with the Admiral, assuring him that he would find means to place her in marriage much to his comfort.
“With whom?” demanded Dorset, plainly anxious to obtain an explicit pledge.
“Marry,” answered Harrington, “I doubt not you shall see him marry her to the King.”
As a consequence of this conversation Dorset called upon the Admiral at Seymour House a week later, and as the two walked in the garden an agreement was arrived at, and her father was won over to send for the child, who thereafter remained in the Admiral’s house “continually” until the death of the Queen.55
It was a strange arrangement; the more so that it was evidently concluded before the marriage of the late King’s widow to Seymour, a man one would imagine to have been in no wise fit to be entrusted with the sole guardianship of the little girl. But Dorset was ambitious; the favour of the King’s uncle, with the possibility of securing the King himself as a son-in-law, was not lightly to be forgone; and the sacrifice of Jane was made, not for the last time, to her father’s interest.
To the child herself the change from the Bradgate fields and parks to the London home of her new guardian must have been abrupt. Yet, though she may have felt bewildered and desolate in her new69 surroundings and separated from her two little sisters, her training at home had not been of a description to cause her overmuch regret at a parting from those responsible for it. It has been said that every child should dwell for a time within an Eden of its own, and with many men and women the recollection of the unclouded irrational joy belonging to a childhood surrounded by love and tenderness may have constituted in after years a pledge and a guarantee that happiness is possible, and that, in spite of sin and sorrow and suffering, the world is still, as God saw it at creation, very good. The garden in which little Jane’s childhood was passed was one of a different nature. “No lady,” says Fuller pitifully, “which led so many pious, lived so few pleasant days, whose soul was never out of the nonage of affliction till Death made her of full years to inherit happiness, so severe her education.” Her father’s house was to her a house of correction.56
Such being the case, the less regret can have mingled with the natural excitement of a child brought into wholly new conditions of life, and treated perhaps for the first time as a person of importance. Nor was it long before circumstances provided her with a home to which no exception could be taken. By June Seymour’s marriage with the Queen-Dowager had been made public.
In the interval, short though it was, that elapsed70 between the King’s death and the union of his widow and the Admiral, Seymour had had time, before committing himself to a renewal of his suit to Katherine, to attempt a more brilliant match. Henry had been scarcely a month dead before he addressed a letter, couched in the correct terms of conventional love-making, to the Princess Elizabeth, now fourteen. He wished, he wrote, that it were possible to communicate to the missive the virtue of rousing in her heart as much favour towards him as his was full of love for her, proceeding to pay the customary tribute to the beauty and charm, together with “a certain fascination I cannot resist,” by which he had been subjugated.
Elizabeth, at fourteen, was keen-witted enough to estimate aright the advantages offered by a marriage with the uncle of the reigning sovereign. Nor was she, perhaps, judging by what followed, indifferent to the personal attractions of this, her first suitor. Though a certain impression of vulgarity is conveyed, in spite of his magnificent voice and splendid appearance, by the Lord Admiral, a child twenty years younger than himself was not likely to detect, in the recognised Adonis of the Court, the presence of this somewhat indefinable attribute. In her eyes he was doubtless a dazzling figure; and though she replied by a polite refusal to entertain his addresses, it is said that she afterwards owed her step-mother a grudge for having discouraged71 her from accepting them. Her answer was, however, a model of maidenly modesty. She had, she stated, neither age nor inclination to think of marriage, and would never have believed that the subject would have been broached so soon after her father’s death. Two years at least must be passed in mourning, nor could she decide to become a wife before she had reached years of discretion.57
That problematical date would not be patiently awaited by a man intent upon building up without delay the fabric of his fortunes; and, denied the late King’s daughter, Seymour promptly fell back upon his wife. A graphic account of the beginning of his courtship is supplied by the Spanish chronicle, and, if not reliable for accuracy, the narrative no doubt represents what was believed in London, where the writer was resident. The question of the marriage had been, according to him, first mooted to the Council by the Protector, and though other authorities assert that the Duke was opposed to the match, both facts may be true. It is not inconceivable that, whilst he would have preferred that his brother should have looked less high for a wife, the possibility that Seymour might have obtained the hand of the King’s sister may have caused the Protector to regard with favour an arrangement putting a marriage with the Princess out of the question.
72At the Council Board it is said that the proposal received the approbation of the Chancellor. Cranmer, though characterising it as an act of disrespect to the memory of the late King, promised to interpose no obstacle. Paget, the Secretary, went further, engaging that his wife, in attendance on the Queen, should push the matter to the best of her ability.
