pound, to be paid at 1000 pound yearly, of wich he was after releasid."12 This severe pecuniary punishment (for it was a full twelvemonth before the Earl was relieved of the responsibility) produced, it may be supposed, no very cordial feelings on his part, towards the administrating members of the Council. The following passage, which Strype has extracted from the Privy-Council Book, fully demonstrates this circumstance; and at the same time furnishes an amusing contrast to the picture which our biographer has drawn of the Earl's zeal on another occasion when, as now, he was called upon to exercise his provincial authority in the county of Sussex : July 13. The Lord Cobham and Mr. Comptroller were with him; but they found him not disposed to go. He pretended sickness, poverty, and lack of provision; and that, since his fine was set, he thought himself restored to favour with the King's Council also, which he had dearly bought, considering that in his own conscience he had never offended. Wherefore it seemed strange to him now to be commanded into Sussex. Whereupon the Council resolved, that the Lord Admiral and the Lord Cobham should go again unto him, and require him to send back the pardon that he had sued and obtained of the King, and telling him that he (sic) would find means that they should come to the trial of this justification of himself, and his going into Sussex, he was commanded to be used according to justice; and, as to no otherwise than as all other noblemen are in the whole realm, for the preserving the peace of the country between this and Michaelmas, in eschewing such inconve niences as happened last year. To this his direct answer was required." "By the sequel,” adds Strype, “it appears that he went not into Sussex; for the Duke of Somerset was dispatched thither."'13 It is not clear whether the occasion on which Arundel's ac tivity is praised by his biographer was before this or in the following year, 1551; but it is probable that the Earl's repugnance was merely directed against the arbitrary dictation of the Council; and that, whenever he perceived his presence absolutely requisite in his county, it was zealously bestowed. The remission of the Earl's fine (or the greater part of it), about a year after its imposition, is again noted in the Diary of the young monarch: "Jan. 6 [1550-1]. Th' erle of Arrundel remitted of 8,000 which he ought to have paid, for certein fautes he had committed, within 12 yeris." 14 12 Copied from the original in Cotton MS. Titus, B. II. The editors of the Oxford edition of Burnet should have collated this interesting document with the MS. and if they had not thought it desirable to conform to the original orthography, they would at least have corrected some errors of transcription, particularly in the 14 Not making due allowance for Edward's inexperience in written composition, Strype mistook the "twelve years" to apply to the "faults" instead of the fine, and rather whimsically adds (Memorials, vol. II. p. 249): "So it seems he was now called to account for twelve years past; which was somewhat hard, and a sign he had enemies at court." The ecclesiastical historian would have avoided this misapprehension, had he properly taken into consideration the former passage (of which he had himself made use in p. 195), in which it is clearly stated that the 12,000l. was to be paid at the rate of 1000l. yearly. How the sum of 12,000l. was reduced to the 8,000l. mentioned by King Edward, does not appear; it may be that only two-thirds of the fine was remitted. As it is necessary to notice another mistake which Strype has made in connexion with this subject, by confounding the Earl of Arundel with Sir Thomas Arundell, K. B. (the ancestor of the Wardour family) the present may be as fit a place as any other to introduce a few observations on that point. In the Memorials, vol. II. p. 306, Strype has quoted a curious account of the "secret intrigue" which led to the Duke of Somerset's fall, from a book intitled, "A short Treatise of Politic Power, by John Ponet, Bishop of Winchester; "if," it is added, "he be indeed the author of that book, which is said to be published in the year 1556, and reprinted 1642." From these expressions it is evident that Strype never saw the original edition, but only the reprint: as the latter is not now to be found, Strype is saved by that circumstance only from being convicted of having misquoted and perverted the sense of his authority; and it is to be feared that the chance of his innocence is small, as the title of Earl is not added to the name of Arundel in the extract, but only in Strype's own remarks. By the favour of Francis Douce, esq. F.S.A. I have ascertained that the book was really published in 1556, and that it was written and owned During the greater part of 1551, the Earl remained unmolested; but, when