Sir Walter Raleigh: In Life & Legend (52 page)

Though she was not permitted to visit her husband, Bess replied to his letters, helping him preserve his sanity as health failed and hope faded. Knowing that all messages were relayed to the uncompromisingly hostile Secretary Robert Naunton, her words were moderate, and pragmatic, yet full of love and comfort. 'I am sorry', she wrote on 18 October, responding to Ralegh's complaint that a rupture was destroying him from within, 'to hear amongst many discomforts that your health is so ill, tis merely sorrow and grief that with wind hath gathered into your side. I hope your health and comforts will mend and mend us for God.'
26

Under diplomatic pressure from Spain to have the 'pirate' hanged at the earliest opportunity, or even sent to Spain for execution, King and Council considered their options. Had Ralegh made good his original opportunity, had he fled to France from Plymouth, the problem might have been removed. James, who had in some sort promised extradition to Madrid, and who now faced Council opposition to so demeaning a gesture, would no doubt have been relieved. Ralegh, however, remained in England, and so long as he did, the position of a king determined to maintain the Spanish alliance was far from easy. Alliances are not made or broken on the fate of a single man. Procrastination and imprisonment in the Tower might well have sufficed. On the other hand, James had no particular wish to spare Ralegh. Believing that he had been let down, indeed betrayed, by someone who owed him life itself, the King wondered whether a decision to spare or pardon Ralegh would be worth all the consequent diplomatic fuss.

The Council commission established to probe his offences first questioned Ralegh on 17 August. Members of his crew, some humble, some prominent, and his subordinate captains and commanders were also interrogated.
27
William Herbert, George Ralegh, Roger North and John Chudleigh all communicated their confidence that Ralegh had really believed in the mine - though perhaps he had relied too much on Keymis's uncorroborated reports - tainted by a suspicion that he had been working in league with France. The French agent's interpreter, de la Chesnee, who had approached Ralegh at Brentford on his master's behalf, was questioned too.

That ambiguity compromised Ralegh's chance of survival. Convinced despite the captains' testimony that tales of the mine had been exaggerated if not fabricated - the failure of the voyage had been proof enough of this - but half-believing rumours that Ralegh's voyage was one element in a conspiracy fomented by France, the commissioners persevered. The prisoner was interviewed repeatedly, first by members of the Council, then by Sir Thomas Wilson, Keeper of the State Papers, acting under a Council commission dated 10 September.
28
Wilson was no impartial examiner; he openly sought incriminating evidence from this 'Arch-hypocryte', asking God to preserve James 'from having many such dangerous subjects'.
29
The frustration of the Council is obvious at this point; they clearly believed that Ralegh was withholding important information, and that he was toying with them. Accordingly, Wilson was given permission to take a firm line with the 'hypocrite'. He had Ralegh's loyal servant Robin removed from the Tower, and replaced with someone more reliable. Diligent in his duty,Wilson nevertheless met with some initial resentment and obstruction from both the Lieutenant of the Tower, who fretted that his authority was being undermined, and from the Earl of Northumberland, who tried to deny Wilson a convenient lodging in the Tower on the grounds that the rooms under discussion were needed for occasional visits by his son. Ralegh's old friend was still doing what he could.
30
By 17 September, though, Wilson had his way. The Lieutenant was (at least temporarily) reconciled and Ralegh was moved from the Wardrobe Tower to the Brick Tower, even though the transfer involved shifting stills and other chemical apparatus.
31
As in most of his reports, Wilson attempted a little witticism to tickle his august audience. 'I have bene wholly busied in removeing this man to a saffer and higher lodging', he declared,'which though it seemes nearer heaven, yet is ther noe meanes of escape from thence for him to any place but to Hell.'
32

Despite Wilson's efforts, however, the pickings were meagre. At one moment Ralegh would suggest that he might have more to tell, particularly on his links with France. At the next he would dismiss this information as worthless, reminding Wilson that the King would hardly credit, let alone pardon a man who spoke out merely to save his own life.
33
A new approach seemed necessary. James at this stage declared himself content to receive letters from Ralegh, provided that the prisoner set out substance, and did not presume to play any more of his old games.
34
Here was a hint that an honest admission might make a good impression; it was a clever move which prompted Ralegh to candour. He wrote, and wrote again, laying open every secret of his heart according to the optimistic Wilson.
35
In particular, Ralegh acknowledged that he had indeed received a commission from the Duke de Montmorency, Admiral of France, given to him by a French intermediary.
36
That candour, however, eventually proved to be another political misjudgement, for it may finally have edged James away from mercy. Comparison with earlier, more guarded, letters only served to confirm the King's opinion that he was dealing with an evasive liar.
37

The burden on a prisoner in these circumstances is immense. Ralegh found some solace in his 'chymicall stuffes, amongst which', Wilson wrote sarcastically, 'there are so many spirits of things, that I think there is none wanting that ever I heard of, unless it be the spirrit of God'.
38
Dismissing the present, Ralegh preferred to dwell on the long ago, on the injustice of 1603, which he now put down to the machinations of the recently disgraced Earl of Suffolk and the long-dead Earl of Northampton - two scapegoats who could not respond.
39
Many Greeks and Romans, he reflected, had been brave enough to kill themselves rather than face execution, and there were some theologians who believed that, in certain circumstances, suicide might not be a sin. Northumberland's father, who had shot himself while a Tower prisoner in 1585, had taken matters into his own hands, and had faced his end with courage.
40
Suicide had preserved his earldom and his estate for his son. Close to death, Ralegh was communing with Tower ghosts, coming to terms with his own mortality and pondering on his present and future reputation.
41