After dinner one day, accordingly—to continue the narrative of the Spaniard—when the Queen, with all her ladies, was in the great hall of the palace, and the Lord Admiral entered, “looking so handsome that every one had something to say about him,” Lady Paget, taking her opportunity, made a whispered inquiry to the Queen as to her opinion of Seymour’s appearance. To which the Queen answered that she liked it very much—“oh, how changeable,” sighs the chronicler, “are women in that country!” Encouraged by Katherine’s reply, Lady Paget ventured to go further, and to hint at a marriage; answering, when the Queen replied by demurring on the score of her superior rank as Queen-Dowager, that to win so pretty a man you might well stoop. Katherine would, she added, continue to retain her royal title.58
The Queen did not prove difficult to persuade. If it is true that she had been cognisant of Seymour’s attempt to obtain the hand of her step-daughter, the fact might have warned her of the nature of the love73 he was offering to herself. But a woman in her state of mind is not accessible to reason. A little more than a month after Henry’s death the betrothal took place, the marriage following upon it in May, and the haste displayed giving singular proof of how far the Queen’s old passion had mastered prudence and discretion. The world was scandalised, and the King’s daughters in particular were strong in their disapproval; Mary, the more energetic of the two on this occasion, summoning her sister to visit her, that together they might devise means of preventing the impending insult to their father’s memory, or concert a method of making their attitude clear.
Elizabeth, though her objections to the match were probably, on personal grounds, stronger than those of her sister, was more cautious than Mary. The girl, or her advisers, may have been aware of the fact that opposition to the King’s uncle would be a dangerous course to be pursued by any one whose future was as ill assured as her own; and, in answer to her sister, she pointed out, though expressing her grief at the affair, that their sole consolation would lie in submission to the will of Providence, since neither was able to offer practical resistance to the project. Dissimulation, under these circumstances, would be their best policy. Mary might decline to visit the Queen, but in Elizabeth’s subordinate position she would herself be compelled74 to do so, her step-mother having shown her so much kindness.59
Despite public censure, despite the blame and disapproval of critics whose disapproval would carry more weight, Katherine may not at this time have regretted her defiance of conventional propriety; and those spring weeks, passed at her jointure palace in Chelsea, were probably the happiest of her life. The nightmare sense of insecurity, which can never have been wholly laid to rest so long as Henry lived, was removed; the price exacted for her royal dignity had been paid, to the uttermost farthing; and she was a free woman. Her old love for Seymour had re-awakened in full force, and she believed it was returned. Pious and prudent, Katherine had forgotten to be wise. Disillusionment might come later, but at present the future smiled upon her; and she may fairly have counted upon it to pay, at long last, the debts of the past.
Her letters, light and tender, grave and gay, indicate her mood as she awaited the day when she would take her place before the world as Seymour’s wife. Whether a marriage had already taken place, though kept private as a concession to public opinion, or whether it was still to come, there were secret meetings in the early spring mornings by the river, when the town was scarcely awake, the more welcome, it may be, because of the sense that they were stolen.
75“When it shall be your pleasure to repair hither,” wrote Kateryn the Quene—her invariable signature—to her lover, “ye must take some pains to come early in the morning, that ye may be gone again by seven o’clock; and so I suppose ye may come hither without suspect. I pray you let me have knowledge over-night at what hour ye will come, that your portress [herself] may wait at the gate of the fields for you.... By her that is, and shall be, your humble, true, and loving wife during her life.”
Poor, learned Katherine had fallen an unresisting victim, like any other common woman, to the gifts and attractions of the man who was to prove so unsatisfactory a husband!
By May 17, if not before, it is clear that the marriage had taken place, though the secret had been so closely kept that it was a surprise to the bridegroom to discover that it was known to the Queen’s own sister, Lady Herbert. On visiting the latter, he told Katherine in a letter of this date, she had charged him “touching my lodging with your Highness at Chelsea,” the Admiral stoutly maintaining that he had done no more than pass by the garden on his way to the house of the Bishop of London; “till at last she told me further tokens, which made me change colour,” and he had arrived at the conclusion that Lady Herbert had been taken into her sister’s confidence.
76Meantime the inconvenience of the present condition of things was evident; and to Mary—curiously enough, since her disapproval of the projected marriage had been so pronounced—Seymour applied for help which should enable him to put an end to it. Although he preserved the attitude of a mere suitor for the Queen’s hand, it may be that the Princess suspected that she was being consulted after the event. Her answer was not encouraging. Had the matter concerned her nearest kinsman and dearest friend it would, she told the Admiral, stand least with her poor honour than with any other creature to meddle in the affair, considering whose wife the Queen had lately been.
“If the remembrance of the King’s Majesty my father ... will not suffer her to grant your suit, I am nothing able to persuade her to forget the loss of him who is, as yet, very rife in mine own remembrance.” If, however, the Princess refused the assistance he begged, she assured him that, “wooing matters apart, wherein, being a maid, I am nothing cunning,” she would be ready in other things to serve him.
