Spain: December 1546, 1-15 | British History Online

Calendar of State Papers, Spain, Volume 8, 1545-1546. Originally published by His Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1904.

Citation:

'Spain: December 1546, 1-15', in Calendar of State Papers, Spain, Volume 8, 1545-1546, ed. Martin A S Hume (London, 1904), British History Online https://prod.british-history.ac.uk/cal-state-papers/spain/vol8/pp513-529 [accessed 19 April 2025].

December 1546, 1–15



7 & 24 Nov. 5 & 12Dec. Simancas. E.R. 873.	357. Document headed:—“Account of letters from Juan de Vega 7 and 24 November and 5 and 12 December, 1546. Answered from Heilbronn 16 January, 1547.”
	Decision on the points at issue had been delayed until the arrival of Cardinal Farnese on the 11th. Vega had spoken to the latter, and he had promised to use every effort to obtain a prompt and favourable decision. Before Farnese arrived it had been suggested to Vega through Cardinal Santa Flor that the Pope would grant the whole 500,000 ducats, on condition that this concession should cover the supplementary grant of 100,000 crowns, of which hopes had always been given. Vega had refused this, taking his stand on the instructions.
	(Marginal note for reply: He did very well in this. Let him keep to it.)
	Vega says that if the Pope is once convinced of your Majesty's success, he has no doubt that he will do all that is required of him; although it is evident that he is ill pleased. On the contrary, he and his friends cannot conceal the favourable progress of events, and never cease their confessions of the enemy's weakness. Cardinal Farnese had expressed his great satisfaction and devotion to your Majesty, but some people do not believe the truth of it. Still every appearance of confidence in him shall be shown. The Pope has had many conferences with the French Ambassador, concerning peace and with reference to this enterprise. They are employing every sort of artifice to persuade Vega of the difficulty they (i.e. the Pope and his Counsellors) will have in continuing the subvention, etc., though the Bishop of Ancona assures him of the Pope's desire to satisfy your Majesty, on condition that Vega will use his good offices in the matter of peace between your Majesty and France.
	(Marginal note for reply: He must persist in pressing the mission of Don Juan de Mendoza, pointing out the perplexity of the Emperor at the long delay in sending the reply and furnishing the subsidy. His Holiness must remember how earnestly the Emperor has written about it, and how urgently the help is required. With regard to the question of peace (i.e. the confirmation of the peace between the Emperor and France) it has no connection whatever with the main point at issue, and Juan de Vega will not make any move in this respect as they request. The Nuncio recently told de Granvelle that he had received letters from Rome referring exclusively to this question of peace, and that as the time had arrived for sending the troops into winter quarters, he thought it would be advisable to endeavour to conclude peace (with France). Granvelle asked him if he had any communication to make about Don Juan de Mendoza's mission, to which question he replied in the negative. Granvelle then told him to consider what the Emperor would think of his having nothing to say about the principal business in hand. To this he only answered that he hoped shortly to have a reply on that point.)
	Don Juan de Mendoza writes that he had spoken to Cardinal Farnese as soon as he arrived, and the latter had promised all his aid, saying that he was no longer Legate, but only a servant of your Majesty. Mendoza desires instructions as to how long he should remain in Rome if the Pope delays his decision, and also if his Holiness should raise difficulties about the other subsidies which are justly payable, especially the 500,000 ducats.
	With regard to the Council, no advice had come from Trent nor any reply to the letter written lately from Rothenburg with regard to the suspension and the other points discussed there between Cardinals Farnese and Trent and others.
	(The rest of this document refers to the Italian princes and Spanish ecclesiastical appointments of no interest.)
5 Dec. Simancas. E.R. 873.	358. Juan de Vega to the Emperor.
	(Congratulations on the victories of the King of the Romans in Saxony, the retirement of the Landgrave and the weakness of the enemy.)
	“I am of opinion that this news will do more in favour of the affairs now being negotiated than Cardinal Farnese's promised efforts, as he has delayed so long before coming to keep his word. He has indeed not yet arrived; nor is it known for certain when he is coming, though I am informed that he is not passing by way of Piacenza, as was previously announced. Since the good news has been received they have written asking him to hurry, but I suspect that their real object was further to delay his coming, in order that the Pope might utilise the delay for his own ends. Since my last letters of 18 and 20 ultimo Don Juan Hurtado de Mendoza and I have been with the Cardinal ministers, and once with the Pope. It would be tedious and useless to detail all that has passed in these interviews; the substance of it all was that they replied to Don Juan's requests, raising difficulties, especially in the prolongation of the treaty and in the matter of the 500,000 ducats. They said that they must await the arrival of Cardinal Farnese for the other points. When we pressed the Pope urgently for a decision so that Don Juan might return, it was arranged that we should meet the ministers again, and discuss the matters dependent upon the existing treaty, (fn. 1) since we could do that without the Legate (i.e. Farnese), but that the questions touching future action must await Farnese's arrival.