the second and fatal attack was made upon the Duke of Somerset and his party, in the month of October, he again shared in the vengeance of Warwick. King Edward first mentions in his Diary, under the 7th of October, "a device made to call the Earl of Warwick to a banquet, with the Marquess of Northampton and divers others, and to cut off their heads." It was afterwards stated "that the place wher the nobles shold have been bankettid, and there heddis striken of, was the L. Pageit's howse, and how th' erl of Arrondel knew of the matteir as wel as he, by Stanop, who was a messengeir betwene theme. Also some part how he's went to London to get freindes, once in August last, faining himself sike. Hammon also confessid the watch he kept in his chaumbre at night." 16 The consequence was, that on the 8th of November, "th' erle of Arrondel [was] committed to the Tower, with Mr. J. Straodley and S. Albon, his men, bicause Crane did more and more confess of him." 17 The Earl remained a prisoner in the Tower for nearly thirteen months. He was released on the 3d of December, 1552, which was the first anniversary of the Duke of Somerset's execution; after making a " submis. sion" before the Privy Council, the words of which are printed by Strype. He was required therein to refer to his examination in the Tower, whereby, it was alleged, his privacy to the designs of the Duke of Somerset had been made apparent; but the sum of his confession went no further than that he "did not, according to my most bounded duty, reveal so much as I did know of the said Duke's intents to your Highness, or to some others of your Majesty's Privy Council, but did conceal and keep the same secret.' After making this submission, the Lords informed him, that he was fined 6000 marks (which he was bound in a bond of 10,000 marks to pay, at the rate of 1000 marks yearly) ; and he was then set at liberty, being admonished by the Lords "to behave himself according to the duty of a nobleman, and to be indeed what he professed in words."18 It is probable that the Earl only paid one small instalment of this second fine; for on the 10th of May the mode of payment was lightened, even if the sum was not reduced;" and on the 2d July, a pardon and discharge for the whole was granted to him. "This," remarks Strype, we may conclude was Northumberland's do by Bishop Ponet; his name appearing thus in the title: "By I. P. late B. of VV." As the party mentioned in the passage is not the Earl of Arundel, it will be sufficient to refer to Strype for this singular statement by a witness of such weight as the Bishop of Winchester; merely pointing out the very serious interpolation. As it appears in Strype the sentence is: "at the Earl's suit, Arundel escaped, otherwise had his head with the axe been divided from his shoulders." But in the original, -"at th' erles sute Arundel hathe his head with the axe divided from the shoulders." It will be perceived that the alteration was made under the supposition that the Earl of Arundel was meant, and that the writer had mistaken the historical fact; but such a direct perversion of the text of an author, without any intimation, is perfectly inexcusable. Sir Thomas Arundel (who, it so happened, was half-brother to the Countess of Arundel) actually suffered on the 26th of Feb. 1552-3. Among the Metrical Visions of George Cavendish (appended to Singer's edition of his Life of Wolsey), is one presumed to be spoken by Sir Thomas; his confessions in which perfectly coincide with Bishop Ponet's narrative. "With the Duke of Northumberland I was in consultacion, I was cheafe councellor in his first overthrowe Of the Duke of Somerset, which few men dyd know." 15 It is not perfectly clear whether this relates to Arundel, or to Paget. 16 King Edward's Diary. 17 Ibid. 18 Strype's Memorials, vol. II. p. 383, from the Council Book. 19 A grant that he should pay at the Office of Augmentations 32214. 128. 2d., at 3331. 6s. 8d. every Easter. Strype ubi supra. GENT. MAG. July, 1833. Purposing to visit the west of England, I felt that both health and pleasure might be consulted by a voyage by steam from London to Plymouth. I shall not trespass on your indulgence, by observations on the early part of my journey leaving "Woolwich and Wapping smelling strong of pitch," and "Grenewich ther many a shrew is inne," and all the common routine of places so familiar to the steam-boat tourist, without comment. With respect to this mode of travelling, I feel certain that any one who may be inclined to take this voyage will be highly gratified by his choice, were it only to see the truly magnificent spectacles of the rising and setting sun upon the ocean. The bold eminences of Dover, crowned with the ruined church, and the noble antique fortress, shew no where in so bold a point of view as from the sea; and what object on a journey by