——— > = 
ea 
By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.S.A. 155 
herself, like her unfortunate sister, Lady Jane, had no ambition of 
her own, and both of them probably heartily wished that they had 
nothing whatever to do with the succession. The Queen may per- 
haps seem to us to have acted with unnecessary severity ; but we are 
living in the days of Queen Victoria, not of Queen Elizabeth: and 
there are no conspiracies and plottings now besetting the throne 
by potentates abroad or fanatics at home, for purposes of their 
own; we are happily free from troubles upon that score, and 
to be so free is surely a blessing above all price, if we all did but 
know it. But things were different then : and the difference should 
always be remembered, in judging of the conduct of Queen Elizabeth. 
After the death of Lady Katharine Grey, the Queen was, personally, 
as kind as it was possible to be, to the Earl of Hertford and his 
children, and all would have been forgotten, had it not been for 
another Royal alliance (to be mentioned presently), designed by one 
of this same Seymour family, which most unluckily coming to her 
knowledge just before her death, revived all the animosity she had 
felt against Lady Katharine. 
Elizabeth’s death-bed is deseribed by a Lady Southwell, an eye- 
witness.! Up to that moment, who the successor was to be was still 
uncertain ; and Secretary Cecil and others, on the night of the 23rd 
of March, 1603, approached her bed-side, asking her to name one. 
The old Queen seemed to be already speechless ; so they requested 
her to show, by some sign with her hand, when they should have 
named the one she liked. She said nothing. They named ‘“ The 
King of France?” Neither word, nor sign. “ The King of 
Scotland?” Again neither. They then ventured the name of 
“The Lord Beauchamp, the son and heir of Katharine Grey?” She 
was stirred by the sound of the name: and replied, “TI will have 
no rascal’s son in my seat, but one worthy to bea King.” According 
to another account,” Cecil then boldly asked her, what she meant by 
those words, “no rascal should succeed her?’’ Whereto she answered 
that “her meaning was, that a King should succeed, and who should 

1 Quarterly Review, vol. 108, p. 439. 
? Disraeli’s ‘* Curiosities of Literature, 2nd ser., iii., 107. 