	This was four days ago, and although we have asked for an appointment with the ministers we have been unable to obtain one: nor can we quite make out what their decision will be, though I have always been of opinion that the Pope will not dare to refrain from aiding your Majesty. Since the news above-mentioned (i.e. of the victories in Saxony) we have been informed that the Pope would satisfy your Majesty in the matter of the 500,000 ducats; and also in the increase of his contingent, as well as providing money for the rest. I am also privately informed by a trustworthy person that Maffeo told him to-day that the Pope would do as your Majesty asked; as, under the circumstances, no other course was possible. I am pressing them for a decision, and Cardinal Santa Flor to-day sent me excuses for not having met us, the Pope having been unwell, but promised to see his Holiness and arrange.
	I have not been able to understand what is the Pope's decision about the Council (of Trent), but I expect that your Majesty will have learnt from Trent. But I know that before the news (of the victories) arrived, they were not satisfied with the proposals for the prorogation which were brought forward by your Majesty's representatives; and I am told that they are still very much discontented on the point; although when the letters of 22nd ultimo arrived the Pope sent a message to Trent in a great hurry.
	Rome, 5 December, 1546.
5 Dec. Simancas. E. 1192	359. Document headed:— “Account of the letters of Don Diego (Hurtado de Mendoza) respecting the Council (i.e. of Trent) for consideration of his Majesty. Discussed at Rothenburg, 5 December, 1546.”
	Cardinal Farnese having arrived at Trent, to all appearance determined to live and die in his Majesty's service, a meeting was held of the Legates, Cardinals Farnese and Trent, and Don Diego. The three following points comprising the future action with regard to the Council were brought forward for discussion:—
	1. The article of “Justification” being now on the point of final decision, is it to the benefit of Christendom and of the “enterprise” that it should be promulgated at once or suspended for a month or two?
	2. Would it be better to bring forward in the Council the article touching the residence of bishops, or for his Holiness himself to issue a Bull voluntarily granting to the bishops all he honestly could do in order that they might be able to reside in their churches ?
	3. Since your Majesty had not consented to the transfer of the Council elsewhere, what was to be done with it ? (i.e. the Council.)
	With regard to the first point, the arguments for and against the promulgation of the article are set forth at length, the final decision of the five persons present being that the inconvenience that would result from the suspension of the article would be more easily dealt with and remedied than the difficulty that would be caused by its promulgation; and it was determined that the promulgation should be delayed for the present. At the same time it was recommended that the substance of the article should be quietly spread throughout the Church by the bishops, etc. Don Diego wrote privately that a doctrine spread in this way would lack authority, as it would be necessary for the Council to reserve the right of abolishing, supplying or changing what it might consider necessary, according to circumstances.
	With regard to the second point, of the residence of prelates, the question was so difficult and dangerous, owing to the fact that each prelate would interpret it according to his own interests, disregarding the larger interests of Christendom. The decision of the point might give rise to divisions between the Pope and the Council, or between the Princes and the Roman Church, which might end in schism. It was therefore thought best that the Pope should at once issue a Bull allowing to the prelates who would live in their churches all the concessions proposed recently to the legates, and even more amply still, especially abolishing the exemptions to priests, friars and chapters. Don Diego was anxious to learn from the legates exactly what concessions the Pope intended to grant to the bishops; but he was told that the matter was purely one of ecclesiastical discipline.
	On the third point, it was considered that no question of removing the sittings elsewhere was to be discussed, and that the best course would be to announce a recess or suspension for six months. This would avoid many difficulties: amongst others that, as the Council is to sit during the war and the latter is suspended during the winter, the Council should also be similarly suspended. If the Council continued to sit during a suspension of hostilities, it would be necessary to close it very shortly; because after the publication of the “Justification” article, there would be nothing further to occupy the Council, all the other articles being either dependent upon that of Justification, or already settled by previous resolutions. The objects to be gained jointly by the Council and the war together would therefore fail; and at the same time it was recollected that if an attempt was made to deal with matters slowly the Council would dissolve of itself, which would be the most dangerous eventuality of all; seeing that the idea of consulting the Universities on the article of Justification had been rejected by the whole of the Council, in consequence of the scandal and loss of prestige that would result as well as the bad example it would set to posterity. Each party present therefore decided to lay these views respectively before the Pope, the Emperor, etc.
	After discussion with the Emperor, the following answer was ordered to be sent to Don Diego (de Mendoza).