land can equal the view of the fine promontory of Beachey Head, one of the grandest objects of coast scenery in the kingdom. But the most delightful part of the voyage, is where the lofty cliffs and bold headlands of the southern coast of Devon are approached after passing Start Point. A glimpse of the distant Eddystone, breaking the horizon, is gained, but too indistinct to give a fair idea of this creation of the genius of Smeaton, who overcoming difficulties to others insurmountable, raised a monument of kill never perhaps to be surpassed. entrance to Plymouth Sound is dered highly interesting by its coning the most extensive work of mo dern days, the Breakwater. The forcible rebuke of Canute to his flatterers would here seem to have lost its moral; by human genius and human power, the fury of the waves is restrained, and by this mighty wall they seem forbid to enter armed with their destructive powers, one of the most beautiful, and now, perhaps, the most secure harbour in existence. The splendid scenery of Mount Edgcombe, which might well tempt the invader of our shores to claim it for his residence, and the town of Devonport, crowned with its column, bespoke a conclusion of the voyage, and the dropping the anchor in the Catwater, seemed by the crowd of boats surrounding the steam vessel, with the dense mass of houses in Plymouth, a repetition of the scene I had left in London two days previously. As my object is to notice principally objects of architecture and antiquity, I purpose to make the subject of this paper, the ancient and interesting mansion of COTEHELE. Adelightful excursion of about eighteen miles on the river Tamar, precedes the arrival at this ancient seat: on the way are seen Moditonham, a handsome modern seat; and on a lofty eminence, the modern gothic mansion, or castle as it is styled, of Pentilly. The tomb, which has excited some interest, is not to be seen from the water. The grounds about the mansion of Cotehele are delightfully wooded; lofty trees, with foliage of almost unchecked luxuriance shut out the view of the mansion from the river; and it is not seen until it is closely approached. There is a singularity about this mansion, which requires to be accounted for. It cannot claim an origin in very remote antiquity, the earliest parts being not older than the reign of Henry the Seventh; yet the narrowness of the windows and other openings, and the tower above the gateway, would lead to the idea that it was built in an early and insecure period. This, I think, may be accounted for from the fact that the builder, Sir Richard Edgecumbe, had encountered personal danger in the wars of the Roses; and having built his mansion in the early part of the reign of Henry the Seventh, so soon after the conclusion of the conflict, he would naturally be impressed with the CHAPEL OF COTEHELE HOUSE, CORNWALL. fear that the reign of the newly-enthroned monarch might not be more peaceable than that of his predecessors; and he built his mansion under these impressions in the style in which we see it. The house is quadrangular, with a court-yard in the centre, and, like the generality of the mansions of antiquity, has the appendages of a Hall and Chapel. It is built of moorstone generally, in irregular courses, though some of the blocks are exceedingly large. The west front is not imposing, from the want of height, which detracts much from its general appearance.* The entrance is not in the centre, and is only wide enough for footpassengers; it consists of an obtuse pointed arch, slightly moulded with foliage in the spandrils; it is enclosed within another of larger dimensions with a weather cornice, and in the space between the two arches is a blank shield, accompanied by two bold leaves. The windows are situated high in the wall; they are of small dimensions, being in fact little more than enlarged loopholes. The chimneys are square, having caps formed The buildings probably underwent some alteration about the year 1627, as that date appears carved in stone above the gateway. Beauties of England and Cornwall. with coping stones. Above the entrance rises a tower of a cubical form, with an embattled parapet, which differs from many erections of the same kind in not taking its rise from the ground, the front of the tower being a continuation of the face of the wall of the main building. On entering the court through the gateway, the Hall is seen in the front, and near it on the west side of the quadrangle, the eastern window of the Chapel. The interior of the Hall is very interesting. The roof is timber, and arched; and on the walls hang various pieces of armour and weapons of considerable antiquity, with a complete suit of armour, which, however, is probably not older than the civil wars. In the end walls are apertures in the shape of a quatrefoil, which admit a view of the