The young King, to whom recourse was next had, was found more accommodating; and indeed appears to have been skilfully convinced that it was by his persuasions that his step-mother had been induced to bestow her hand upon his uncle, writing to thank the Queen for her gentle acceptation77 of his suit. The boy, after Katherine’s death and her husband’s disgrace, gave an account of the methods used to obtain his intervention:
“The Lord Admiral came to me ... and desired me to write a thing for him. I asked him what. He said it was none ill thing; it is for the Queen’s Majesty. I said if it were good the Lords would allow it; if it were ill I would not write on it. Then he said they would take it in better part if I would write. I desired him to let me alone in that matter. Cheke said afterwards to me, ‘Ye were best not to write.’”60
The boy’s letter to the Queen proves that he had subsequently yielded to his uncle’s request; and in June the fact of the marriage became public property.
The progress of the love-affair will have been watched with interest by the curious and jealous eyes of Elizabeth, the half-grown girl, who, placed by the Council under her step-mother’s care at Chelsea, had ample opportunities of forming her conclusions. Lady Jane Grey may, not improbably, have been likewise a spectator of what was going forward. There is no evidence to show whether it was before or after the public avowal of the marriage that she took up her residence under the Queen’s roof. But, having obtained his point and gained her custody, it is not unreasonable to imagine that the Admiral may have found a child of ten an encumbrance78 in his household, and have taken the earliest opportunity of consigning her to Katherine’s care.
A passive asset as she was in the political reckoning, the debates concerning her guardianship must have done something to bring home to her mind the consciousness of her importance; and she had doubtless been made well aware of her title to consideration by the time that she became an honoured inmate of the Lord Admiral’s house. But concerning the details of her existence at this date history is dumb, and we can but guess at her attitude as, fresh from her country home, she watched, under the roof of her new guardian in Seymour Place, the life of the great city around; or within the more tranquil precincts of Chelsea Palace, with the broad river flowing past, shared in the studies and pursuits of her cousin Elizabeth, ready-witted, full of vitality, and already displaying some of the traits marking the Queen of future years.
Did the shadow of predestined and early death single little Jane out from her companions? Like the comrades of whom Maeterlinck tells, “children of precocious death,” possessing no friends amongst the playmates who were not about to die, did she stand in some sort apart and separate, regarding those around her with a grave smile? We build up the unrecorded days of childhood from the79 few short years that followed; and reading backwards, and fitting the fragments of a life into its place, we find it difficult to believe that Jane Grey’s laughter rang like that of other undoomed children through the pleasant Chelsea gardens, that she shared with a whole heart in the games of her playfellows, or that the strange seriousness of her youth did not envelope the small, sedate figure of the child.
80
CHAPTER VII
1547-1548Katherine Parr’s unhappy married life—Dissensions between the Seymour brothers—The King and his uncles—The Admiral and Princess Elizabeth—Birth of Katherine’s child, and her death.
THE belated idyll of love and happiness enjoyed by “Kateryn the Quene” was of pitifully short duration. During the first days of September 1548, some fifteen months after the stolen marriage at Chelsea, a funeral procession left Sudeley Castle, and the body of the wife of the Lord Admiral was carried forth to burial, Lady Jane Grey, his ward, then in her twelfth year, acting as chief mourner.61
Jane had good cause to mourn, in other than an official capacity. It is hard to believe that, had Katherine Parr been living, the child she had cared for and who had made her home under her roof, would not have been saved from the doom destined to overtake her not six years later.
Katherine’s dream had died before she did, and the period of her marriage, short though it was,81 must have been a time of rapid disillusionment. It could scarcely, taking the circumstances into account, have been otherwise. Seymour was not the man to make the happiness of a wife touching upon middle age, studious, learned, and devout, “avoiding all occasions of idleness, and contemning vain pastimes.”62 His love, if indeed it had been ever other than disguised ambition, was short-lived, and Katherine’s awakening must have come all too swiftly.
Nor was the revelation of her husband’s true character her only cause of trouble. Minor vexations had, from the first, attended her new condition of life, and she had been made to feel that the wife of the Protector’s younger brother could not expect to enjoy the deference due to a Dowager-Queen. To Katherine, who clung to her former dignity, the loss of it was no light matter, and her sister-in-law, the Duchess of Somerset, and she were at open war.