	It will be well to defer the publication of the decision that may be adopted respecting “Justification,” even if the decision itself is adopted secretly, in order to avoid the dissemination of the discord and bad feeling that have arisen over this article. These have already caused the ungodly to print an account of what has passed, and to allege that the Council came to fisticuffs about the article. If the Papal party desire to act otherwise let them do so without consulting us, in order that they may have no excuse for saying that his Majesty and his ministers have openly or tacitly consented to the resolution of the article, or their action regarding it without full consideration; especially as the Papal party objected to consulting the Universities and other learned persons outside the Council; their objection being founded on their own interests, and on the Pope's claim to superiority over the Council. With regard to the dissemination of the doctrine contained in the article by means of preachers, perhaps it would be best not to do this, but to follow the usual course in the Church before these innovations were heard of. With regard to the second point, of remedying the grievances of the bishops, as these grievances are against the Pope and the Roman court the Emperor does not desire to interfere at all in the matter; but to leave it entirely to the Pope, whom he refers to the articles forwarded to the Council from Spain on the subject. On the points there indicated a remedy must be provided in the interests of the good government of his Majesty's dominions. His Majesty hopes that these matters will be settled without the necessity of discussing them in the Council. Don Diego did well in declining to consent to the suspension of the Council. Nothing further should be done on this point, but a stand should be made upon the instructions given to Don Juan de Mendoza (fn. 2) and communicated to Don Juan de Toledo, as similar reasons to those stated therein have moved his Majesty to refuse to allow the Council to be moved. The chief of these reasons is the continuance of his obligation to secure the holding of the Council on German territory, an obligation now greater than ever, seeing that the Emperor is engaged in the war, and affairs are in their present condition.
	If in these circumstances we were to consent to a suspension, it would furnish a pretext for its entire dissolution. With all due moderation, therefore, the suspension or recess, which is almost the same thing, should be avoided. They must be made to understand that his Majesty cannot consent to it.
6 Dec. Paris. Archives Nationales. K. 1486.	360. St. Mauris to Prince Philip.
	(Sends letters he has received giving an account of the defeat of the Protestants in Saxony, “whom God for ever confound.”) I cannot omit to tell your Highness one thing: that the King of France, the Dauphin and all this court are dreadfully alarmed at this defeat of the Protestants; fearing that as they have aided our enemies, they (the French) may now feel the smart.
	The Commissioners of France and England have been assembled in Calais for a long time past to settle their difficulties; but, so far as I can learn, they will fail to come to an agreement, and will separate without doing anything. The King of France has lost hope of an arrangement, and hates the King of England worse than ever, whilst the King of England as deeply distrusts him, as I am told by his ambassador here. He says that the King of England is offended that the King of France should still maintain his galleys at sea (i.e. outside the Mediterranean). These galleys are now near Rouen etc., and it is said that in the spring they will go to the east (i.e. into the Mediterranean). I will keep myself informed on the matter. The King of France has renewed his edicts against the exportation of wheat or barley.
	Angers, 6 December, 1546.
8 Dec. Vienna. Imp. Arch.	361. The Queen Dowager to Van der Delft.
	We last wrote to you on the 2nd instant, sending you the instructions and documents touching the Scottish affairs; and we have since received your letters of 30 and 31 November, informing us of what had passed between the King of England's ministers and the Scottish ambassadors, and also of the statement made to you by the Bishop of Ross, to the effect that the kingdom of Scotland had another treaty with the Emperor; and was not at war with his Majesty, as with the English. We note the reply that you gave him. The English ministers having so explicitly declared in your presence that they do not regard the Scots as having been included in the peace with France, except by the consent of his Imperial Majesty, there will be no necessity for you to make the representation contained in our last letters; but when you see a fitting opportunity you may enforce and confirm the declaration of the English ministers, by stating to the Scottish ambassadors that we, as Regent of these dominions for the Emperor, have been informed by the King of France, by letters from his admiral, of the treaty of peace made between the two Kings, each of whom had included in the treaty the Emperor, his territories and subjects, and we have also learnt that the Scots were likewise included, in accordance with an extract of the treaty furnished to us. We see, nevertheless, that the Scots have not ceased to assail, plunder, and rob the subjects of his Imperial Majesty; and consequently we sent to Scotland his Majesty's ordinary secretary, M. Matthew Strick, to learn on what pretext the Scots still continued thus to attack his Majesty's subjects, since we understood that by virtue of the inclusion referred to we were at peace with Scotland. Secretary Strick also demanded the restoration of all prizes captured since the treaty of peace; but he was informed by the Scots that they considered themselves included in the peace between England and France, on conditions which they said they had accepted; and that, consequently, they were at peace with England. They were not, however, they said, at peace with the Emperor and his subjects, because the clauses of the treaty of peace were only binding on the contracting parties. As such an interpretation as this is directly at variance with the treaty of alliance between the Emperor and the King of England, and the latter could not include the Scots in the peace except on the condition that the Emperor consented, we are unable to accept this statement of the Scots. We have conveyed this through you to the ministers of the King of England, who have always assured us that the Scots were only included in the peace provided they were at peace with the Emperor: this, indeed, being clearly expressed in the text of the inclusion clause. The Bishop of Ross therefore had no reason for asking you so pointedly whether you were instructed to confirm what the English Chancellor had said, namely, that we were jointly with the English at war with the Scots; since he himself (the Bishop of Ross) had said the same thing in Scotland to Secretary Strick, for the purpose of arousing distrust between the King of England and ourselves. He (the bishop) must also know very well that he was plainly told, when he was in Brussels, that we had no intention of negotiating with the Scots except with the co-operation of the King of England. This was the sole reason why the Emperor refused to include the Scots in the treaty of Créspy. Although the French endeavoured, by means of several contentions proposed by the bishop, to maintain that the Scots were included in that treaty, the bishop was perfectly well aware, and finally admitted, that such was not the case.
