Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 2.djvu/219

1535.] benefit which they derived from his surrender, their honour seemed to be involved in observing the conditions, however made, by which it had been secured.

It is likely, though it is not certain, that Lord Leonard foresaw the dilemma in which Henry would be placed, and hoped by means of it to secure the escape of his kinsman. His own ultimate treason throws a shadow on his earlier loyalty; and his talent was fully equal to so ingenious a fraud. He had placed the King in a position from which no escape was possible that was not open to grave objection. To pardon so heavy an offender was to violate the first duty of Government, and to grant a general license to Irish criminality; to execute him was to throw a shadow indirectly on the King's good faith, and lay his generals open to a charge of treachery. Henry resolved to err on the side on which error was least injurious. The difficulty was submitted to the Duke of Norfolk, as of most experience in Irish matters. The Duke advised that execution should be delayed; but added significantly, 'quod defertur non aufertur.'—Pardon was not to be thought of; the example would be fatal. Immediate punishment would injure the credit of Lord Grey, and would give occasion for slander against the council. The best course would be to keep 'the traitor' in safe prison, and execute him, should it seem good, at a future time. This advice was