Contemporary and early writers are agreed as to the nature of the woman with whom she had to deal. “The Protector,” explains the Spanish chronicler, giving the popular version of the affair, “had a wife who was prouder than he was, and she ruled the Protector so completely that he did whatever she wished, and she, finding herself in such great state, became more presumptuous than Lucifer.”63 Hayward attributes the subsequent disunion between the brothers, in the first place,82 to “the unquiet vanity of a mannish, or rather a devilish woman ... for many imperfections intolerable, but for pride monstrous”;64 whilst Heylyn represents the Duchess as observing that, if Mr. Admiral should teach his wife no better manners, “I am she that will.”65
The struggle for precedence carried on between the wives could scarcely fail to have a bad effect upon the relationship of the husbands, already at issue upon graver questions; and Warwick, Somerset’s future rival, was at hand to foment the strife between Protector and Admiral, and, “secretly playing with both hands,” paved the way for the fall of the younger brother and the consequent weakening of the forces which barred the way to the attainment of his personal ambitions.
From LADY JANE GREY AND HER TIMES By I. A. TAYLOR
Author of “Queen Hortense
American Title Services of Greenwood Village, Colorado offers a wide variety of products and services to enhance every aspect of a real estate transaction, both residential and commercial. With offices throughout the greater Denver metro area and the Front Range of Colorado, we are here to help make every closing, every client and every person involved in a transaction feel well informed, valued, and a welcomed part of the event.
American Title Services
3665 John F. Kennedy Pkwy Suite 1-300
Fort Collins, CO 80525
Phone: (970) 658-9120
Contact Person: Richard Talley
Contact Email: ftc@americantitleservices.tk
Website: www.AmericanTitleServices.com
You Tube URL: www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLubcbAV72Q
You Tube URL: www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ltbi86kcxY
You Tube URL: www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_UaR7UvjSQ
Main Keywords:
title company, title services, real estate escrow, title companies, title insurance, transaction coordination, construction loan disbursements, plat approvals and certification • on site closings, foreclosure guarantees, 1031 exchanges
Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi along with HH Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, President of the UAE witnessed a transaction made using the JAYWAN card, based on India's digital RuPay credit and debit card stack in Abu Dhabi
Heaven Network is a innovative blockchain technology which enables user with fast transaction with full security and backed by dollars.
In the insurance sector, we need to monitor transactions. This is the industry where violations can damage the company's reputation. AML transaction monitoring can help you to monitor the transactions of onboarding customers. For more info visit our website: bit.ly/3RZBcY1
Dated 25th November 1888 Office Copy of the Transaction to sell £160 of Stock in Midland Railway Company by James Warner and Edward Boyce Pomeroy, Trustees of James Warner Seniors Will to Robert Thornton, High Cross, Framfield, Sussex for £213 1s.
James Warner Junior born circa 1834 was the son of James Warner and Hannah Hopson and the brother of Ann, nee Warner, Wheelhouse and Mary Ann, nee Warner, Chamberlayne. He married Harriet Mann in 1856. He died in 1914. He was the main Executor along with Edward Boyce Pomeroy, Solicitor, Wymondham, of his father’s, James Warner Senior, Will. James Warner Senior had died 2nd December 1881.
Robert Thornton is shown in the 1881 census living at High Cross House, Framfield, Uckfield, Sussex
Warner Family of Norfolk Family Papers. Pomeroy and Son, Solicitors, Wymondham
As stated by Quinton towards the end of the exchange, she decides to close her Tiny Paws Designs shop and attributes her decision to Garbato "bankrupting" her. Note that Quinton has a 100% positive rating from 50 users! Admittedly, the strife between Quinton and Garbato seems quite dramatic and absurd. It is possible that Garbato was an unreasonable buyer and that all of Quinton's other customers had a straightforward shopping experience. It doesn't look like the Kiss and Make Up feature would have worked for these ladies!
Opening event organized by Mildot agency for VP Bank's new transaction office on Nga Tu Vong in Hanoi, 11 November 2010. Welcoming the guests
Daniel Amesbury (#16) was a late transaction. Equipment manager Jim Chestnut travels with a lettering kit and managed to get the name on the jersey after arriving at the arena.
This transaction counter was part of some shop furniture commissioned over Christmas 2009. It features sliding glass and perspex doors and custom till draw system.
Automated Transaction Monitoring
Welcome to the age of Automated Transaction Monitoring. eTHIC - OTMS, a product of NCS SoftSolutions assists to track and alert the anomalies in the focus areas.
Please write to marketing@ncssoft.in or visit : ncssoft.in/ to understand the entire product range.
#eTHIC #NCS #NCSSoft #eAudit #AuditTechnology #FinTech #OTMS #transactionMonitoring #riskmanagement #fraud #screening
NCSSoft is a product development company primarily focused on developing products for the financial sector. Completing a decade of delivering comprehensive solutions for Banking and media industries, NCSSoft is the preferred Auditing solution provider for top financial institutions across India. With a user base exceeding 1 lac, we are poised to become a global leader in the Auditing and Compliance space.
Every transaction you process in your iCashbook ends up at the end in the form of a report. These reports tell
you what your business has earned and what it has spent its money on for a particular period.
Various reports also explain many other things such as your GST, cashflow, budgets, profit and cashbook.