	If, perchance, the Scottish ambassadors should again say anything, in the presence of the English ministers, about our having another treaty with Scotland, but without further particularising it, you will say that you cannot speak of that, as you have never heard of such a treaty; but that you do not believe that they can show that any treaty has been made with them that could weaken the treaty of alliance existing between the Emperor and the King of England; which alliance we wish to observe faithfully and sincerely. You will not go beyond this, unless your hand be forced by the production or quotation from the agreement of Antwerp. (fn. 3) If this be done by the Scots, you will give satisfaction to the English ministers by using the arguments contained in the instructions sent you; but you will take great care not to be drawn into any dispute about the said agreement, if you can avoid it, in the presence of the English ministers. If the Scots waive the inclusion clause, as they will be obliged to do if the English stand firm, and begin to negotiate anew, you will intervene in the negotiations, and insist with the English that the Scots must first restore everything they have captured since the treaty of peace between France and England, both from the Emperor's subjects and the English. You must keep firm on this point.
	If the Scots undertake to do this you must tell them at the same time that they must immediately release everything they have stopped, and call in the sureties given by their subjects at the instance of Secretary Strick and since for the captures effected by the Scots from the Emperor's subjects. There must be no delay in this respect; and with regard to the rest of the property, which may have already been scattered or made away with, a joint committee will have to meet and clear up the matter, after which restitution must be made; the persons and property of Scottish subjects being made answerable for the same. But you must take care not to mention the property embargoed, or now on security in Scotland, until the Scottish ambassadors have agreed in principle to the restitution, for fear that if the matter is mentioned before they may seize the opportunity of scattering the whole of the property. If, moreover, you see a disposition on the part of the English to make their own profit out of the business in their new treaty, by abandoning the claims for captures and damages committed by the Scots on their subjects, and they ask you to make similar concessions, in the interests of peace, you will answer that you have no authority to do so, and you cannot consent without communicating with us, as in such case you will do. You will, at the same time, let us know what you can learn of the probable tenour of any treaty the English may make with the Scots. You may signify to the English ministers that, in your opinion, we ought not to forego the restitution referred to, as it is the principal point at issue. As to the rest, you will proceed in accordance with the instructions sent you previously. Touching the messenger we sent to Scotland, you did right in detaining him in England, and you had better send him back hither, retaining his packet until you see what you can settle with the Scots. If, perchance, they do not agree to anything, you had better consider whether it would not be advisable to speak privately to the Bishop of Boss respecting the prolongation of the agreement of Antwerp; but make no mention of this, unless you see that the negotiations for peace are entirely broken off.
	You have not yet sent us any reply respecting the matter we instructed you to press, as to the reinstatement of the Emperor's subjects possessing properties in the Boulognais. What have you done respecting Paget's observations to you on the subject ? We are desirous of knowing what has passed in the matter, which must be actively dealt with, as it is of the highest importance.
	Tournai, 8 December, 1546.
9 Dec. Simancas. E. V. 1318.	362. Diego Hurtado de Mendoza to the Emperor.
	I have come hither (Venice) because Peter Strozzi is secretly here, apparently negotiating something, and also because of this peace the Pope is so bent upon making between your Majesty and France; it even being said that he will give no more money for the war (i.e. with the Protestants) unless your Majesty will consent to a peace with France.
