tow's Annals (London, 1631), 655,
656; Agrippa d'Aubigne, liv. iv., c. ii. (i. 198-200); Davila, bk. iii.
(Eng. trans., London, 1678), p. 89; Froude, vii. 519-528. Consult
especially Dr. Patrick Forbes, Full View of the Public Transactions in the
Reign of Queen Elizabeth (London, 1741), vol ii. pp. 373-500. This
important collection of letters, to which I have made such frequent
reference under the shorter title of "State Papers," ends at this point.
Peace was definitely concluded between France and England by the treaty of
Troyes, April 11, 1564 (Mem. de Conde, v. 79, 80). Sir Nicholas
Throkmorton, who had long been a prisoner, held to be exchanged against
the hostages for the restitution of Calais, given in accordance with the
treaty of Cateau-Cambresis, now returned home. Before leaving, however, he
had an altercation with his colleague, Sir Thomas Smith, of which the
latter wrote a full account. Sir Nicholas, it seems, in his heat applied
some opprobrious epithets to Smith, and even called him "traitor"--a
charge which the latter repudiated with manly indignation. "Nay, thou
liest, quoth I; I am as true to the queen as thou any day in the week, and
have done her Highness as faithful and good service as thou." Smith to
Cecil, April 13, 1564, State Paper Office.

[269] Mem. de Claude Haton, i. 356, 357.

[270] See the order of the fanatical Parliament of Toulouse, which it had
the audacity to publish with, or instead of, the king's edict. It contains
this clause: "Ce que estant veu par nous, avons ordonne et ordonnons que,
en la ville de Thoulouse ni aultres du ressort du parlement d'icelle, ne
se fera publicquement ni secrettement aulcun exercice de la nouvelle
pretendue religion, en quelque sorte que ce soit, sous peine de la hart.
Item, que tous ceux qui vouldront faire profession de laditte pretendue
religion reformee ayent a se retirer," etc. Mem. de Claude Haton, i. 358,
359.

[271] Recordon, Le Protestantisme en Champagne, 132, 133.

[272] M. Floquet, in his excellent history of the Norman Parliament (ii.
571), repudiates as "une de ces exagerations familieres a De Beze," the
statement of the Histoire eccles. des eglises reformees, "that in the
Parliament of Rouen, whatever the cause might be, whoever was known to be
of the (reformed) religion, whether plaintiff or defendant, was instantly
condemned." Yet he quotes below (ii. 571, 573, 574), from Chancellor de
l'Hospital's speech to that parliament, statemen