ript collections, at present in the possession of Lord Royston.
She there enjoins Walsingham, before he opens the treaty, to examine
the person of the duke; and as that prince had lately recovered from
the small-pox, she desires her ambassador to consider, whether he
yet retained so much of his good looks, as that a woman could fix her
affections on him. Had she not been in earnest, and had she only meant
to amuse the public or the court of France, this circumstance was of no
moment.]

[Footnote 18: NOTE R, p. 203. D'Ewes, p. 328. The Puritanical sect had
indeed gone so far, that a book of discipline was secretly subscribed
by above five hundred clergymen; and the Presbyterian government thereby
established in the midst of the church, notwithstanding the rigor of
the prelates and of the high commission. So impossible is it by penal
statutes, however severe, to suppress all religious innovation. See
Neal's Hist. of the Puritans, vol. i. p. 483. Strype's Life of Whitgift,
p. 291.]

[Footnote 19: NOTE S, p. 205. This year, the earl of Northumberland,
brother to the earl beheaded some years before, had been engaged in a
conspiracy with Lord Paget for the deliverance of the queen of Scots. He
was thrown into the Tower; and being conscious that his guilt could be
proved upon him, at least that sentence would infallibly be pronounced
against him, he freed himself from further prosecution by a voluntary
death. He shot himself in the breast with a pistol. About the same time
the earl of Arundel, son of the unfortunate duke of Norfolk, having
entered into some exceptionable measures, and reflecting en the unhappy
fate which had attended his family, endeavored to depart secretly
beyond sea, but was discovered and thrown into the Tower. In 1587, this
nobleman was brought to his trial for high treason; chiefly because
he had dropped some expressions of affection to the Spaniards, and had
affirmed that he would have masses said for the success of the armada.
His peers found him guilty of treason. This severe sentence was not
executed; but Arundel never recovered his liberty. He died a prisoner
in 1595. He carried his religious austerities so far, that they were
believed the immediate cause of his death.]

[Footnote 20: NOTE T, p. 216. Mary's extreme animosity against Elizabeth
may easily be conceived, and it broke out about this tune in an incident
which may appear curious. While the former queen was kept in custody by
the e