	The Republic (of Venice) carries it crest high, and people are very indignant that the German war is stopping their trade. Still, as I have often written, the Republic will not adopt any course to your Majesty's detriment in the present state of things. I only refer to it again to clear my conscience. (fn. 4)
	I have written freely to your Majesty on other occasions how passionately the presidents and prelates (i.e. in the Council of Trent) deal with religious questions, and how confusedly, how disorderly, and how regardfully to private interests such matters are discussed. This is proved by the manner in which the article of “Justification “ was proceeded with; but it was first exhibited in the original plan for business, and then in the question of the conception of the Virgin.
	In that of the justification, respecting the certainty of grace, so much passion and corruption have been exhibited on both sides, and so little devotion in essential things, that it is easy to judge how everything has been, and will be, dealt with in this Council.
	From head to foot selfish interests are supreme, and they (i.e. the prelates) have no other God, and no other law, than their own advantage, in accordance with which their every decision is ruled. (fn. 5) All this being true, as it is, if they hurry to settle the articles of “Justification,” and the residence (of the bishops), everything will be over; and the Council will be wound up in four days. From this two inconveniences will arise. First the abuses will be fixed, whilst we who have seen how things have been done, and have heard what has passed, will be bound to abide by the determinations arrived at. Secondly: in case it should be desired to amend matters by another Council it will be almost impossible to do so; as the abuses have been approved of by this Council, and the Pope remains the perpetual head of the Council which will defend such abuses.
	I hear from Juan de Vega that the Pope does not approve of the suggestion of suspending the sittings. This may arise from an idea that everything is bad for him which appears even tolerably good to your Majesty's ministers, for in matters of religion a man must say what he thinks without being asked. As I am now leaving my duties in the Council to serve your Majesty elsewhere, I feel conscientiously obliged to write to your Majesty. I did so before in all sincerity, and I now point out, as I did in my letters from Trent, the difficulties I foresee in the resolution of the articles upon “Justification,” the residence of prelates, and the hasty action of the Council in the matter of suspension of the sittings, in case your Majesty cannot spin matters out, or other difficulties occur which may render these necessary.
	(The rest of this letter, 2 pages, is occupied by Venetian affairs and rumours of Turkish movements in the Mediterranean of no interest.)
	Venice,9 December, 1546.
12 Dec. Simancas. E. R. 873.	363. Juan de Vega to the Emperor.
	(Letter received detailing the Emperor's progress. His Holiness had received news of the dispersal of the enemy, which had caused much sensation. The Pope spoke of holding rejoicings; but as the Emperor's last letter is not very definite the rejoicings have been postponed. Much talk on the matter. Cardinal Farnese has arrived. He and Juan de Mendoza saw his Holiness this morning. No decision arrived at yet, but indications tend to the belief that a favourable result will be obtained, especially about the 500,000 ducats. They wish, however, to make this concession cover the supplement due for the troops sent short, and the extra 100,000 ducats. We will not accept this. The other matter ordered by the Emperor must be dealt with in another letter, as the present is not going by a private courrier.
	The writer is now ready to start for his new Viceroyalty of Naples, when his orders arrive. Thanks the Emperor for sending galleys to convey him.)
	As a more certain messenger is now taking this letter, I can write the rest more clearly. “When his Holiness is quite convinced of your Majesty's success, I believe he will do what is asked of him; although he is much chagrined, and his people are so to an extent that they are unable to conceal, at your Majesty's success. They are most unwilling to admit the weakness of the enemy. In public Cardinal Farnese has expressed his great devotion to your Majesty; but those who see beneath the surface are not so certain of this. But still every mark of confidence shall be shown to him here to see whether it will expedite matters, which are being delayed in an extraordinary manner. That other business (fn. 6) shall be kept quite secret; as if they knew that it was to be broached they would throw every obstacle in the way of those now under discussion. I am of opinion that their design is to make these latter affairs a means of forming a new alliance with your Majesty. If this be the case, they will afterwards be less inclined to turn back than at present when they are perhaps partly undecided.
	Rome, 12 December, 1546.
