rdly stand. In 1531 Warham, the successor of Becket and
Langton, excused his compliance with Henry's demands by pleading (p. 271)
_Ira principis mors est_.[746] In the draft of a speech he drew up
just before his death,[747] the Archbishop referred to the case of St.
Thomas, hinted that Henry VIII. was going the way of Henry II., and
compared his policy with the constitutions of Clarendon. The comparison
was extraordinarily apt; Henry VIII. was doing what Henry II. had
failed to do, and the fate that attended the Angevin king might have
befallen the Tudor had Warham been Becket and the Church of the
sixteenth been the same as the Church of the twelfth century. But they
were not, and Warham appealed in vain to the liberties of the Church
granted by Magna Carta, and to the "ill end" of "several kings who
violated them". Laymen, he complained, now "advanced" their own laws
rather than those of the Church. The people, admitted so staunch a
churchman as Pole, were beginning to hate the priests.[748] "There
were," wrote Norfolk, "infinite clamours of the temporalty here in
Parliament against the misuse of the spiritual jurisdiction.... This
realm did never grudge the tenth part against the abuses of the Church
at no Parliament in my days, as they do now."[749]

[Footnote 745: "It was not from Parliament," says
Brewer (_L. and P._, iv., Introd., p. dcxlvii.),
"but from Convocation that the King had to
anticipate any show of independence or opposition."
True, to some extent; but the fact does not prove,
as Brewer alleges, that Convocation was more
independent than Parliament, but that Henry was
doing what Parliament liked and Convocation
disliked.]

[Footnote 746: "The Queen replied that they were
all fine councillors, for when she asked advice of
the Archbishop of Canterbury, he replied that he
would not meddle in these affairs, saying
frequently, _Ira principis mors est_" (Chapuys to
Charles V., 6th June, 1531). Warham was one of the
counsel assigned to the Queen for the divorce
question.]

[Footnote 747: _L. and P._, v., 1247. Warham also
made a formal protest again