POLITICAL HISTORY 



Spanish marriage in his avowed intention, but embarking on a course 

 which, if successful, must have meant the overthrow of the queen's 

 Government. He seized Rochester Bridge and repaired the fortifications 

 of the castle. On January 29 the Duke of Norfolk's attempt to force 

 Rochester Bridge failed, the Londoners under him going over to Wyatt. 

 On February i Wyatt was at Deptford and on the 3rd he entered 

 Southwark. He had already delayed too long for success. He should 

 have been at the foot of London Bridge while the alarm following 

 Norfolk's misadventure was still acute. He had wasted his time offer- 

 ing terms of submission to a daughter of Henry VIII. and a grand- 

 daughter of Isabella the Catholic. 



It was possible that Wyatt might be supported from Surrey. On 

 January 25 a warrant was issued under the queen's signet and sign 

 manual to Sir Thomas Cawarden at Blechingley, bidding him arm his 

 servants and watch over the order of his own neighbourhood. 1 On the 

 next day the queen commanded the sheriff, Sir Thomas Saunders, to 

 obey in all things Lord William Howard, the admiral, who had re- 

 ceived a certain commission for the affairs of Kent and Surrey. 2 On 

 Sunday, January 28, Lord William Howard commanded from Reigate 

 Sir Thomas Saunders, the sheriff, and William Saunders, Esq. of Ewell, 

 to seize all Sir Thomas Cawarden's arms, 3 and on the 2gth he repeated 

 the order to them * and to all the queen's lieges in Surrey.' It was 

 clearly believed that Sir Thomas's arms were likely to be employed on 

 the wrong side. This was the reason for their seizure. Wyatt's success 

 at Rochester was not till the 29th. On the 28th it could hardly be 

 expected that he would come into Surrey and seize the arms himself. 

 From Sir Thomas's own complaints we learn that he was arrested on the 

 25th, and brought before the Council, but discharged. But he was re- 

 arrested by Lord William Howard on the 27th, taken to Reigate, then 

 after the rebellion of course to Lambeth, and to the Clink in Southwark, 

 and finally compelled to stop in his own house at Blackfriars. Nothing 

 was proved against him, and he was soon at his usual work of providing 

 for the amusements at court. But the inventory of the goods seized at 

 his house is startling. There were 24 demi-lances, 86 horsemen's staves, 

 100 pikes, 100 morris-pikes, 100 bows, two hand-guns, other weapons 

 and defensive armour in proportion, besides sixteen great pieces of ord- 

 nance. 4 He could have armed 110 horse and over 300 foot. A great 

 man liked to have armour hanging in his hall, but the great guns were 

 scarcely necessary furniture of a gentleman's house. They were no doubt 

 made in the Weald close by, but for what purpose ? The rebellion was 

 not long foreseen nor meditated. The whole arsenal was considered by 

 the Government to be better bestowed in the Tower. In spite of Sir 

 Thomas's expostulations Elizabeth seems to have preferred to keep them 

 there when she succeeded. He complained that he got very little back 

 again. 



1 Loseley MSS. January 25, 1553-4. * Ibid. Order, January 26, 1553-4. 



8 Ibid. January 26-9, 1553-4, ii. 84 ; and vide Kempe, Loseley MSS. 

 4 Ibid. January 26-9, '553-4. ii- 84. 



375 