14 Dec. Vienna. Imp. Arch.	364. Van der Delft to the Emperor.
	After the receipt of your Majesty's letters of 10th October, containing a letter of credence for me to communicate to the King what had happened up to that time to your Majesty's enemies, I demanded audience. As, however, the King was not very well I was referred to the Council, to whom I conveyed the contents of your Majesty's note. Since then I have received an unsigned letter of the 8th November, of which the original reached me on the 6th instant, as I was coming from Oatlands, where on the previous day I had spoken to the King and had communicated to him the intelligence contained in the said unsigned letter. He took in good part your Majesty's assurance of your Majesty's reciprocity of his good and perfect friendship; and, with regard to the French efforts to make out that the friendship on his side was not sincere, and their continued intrigues to re-gain what they claim, and your Majesty's confidence that he (the King of England) would understand these plans and be on his guard, he replied: “ I believe, and am quite aware, that they (the French) are not only trying to intrigue with me against the Emperor, but even to a greater extent are seeking to intrigue with the Emperor against me. With this object they have used every possible means, both with the Protestants and with the Pope; but, with God's help, I hope to be able to guard my realm and my possessions across the sea, in spite of them.” He then bade me be seated, and said: “I wish to chat with you touching your Master's affairs, which are giving me frequent matter for reflection. I think it very strange that, considering the intimate friendship existing between us, he should give me no account of his undertakings; and that I should know nothing of his affairs, towards the success of which I have every goodwill, not only in the public interest but also because of my affection for one, to whom I am, and always was, a good friend and brother. But I am afraid he will allow himself to be seduced by the Pope.” I thought well, Sire, to reply (as your Majesty had written to me) that you had negotiated nothing with the Pope to his (Henry's) disadvantage; but that, on the contrary, you had always rebutted such suggestions. He seemed pleased at this, but nevertheless said: “ I know that the Pope has not fulfilled the promises he made to the Emperor“: and to judge from the discourse he then held with regard to your Majesty's affairs, I could gather that he wished to see the war in Germany appeased by an accord honourable and glorious to your Majesty, and your Majesty's arms turned against those who, he said, always endeavour to frustrate your enterprises. After he had given me an account of the condition of your Majesty's army, and of that, of the enemy, which was not to your Majesty's advantage, as he heard from a man who had recently arrived from the seat of war, he expressed his unfeigned regret that such was the case: and then resumed the subject of a peaceful arrangement. He would, he said, willingly act on your Majesty's behalf in the matter as a true and sincere friend; and when a settlement was concluded he would join your Majesty against the French, for the purpose of checking their power, and that of their allies, which latter are only awaiting an opportunity to play their own game. He would, he said, also bring into the league the Protestants and the King of Denmark; but this was said in the strictest confidence, and he forbade me to mention that I had heard it from him, in case I communicated it in any of my letters to the Queen (Dowager). I was pleased with this conversation, Sire, both because I could discern clearly the desire he possesses to preserve perfect friendship with your Majesty, and because it is evident that he has no secret understanding with, or trust in, the French. I did my best to prove to him that your Majesty was not making war against the Protestants (i.e. as such) but I could not convince him of this; and then set forth how your Majesty had written to me, saying that solely out of consideration for him you had ordered the release of his subjects' property embargoed in Spain, on security being given. He asked me why security was exacted, to which I replied, in order to obtain redress for what Renegat had unjustly seized. He (Henry) replied, that he had refused to do justice to no one; and that no claim had been made (on account of Renegat's seizures), the embargoes in Spain being a violation of the treaties. I said that I held a letter of credence from the Prince of Spain in favour of the merchants whose property had been plundered by Renegat; and that these merchants had sent a special representative hither with powers to recover the property. This man, Sire, has only come to me just recently. There was previously no one that I could help against Renegat; and the representative of the merchants who has now appeared expressly states that he knows of nothing belonging to your Majesty. (fn. 7) I will urge the matter actively with the Lords of the Council, to whom the King has referred the matter. In the discussions with the King's Commissioners lately, the claims of certain of your Majesty's subjects, merchants of Burgos, were urged. One of these was made by Lope de Carrion, who has been prosecuting it for a long time unsuccessfully; and the commissioners persisted in their opinion that the prize was a good one. I thought well to take the opportunity of gently urging the King himself to order redress to be given to Carrion by some arrangement, and so to end, once for all, the merchants' claims, of which Carrion's was the principal and a possible source of future dispute between the Princes. But the moment the King heard the name of this case, he said: “ I pray you not to speak to me of that again. The affairs of the Emperor and myself do not depend upon the merchants, who can prosecute their claims before my Council.” I begged him to pardon me if I urged the matter upon him; but he had been kind enough when I first came here to make me judge of the case, and I believed that I had given him no reason to trust me less now than he did then. I prayed him to believe that I had no other object to gain in pressing this case than my great desire to banish all occasion for discord between your Majesties. He replied: “ Let my subjects receive redress as well.” I said that redress should be accorded on both sides, and I would not mention the matter to him again until after the embargoes had been raised in Spain. He laughed and replied: “ Well; we will talk about it then,” and with that he dismissed me very amiably, the whole court welcoming me more warmly than ever before.
	The next day as I was returning to London I met a courier on the road, sent by the Queen Regent (Mary of Hungary) with the original of your Majesty's letter of the 8th ultimo; and as I learnt also from private letters of the success of your Majesty's army, and the good exploit of the King of the Romans and Duke Maurice of Saxony, in addition to the information contained in your Majesty's letter, I immediately wrote to the first Secretary (i.e. Paget) asking him to communicate my good news to the King. The Councillors here are delighted with the intelligence.
