Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 40.djvu/281

 of the commons to designate in parliament (1 March 1404) as his regular advisers (ib. p. 530).

Northumberland's reconciliation was a hollow one, and in the spring of 1405 he was again in revolt. Remembering how his plans had been foiled by Westmorland two years before, he began with an attempt to get his redoubtable cousin into his power by surprise. In April or May Westmorland happened to be staying in a castle which Mr. Wylie identifies with that of Witton-le-Wear, belonging to Sir Ralph Eure. It was suddenly beset one night by Northumberland at the head of four hundred men. But Westmorland had received timely warning, and was already flown (Ann. Hen. IV p. 400). Towards the close of May the flame of rebellion had broken out at three distinct points. Northumberland was moving southwards to effect a junction with Sir John Fauconberg, Sir John Colville of the Dale, and other Cleveland connections of the Percies and Mowbrays who were in arms near Thirsk, and with the youthful Thomas Mowbray, earl marshal [q. v.], and Archbishop Scrope, who raised a large force in York and advanced northwards. One of Mowbray's grievances was that the office of marshal of England had been given to Westmorland, leaving him only the barren title. Westmorland therefore had an additional spur to prompt action against this threatening combination. Taking with him the young prince John and the forces of the marches, he threw himself by a rapid march between the two main bodies of rebels, routed the Cleveland force at Topcliffe by Thirsk, capturing their leaders, and intercepted the archbishop and Mowbray at Shipton Moor, little more than five miles north of York (Rot. Parl. iii. 604; Eulogium, iii. 405; Ann. Hen. IV, p. 405). Westmorland, finding himself the weaker in numbers, had recourse to guile. Explanations were exchanged between the two camps, and Westmorland, professing approval of the articles of grievance submitted to him by Scrope, invited the archbishop and the earl marshal to a personal conference (ib. p. 406). They met, with equal retinues, between the two camps. Westmorland again declared their demands most reasonable, and promised to use his influence with the king. They then joyfully shook hands over the understanding, and, at Westmorland's suggestion, ratified it with a friendly cup of wine. The unsuspecting archbishop was now easily induced to send and dismiss his followers with the cheerful news. As soon as they had dispersed Westmorland laid hands upon Scrope and Mowbray, and carried them off to Pontefract Castle, where he handed them over to the king a few days later. Unless the consensus of contemporary writers does injustice to Westmorland, he was guilty of a very ugly piece of treachery (ib. p. 407; Chron. ed. Giles, p. 45; Eulogium, iii. 406). Their account is not indeed free from improbabilities, and Otterbourne (i. 256) maintained that Scrope and Mowbray voluntarily surrendered. Their forces were perhaps not wholly trustworthy, and they might have been discouraged by the fate of the Cleveland knights; but the authority of Otterbourne, who wrote under Henry V, can hardly be allowed to outweigh the agreement of more strictly contemporary writers. Westmorland, at all events, had no hand in the hasty and irregular execution of the two unhappy men, for he was despatched northwards from Pontefract on 4 June to seize Northumberland's castles and lands, and his brother-in-law, Thomas Beaufort, was appointed his deputy as marshal for the trial (Fœdera, viii. 399).

This crisis over, Westmorland returned to his usual employments as warden of the march (in which his eldest son, John, was presently associated with him), and during the rest of the reign was pretty constantly occupied in negotiations with Scotland, whose sympathy with France and reception of Northumberland were counterbalanced by the capture of the heir to the throne (Fœdera, viii. 418, 514, 520, 678, 686, 737). He had made himself one of the great props of his brother-in-law's throne. Two of his brothers—Lord Furnival, who for a time was war treasurer, and Lord Latimer—were peers, and towards the close of the reign he began to make those fortunate marriages for his numerous family by his second wife which enabled the younger branch of Neville to play so decisive a part in after years. One of the earliest of these marriages was that of his daughter Catherine in 1412 to the young John Mowbray, brother and heir of the unfortunate earl marshal who had been entrusted to his guardianship by the king (Testamenta Eboracensia, iii. 321). Shortly after Henry V's accession Westmorland must have resigned the office of marshal of England into the hands of his son-in-law, in whose family it was hereditary (Fœdera, ix. 300).

Thanks to Shakespeare, Westmorland is best known as the cautious old statesman who is alleged to have resisted the interested incitements of Archbishop Chichele and the clergy to war with France in the parliament at Leicester in April 1414, and was chidden by Henry for expressing a de-