han his over the King; and, when
he returned, he took care that Pace should henceforth be employed, not
as secretary to Henry, but on almost continuous missions to Italy. In
1525, when the Venetian ambassador was to thank Henry for making a
treaty with Venice, which Pace had concluded, he was instructed not to
praise him so highly, if the Cardinal were present, as if the oration
were made to Henry alone;[310] and, four years later, Wolsey found an
occasion for sending Pace to the Tower--treatment which eventually
caused Pace's mind to become unhinged.[311]
[Footnote 307: _L. and P._, ii., 3487.]
[Footnote 308: _L. and P._, ii., 3558.]
[Footnote 309: _Ibid._, iii., 1713.]
[Footnote 310: _Ven. Cal._, iii., 975.]
[Footnote 311: Brewer (Henry VIII., ii., 388; _L.
and P._, vol. iv., Introd., p. dxxxv. _n._) is very
indignant at this allegation, and when recording
Chapuys' statement in 1529 that Pace had been
imprisoned for two years in the Tower and elsewhere
by Wolsey, declares that "Pace was never committed
to the Tower, nor kept in prison by Wolsey" but was
"placed under the charge of the Bishop of Bangor,"
and that Chapuys' statement is "an instance how
popular rumour exaggerates facts, or how Spanish
ambassadors were likely to misrepresent them". It
is rather an instance of the lengths to which
Brewer's zeal for Wolsey carried him. He had not
seen the despatch from Mendoza recording Pace's
committal to the Tower on 25th Oct., 1527, "for
speaking to the King in opposition to Wolsey and
the divorce" (_Sp. Cal._, 1527-29, p. 440). It is
true that Pace was in the charge of the Bishop of
Bangor, but he was not transferred thither until
1528 (Ellis, _Orig. Letters_, 3rd ser., ii., 151);
he was released immediately upon Wolsey's fall.
Erasmus, thereupon, congratulating him on the fact,
remarked that he was consoled by Pace's experience
for his own persecution and that God rescued the
|