	I have informed the Queen (Dowager) of the coming hither of two ambassadors from Scotland. One of them is the Bishop of Ross, whose name is Paniter, and who went in 1544 to your Majesty at Brussels. The object of their mission was to seek the inclusion of Scotland in the peace between France and England; and of this, and the answer they received, in my presence, I also duly informed the Queen (Dowager). This answer was to the effect that there was no inclusion of Scotland in the peace except that all treaties existing in the case of both contracting sovereigns were specially reserved. This meant, in the case of the English, the treaty of alliance with your Majesty, with which the King (of England) would on no account interfere, and they (the English) had firmly adhered to this. The Scots thereupon pressed the point of the consequent inclusion of Scotland, saying that they had since given no motive for invalidating such inclusion. The English replied that, on the contrary, they (the Scots) had given several fresh and serious motives for the continued prosecution of the war against them. If no other existed, their (the Scots) attacks since the peace upon the subjects of your Majesty, the King of England's friend and ally, were sufficient. The subject of the inclusion of Scotland was very vigorously opposed by the English, as I have fully reported to the Queen (Dowager), from whom I have received instructions how I am to proceed, in case a peace or another arrangement (i.e. with the Scots) is negotiated here. I am daily awaiting an opportunity to converse with the Council on this matter, in accordance with the Queen (Dowager's) instructions, and also on the subject of Renegat's captures, but they (the Councillors) are much hindered by their own affairs, both those connected with the last parliament (which placed in the King's hands all the chantries) and those concerning the coming parliament, which will deal with the distribution and employment of the proceeds. It may be feared also that the bishops will suffer in their revenues.
	The principal subject of their deliberations was seen afterwards: for the day before yesterday the Duke of Norfolk (fn. 8) was taken to the Tower, he having arrived here (i.e. in London) the same day. His son, the Earl of Surrey, had been detained for five or six days previously in the house of the Lord Chancellor. The reason for this is still unknown; but some people who assume to know assert that they (i.e. the Duke and his son) held secretly some ambiguous discourse against the King, whilst the latter was ill at Windsor six weeks ago; the object being to obtain the government of the Prince. Some other Englishmen say that the hope of their liberation is very small, as the father (i.e. the Duke of Norfolk) was deprived of his staff of office and of his Garter before he was taken to the Tower by water; the son (i.e. the Earl of Surrey) being led thither publicly through the streets.
	Paulin, General of the galleys of France, has been here for the last two days. He is the commissioner for France to settle the delimitation of the territories in the Boulognais, and the questions about the fortifications. As Master Seymour, (fn. 9) brother of the Earl of Hertford, who was the English Commissioner, arrived a day before Paulin, it is said that they have been unable to agree on the said question on the spot, and have come hither about it. The French, it appears, insist upon completing the fortifications they have commenced, which the English will by no means allow, and intended to make it impossible by so arranging the delimitation that an entire portion of the fortification would be included in the English boundary. It is, however, quite possible that Paulin's coming may be more for the purpose of promoting the intrigue of which your Majesty has been informed, and of which I have also advised the Queen (Dowager) by my own secretary, in order to avoid the risk of letters. I have given information of this to the King, who was very glad to know it. So far as I can judge, Sire, the coming of Paulin and the Scottish ambassadors is merely for the purpose of temporising; the French, finding the opportunity gone by to carry out their previous desires, and being now anxious to seek other means on this side. These people (the English councillors) are of the same opinion, and are consequently on their guard, having made great provision of biscuit and other things necessary for their fleet.
	London, 14 December, 1546.
14 Dec. Vienna. Imp. Arch.	365. Van der Delft to the Queen Dowager.
	I went to the King at Oatlands for the purpose of fulfilling my mission to him from the Emperor, and also to present a letter of credence from your nephew the Prince of Spain, to enable me to claim satisfaction for the property seized by Renegat: and I took the opportunity of mentioning Lope de Carrion's claim, and the rest of them. I was referred to the Council, and on my way back to London the next day I met this courier with your Majesty's letters. As soon as I arrived I sent to ask the Lords of the Council when it would be convenient for them to receive me. They excused themselves, by saying that they were extremely busy, and begged me to have patience until the King came to London. Still, they said, if the matter was very pressing they would thank me to let them know. I send a reply to the effect that I wished to see them not on private affairs alone, which could wait, and which, as they had doubless heard, had been referred to them by the King, but because I had been instructed by your Majesty to make a communication, and I wished to fulfil my duty in this respect, and to be able to send an answer to your Majesty. To this they replied that, within two or three days, they would let me know when they could receive me, and yesterday morning they sent word that they could do so. When I arrived at the Council they apologised greatly for delaying the interview for so long, in consequence, they said, of their many great affairs; which, indeed, Madame, were public enough, the Duke of Norfolk having been taken to the Tower the day before yesterday, the same day that he arrived in London, and also the Earl of Surrey, his son, who for five or six days previously had been under arrest in the Lord Chancellor's house. The cause of this is at present unknown, though it is asserted that they entertained some ambiguous designs against the King, when he was ill at Windsor some six weeks ago; the plan being to obtain control of the Prince, and, as some people say, of the country; though I know not with what truth. The chance of their liberation is very small, for the Garter and his staff of office were taken from the father before he was sent to the Tower, and the son was led thither publicly through the streets.
