Page:John Huss, his life, teachings and death, after five hundred years.pdf/256

 Had the prisoner still a flickering hope that Sigismund might exercise a veto power, it was quickly snuffed out. He recalled that at the session, June 8, the king had given him assurance of an opportunity to reply in writing, an assurance confirmed by d’Ailly, and also a promise of a final hearing. He appealed to the nobles of Bohemia to join in petitioning Sigismund to keep his promise. Great would be the king’s confusion, he thought, if he failed to keep it. He almost allowed himself to think that Sigismund from the beginning had no intention of treating him fairly. Against warnings, he had left Bohemia. Jerome of Prague, the good cobbler, Andrew the Pole, and others had told him before he left Prague that he would not return. Huss went so far as to write that Sigismund had condemned him before his enemies did. The king might, at least, have imitated Pilate and declared, “I find no fault in this man” or, in view of the safe-conduct, sent him back to Bohemia to be judged there by the king and clergy. He had communicated to him through Lord Henry Lefl that, in case the king did not approve of the council’s judgment, he would be sent back in safety. At a later date, June 21, apparently lest he should sin in not returning good for evil, he wrote that he thanked Sigismund for all the kindness he had shown, but, in spite of himself, a week later he expressed the opinion that Sigismund had acted deceitfully throughout the whole proceeding.

His thoughts were much upon Jerome, “his beloved associate.” He had no word from him except that, like himself, he was also languishing in a foul prison, expecting death on account of the faith to which he had borne such noble witness to the Bohemians.

As for the council, he drew, in his letters, from his own experiences as well as upon what he heard. He contrasted the spiritual leaders gathered at Constance, who called them-