Hall from adjacent apartments, and would allow the motions of persons assembled in it to be watched; a matter sanctioned by the suspicious character of the times in which the structure was erected; or perhaps the lady of the house may have exercised the spirit of surveillance which Pope ascribes to the lady of Stanton Harcourt, who from her chapel for private devotion, had a lattice into the hall, "intended (as we imagine) that, at the same time as she prayed, she might have an eye on the men and maids." There are some specimens of ancient furniture preserved in the Hall; in particular a chair, bearing the date 1627, which marks perhaps the age of the chief part of the furniniture in the mansion. The following arms are represented in stained glass in the windows: 1. Gules, a bend lozengy Argent, a label of three points Azure; impaling, Gules, on on a bend Ermines, coticed Or, three boars' heads couped Argent, Edgecumbe. 2. Baron. Argent, on a fesse Azure between two chevrons Gules three escallops Or. Femme as No. I. 3. Or, a chevron between three escallops Azure; impaling, Or, three lions passant in pale Sable. 4. Or, three Torteaux, a label of three points Azure, each point charged with three Plates in pale, Courtenay. 5. Azure, an eagle displayed Or, a chief Argent; impaling, Argent, a chevron Azure between three buckles Or. 6. England and France quarterly. 7. Edgecumbe; impaling, Azure, semee of fleurs-de-lis, a lion rampant Argent. 8. Baron as in No. 2, impaling Baron in No. 2. 9. Baron as in No. 2, impaling, Sable, a ram's head cabossed Argent, attired Or. 10. The Femme in the last shield, impaling, Or, a bend nebulé Sable. The Chapel projects from the western side of the mansion; it is small and neat. I enclose a sketch of the exterior. The doorway to the right leads into the great court. It will be seen by the engraving that the Chapel consists of a small nave, with a southern entrance, and has a small bell tower. The square window in the west end is unglazed, the aperture being secured by iron bars; but allowing any person who may be standing on the outside to see the altar, so that the elevation of the Host might distinctly be seen even by those persons who, from want of space, or other causes, might not be admitted into the body of the Chapel. At a distance of a few feet from the door lies an ancient font, 19 inches square by 14 inches deep; it is formed of one block of moorstone, and panelled, not ornamentally, at the sides. From the circumstance of the font it * Pope's Letters, No. 30, to the Duke of Buckingham. This is probably a modification of the last coat. is evident that parochial duty was at some period performed in the Chapel, and it is not improbable that the mansion and its grounds anciently, either was, or claimed to be, an extra-parochial district. I am not aware whether it be so at present. The interior of the Chapel is approached from the mansion by the hall, to which it communicates by means of a small room. The roof is of timber, ribbed and panelled, and coved in the form of an obtuse arch. The altar is oak, with upright panels having quatrefoil heads. An ancient altar-cloth belonging to this Chapel is preserved in the house. It is formed of red velvet, powdered with fleurs-de-lis; the part which would be shown when it was laid upon the altar, had a crucifix in the centre, accompanied by the twelve Apostles, in rich embroidery, and the following arms: Edgecumbe impaling the ram's head, as No. 9 in the hall. The crucifix on the altar is modern; the ancient one having, in all probability, fallen a sacrifice to the same spirit of fanaticism which caused the font to be thrust out of the Chapel. In the south window, which is shown in the engraving, are representations in painted glass of St. Anne and St. Katherine. The east window is pointed; it is divided by mullions into three lights, with upright divisions on the head of the arch. In the Chapel are the following arms: Azure, an arrow erect Sable. Sir T. Cotehele, 1589. This date, I should think, applies to most of the interior fittings of the Chapel, as well as the house itself; and as it was subsequent to the Reformation, it will account for the altar table being constructed of wood, although so much of the veneration of ancient custom had been observed as to preserve the altar form in the construction of it. At the west end is an ancient clock, which, I apprehend, has long ceased to work. The limit of a single visit will not allow me to particularize, or even to notice incidentally, the various curious articles of furniture contained in this mansion. In the drawing-room the screen to the doorway appears to be of the date of the building; on the door itself are roses in lozenges. The bed-room called King Charles's, has a fine ancient state bed, with a profusion of carved work about it; at the head are three |