CHAP complete the suppression of those monasteries which could be brought to the ground without danger. VI A.D. 1535-6 This first Act of Dissolution [27 Hen. VIII. cap. Act of Dis. 28] was passed about the end of February 1535-6, solution some four or five months from the time at which the visits to of Com mons important inquiry into the condition of the monastic institutions was begun. In what manner, and by what channel it found its way into Parliament, is not on record, but of course it was a "Government bill,' and bills of this kind were sometimes initiated, or forwarded a stage, by very significant impulses. The King's Which among the "faithful Commons" could hesitate the House as to his vote when "the King's Grace came in among the burgesses of Parliament, and delivered them a bill and bade them look upon it, and weigh it in conscience," departing out of the House of Commons with a promise that he would be there again on the following Wednesday to hear their minds! Whether or not this was so presented, the King afterwards spoke to them of it as "my bill," and it bears strong marks of royal authorship. It is entitled "an Act whereby religious houses of monks, canons, and nuns, which may dispend manors, lands, tenements, and hereditaments above the clear value of two hundred pounds, are given to the King's highness, his heirs, and successors for ever." of the Statements In the preamble of this Act, it is first stated that preamble "manifest sin, vicious, carnal, and abominable living is daily used and committed commonly" in religious houses whose inmates do not exceed twelve in number, "whereby" the heads of those houses spoil, destroy, and waste their churches, monasteries, lands, and other possessions, as well as the "ornaments of their churches," to the high displeasure of God, and VI A. D. 1535-6 of some of to the great infamy of the King's highness and the CHAP realm. Thus two important charges are at the outset made against a certain class of monasteries, those in which the number of persons was less than twelve. The allegation is, of course, so far as the number is Absurdity concerned, ridiculous; as, if there had been a plague them of immorality and wickedness pervading monastic houses to so great an extent, it would not have been limited to the "hard and fast line" of those whose inmates amounted to one dozen only. The statement of the preamble is, therefore, to this extent weakened in its force as a probably truthful accusation, though even this absurdity may not be inconsistent with the truthfulness of other portions. But it is further weakened by the charge that the Untruth of heads of these monasteries containing twelve persons or fewer wasted the "ornaments" as well as the other possessions of their churches and monasteries. It is indisputable that the visitors dispossessed them of these, laying their hands upon all the gold and silver plate that they could find, and also on all "relics" which were adorned with the precious metals or precious stones. This accusation seems to have no Seem other object than to cover the fact that the disap- inserted to pearance of such " ornaments" from the monasteries acts of and churches arose from their appropriation by the King. The visitors "hadde packed up such joells & stuffe as the monks had," the "crosses of silver & golde," of which Layton wrote "I shall bring you the reste, whan I have recevide all," and the 1 The number twelve was really suggested by the Bull of 1528, which empowered Wolsey and Campeggio to suppress any houses under that number, and transfer the monks or nuns to the larger others disguise plunder VI CHAP King's privy purse ultimately received them: but the Act of Parliament, at the King's bidding, stated that they had been "wasted" by the monks. A.D. 1535-6 as to many visitations desire to monks It is then further stated in this preamble that Allegation there had been "many continual visitations" of the previous monasteries during the preceding two hundred years; but from the extreme difficulty which Wolsey (with all his unprecedented power) found in obtaining authority to visit them, this must be a great exaggeration, except so far as it may be meant to apply to the few cases in which archbishops and bishops could visit without special license from Rome. The allegation was plainly introduced for the sake of the following assertion that "without such small Professed houses be utterly suppressed, and the religious perreform the sons therein committed to great and honourable monasteries of this realm, where they may be compelled to live religiously, for reformation of their lives, there shall else be no redress nor reformation in this behalf." This professed desire to reform the inmates of these houses was shown in practice, not by thus transferring them to larger monasteries, but by giving them each forty shillings and a layman's or priest's gown, out of the plunder of their houses, and then sending them about their business. This provision of the Act was copied from the papal bull of 1528, and there can be no doubt whatever that it originated with Wolsey; but the intention of its original framer was not carried out by the King and Parliament who adopted his words; and the monks made to ejected from the lesser monasteries were mostly sent into the world, and sent there with forty shillings, a little fortune on which to begin life again. Yet this portion of the preamble is reiterated a few lines. but no attempt whatever do so VI A.D. 1535-6 further on in the Act, in the words, "considering CHAP also that divers and great solemn monasteries of this realm, wherein (thanks be to God) religion is right well kept and observed, be destitute of such full number of religious persons, as they ought and may keep ;" which words could hardly be inserted for any other purpose than that of conciliating the parliamentary representatives of the great solemn monasteries, whose opposition to the suppression of the "little and small abbeys" would be very troublesome, and might be thus prevented. fulness of Respecting this preamble, it is to be observed (1) Untruththat there are some manifest falsehoods in its allega- this Act tions; (2) that there is gross absurdity in its statement that the monasteries containing only twelve inmates were past reformation, while those containing more than twelve were respectable; and (3) that no attempt was made at the reformation which is said to be impossible, the Act being passed within six months of the time when the inquiry on which it was founded had been commenced. During that six months many of the monasteries had been extinguished instead of an attempt being made to reform them. The injunctions respecting reformation were, indeed, given to the remainder, but no further inquiry was made as to whether or not those injunctions had been observed. It is worth noting these circumstances in case any future historian should revive the allegation that the King and his ministers were conspicuous for their honesty in all and of its the transactions connected with the dissolution. Honesty is just the virtue of all others which is most certainly proved to have been wanting in them. 2 It is observable that this limit is ignored in the enacting clauses. U contrivers CHAP VI A. D. 1535-6 Of the enacting clauses, which go into great detail, only two or three particulars require to be noticed. (1.) In the first place all monasteries, priories, &c., which have not an income exceeding two hundred pounds a year are given to the King and his heirs, because it is "much more to the pleasure of Almighty God, and for the honour of this his realm," that their revenues "should be used and committed to better uses," and the "unthrifty religious persons" made to reform their lives. (2.) The possessions of every kind which belonged to these monasteries were invested in the King “in as large and ample manner as the abbots, priors, abbesses, prioresses, and other governors of such monasteries. priories, and other religious houses, now have, or ought to have, the same in the right of their houses;" not as in their own right, for their own use, but as trustees. (3.) The Act is an ex post facto piece of legislation, giving to the King all monasteries that had been handed over to him during the year preceding by the resignation of their inmates, or that have otherwise been suppressed or dissolved. (4.) All sites, tithes, or monastic goods which had been given away by the King were confirmed to those on whom he had already bestowed them. (5.) It was enacted that the King should have and enjoy the actual and real possession of all the dissolved monasteries for a particular object, "so that his Highness may lawfully give, grant, and dispose them, or any of them, at his will and pleasure, to the honour of God and the wealth of this realm." No doubt there is a certain vagueness about this expression, but it can scarcely be considered as honestly |