Page:English Historical Review Volume 37.djvu/204

 196 THE GREAT STATUTE OF PEAEMUNIRE April so. 1 Most of the recent translations in England seem, it is true r to have had the consent of either the king or the bishop concerned, if not of both ; but one that of John Buckingham from Lincoln to Coventry and Lichfield was apparently made contrary to the wishes of both Richard and Buckingham himself, and there- fore fell clearly within the scope of the statute of 1393. Yet there is no indication that any appeal was made to the statute ; the Crown recognized the translation of Buckingham as valid, 2 though the bishop himself is said to have refused his new see ; a and Richard was apparently at a loss how to prevent the pope from creating vacancies in English sees as he liked. 4 In fact, if men could be found who were ready to risk the penalties ordained in the statute and introduce into the country bulls notifying arbitrary translations, the king had no effective remedy for the consequent inconvenience to the English church and himself r unless he were daring enough to deny the pope's right to exercise a prerogative hitherto recognized on all hands as spiritual, and strong enough to coerce the clergy into compliance with his policy. Neither condition was fulfilled until the days of Henry VIII. The truth probably is that the enacting part of the statute was not regarded very seriously. It was badly drafted. It contains a glaring anacoluthon ; the passage prescribing penalties and procedure reads like the rough notes of a clerk ; and it abounds with words and phrases of doubtful import. In sharp contrast is the long preamble, obviously drawn up with care. The form of it is singular, and creates the impression that it was intended primarily to impress the pope with the unanimity of the English nation in opposition to the designs imputed to him. Probably, in fact, it should be looked upon as a political manifesto rather than as part of a measure of legislation. 5 Nor did it fail of 1 Ord. Priv. Council, i. 80 ; Ann. Ric. II, 226 seq. ; Walsingham, ii. 228. 4 Cal. of Pat. Bolls, 1396-9, p. 383. 3 Ann. Ric. II, p. 226 ; Walsingham, loc. cit. The St. Albans writers say that the bishop, after refusing Coventry and Lichfield, retired to Canterbury, where he ended his days as a monk. It is likely enough that Buckingham, an old man, did not wish to move from Lincoln to a poorer see and a less orderly diocese ; but the news of his translation cannot have reached him more than a few days before his death (Eubel, Hierarchia Medii Aevi, i. 216, 242, 319), and five weeks after that event the pope had not heard of his refusal of Coventry and Lichfield (Cal. of Papal Letters, v. 167). The story in the chronicles cited must therefore be regarded with some scepticism. 4 At St. Albans Richard's anxiety was thought to be assumed, and he was sus- pected of having connived with the pope in the recent translations ; but his reference of the question to the judges indicates that, whatever his motives, his concern was not altogether feigned. The whole episode, however, raises many perplexing problems. Its clue is probably to be sought in Richard's political aims at this time ; but these lie far beyond the range of my present inquiry. 6 That there was a serious but temporary crisis in the relations between the Crown and the papacy is suggested by a writ, issued while the Winchester parliament was