	After hearing the apologies of the Council I stated my mission, though not without letting them know that I was at a loss to understand the rumour that the Scottish ambassadors had sent their herald back to Scotland and that a French gentleman named Oysif had also passed through here on his way thither. I added that I had fully reported to your Majesty all that had passed at the first conference; and that they (the English councillors) had rejected the inclusion clause, by virtue of the treaty with the Emperor, which treaty they insisted upon safeguarding, and had no intention of contravening. Your Majesty had, I said, thereupon written to me that, as the Emperor was at war with the Scots by reason of the said treaty of alliance, he had not only declined to include them in his peace treaty with France, but had also refused to listen since to their requests for a peace with his Majesty, who had taken this course in order not to contravene his treaty of alliance with England. The Councillors replied that they could not prevent the King of France from sending to Scotland whomsoever he pleased; and they then begun to say laughingly, in their own language, as I understood, that passengers from France would not bring any benefit to them. They afterwards turned to me, and said that the letters carried by him (Oysif) with regard to us, might be called letters of Bellerophon; “and as for the Scottish ambassadors, affairs remained in exactly the same position as they were when you yourself were present at the conference and saw how lovingly we treated them.” Nothing, they said, of importance should be done without my knowledge. With this, Madame, they rose and went to dinner, the whole Council being present, except Secretary Paget, who was with the King. For this reason I had no opportunity of renewing the discussion of the Boulognais claims, the Council having already referred that question to the King himself, upon whose benignity, they said, it entirely depended. The commissioners appointed by the King to settle the limits of the Boulognais arrived this morning, and are now with the King, without having first seen the Council. On the first opportunity I will speak to Paget about it, as I can get more from him in this matter than from the others.
	In my conversation with the King I thanked him, by the Emperor's orders, for the information he had sent to his Majesty through his (Henry's) ambassador, and also on your Majesty's behalf for having sent the same intelligence through his Secretary to me for your Majesty's information. I told him that, for certain reasons, I had not sent the intelligence by letter, but by my Secretary, and the King seemed pleased at this. Continuing my mission from the Emperor, I said that although the French thought to carry on this intrigue with him, they make it perfectly evident that they have no intention of remaining true to their friendship with him, but will seek every opportunity to recover what they claim, without any cost to themselves; but I was sure that the King (of England), with his great prudence, was well aware of that, and would be on his guard. He replied, that he would hold tight his own country and his territory in France against them. He knew well that the French not only endeavoured to treat with him or with the Emperor, but had made advances to the Protestants, and even to the Pope. He ended his discourse by saying that he wished the Emperor all prosperity, but still would like to see him in good and honourable accord with the Protestants, and that afterwards he should come and help him (Henry) to attack those who stood in his path. I was glad, Madame, throughout all this conversation, to see his unfeigned desire and determination to preserve his friendship with the Emperor, especially as the news then current here was not at all to our advantage. As I heard nothing more from the King about the intrigue, I mentioned it to Paget, saying that the trick that the King had told the Emperor and your Majesty about was not very secret, for I had learnt from another quarter also, besides what Paget had told me, that, in anticipation of the exploit, the French galleys had not been dismissed, and that all the hulks coming to France after Candlemas were to be seized for the invasion of Holland. (fn. 10) He laughed at this, and whilst we were at table, hearing that I was about sending for a supply of French wines for my own use, he said openly “Take care you do so before Candlemas.” I had no opportunity of speaking more fully with him, but will diligently seek one, not only on account of this question but also with relation to the Boulognais claims, about which it is said that Paulin, Captain of the galleys of France, arrived here the day before yesterday, he having been entrusted with this commission. It may be that he hopes, by one means or another, to bring these people to his plans. I will report all I can learn to your Majesty.
	With regard to the safe-conducts for Scotland, I will keep the packet here, in accordance with your Majesty's orders written from Tournai. I think this will be the wisest course under the circumstances.
	London, 14 December, 1546,