Still there were glimpses of an earlier Ralegh, a memory of the old vanity, self-pity, and wit. He told Wilson that, while he had combed his hair for an hour every day before being consigned to the Tower, he had since given up such conceits. There was no point in all that combing now, he said, if the hangman were soon to have his head.
42
Some of the self-belief remained too, as he bragged about his own abilities, not least when developing a process to distil sea water.
43
There is also the first hint that Ralegh was working out his own response to the threat that he faced, that he was determined to perish 'in the light'. If death was becoming inevitable, he reasoned, a hugger-mugger 'Roman' suicide, however noble, only played into his enemies' hands. Ralegh would make sure that he died on a public stage, speaking out against all those who had dragged him down.
44

In mid-October, Wilson was commended for his efforts and told that he might hand Ralegh over once again to the Lieutenant of the Tower. He left at once, recognizing that his efforts had proved substantially unproductive. As an afterthought to the same order, Naunton agreed that Bess should be set at liberty from her house-arrest.
45
Ralegh understood the significance of these developments. The investigatory phase was to all intents and purposes over; it no longer mattered if he had a conversation with his wife. 'When you are gone', he had told Wilson at the end of September, 'I shal be delivered to the secular powre as they cale it.'
46
For those minded to hear these things, the remark conjured an image of the heretic handed over for burning, even of Christ delivered to the Romans. The King of Spain then freed James from any promise to extradite Ralegh; for Philip III, home-grown justice would now suffice.
47

But what form should home-grown justice take? As one of Carleton's correspondents, Edward Harwood, wrote early in October, if Ralegh were to be executed, the matter would have to be handled 'handsomely'. If, on the other hand, the honour of the state could not be guaranteed then the prisoner was likely to live, for all that James hoped to oblige Spain and his own inclinations.
48
No one wanted another fiasco like the 1603 trial. On the eighteenth, the commissioners reported their findings to the King in the form of a document drawn up by Ralegh's old adversary Sir Edward Coke. The paper strives for objectivity. It begins by pointing out the obvious: Ralegh stands attainted of high treason, 'which is the highest and last work of law'. Legally dead already, he cannot be charged with crimes committed since. A trial of new offences is therefore redundant. Nevertheless, while it might be perfectly proper to proceed to execution forthwith, other factors should be considered. Ralegh's 'late crimes and offences are not yet publicly known', and a 'great effluxion of time' has passed by since his attainder. Taking these things into consideration, it might make good sense to publicize his crimes in the form of a narrative.

That was one path, straightforward, and legally correct. However, the commissioners then expressed their preference for another way forward. They thought it advisable to call Ralegh before the Council and principal judges in the formal surroundings of the Council chamber. Moreover, 'some of the nobility and gentlemen of quality [might] be admitted to be present to hear the whole proceeding, as in like cases hath been used'. Thereafter, the King's legal counsel might proceed against him on charges centred around 'his acts of hostility, depredation, abuse as well of your Majesty's commission as of your subjects under his charge, impostures, attempt of escape, and other his misdemeanors'. The Commissioners had reservations over the extent to which dealings with France should feature in the indictment. They saw little point in working the affair up into a diplomatic crisis, and although, of course, the decision lay with James, they recommended that a veil should be drawn over that particular aspect of the case. The Commissioners suggested that Ralegh should be heard, that he should face witnesses 'if need be', but that afterwards he should be 'sent back; for that no sentence is, or can be, given against him'. Of course, if a sentence could not be passed down, there should still be some judgement, some public process of assessment. The Lords and judges would advise the King 'whether in respect of these subsequent offences, upon the whole matter, your Majesty if you so please, may not with justice and honour give warrant for his execution upon his attainder'. The matter should be recorded in 'a solemn act of council...with a memorial of the whole presence'. Furthermore, 'the heads of the matter, together with the principal examinations touching the same', should be given to members of the Council 'that they may be perfectly informed of the true state of the case, and give their advice accordingly'. Again, thoughts go back to Winchester, and to the detailed abstract of treasons that Coke and others had produced as an aide memoire.
49

At once brave and principled, these recommendations represent the Commissioners' collective belief that to refuse Ralegh a hearing - and one that came as close as might be to a fresh trial - would be to deny him justice. After so long, and in all the circumstances, the King's decision to spare Ralegh's life in 1603 could not now simply be set aside without compromising both the law and James's honour. Their letter is dated from York House, and the precedent they hint at is surely that of the late Earl of Essex, who was censured by the Lords in that very building during the summer of 1600, a few months before his rebellion. When the offence was capital, there was in fact no obvious 'like' case, but the assertion would itself convince. The Commissioners' stand on the principle of a hearing, for such it was, has never been accorded the respect that it deserved, though it does seem to have drawn a response at the time. All of a sudden, rumours ran through London that everything would turn out well for the prisoner, that he 'had the libertie of the Towre', and while some of this may have resulted from garbled news of Wilson's discharge, the measure of sympathy shown by prominent statesmen might also have influenced the public mood.
50

James, however, was dissatisfied with the Commissioners' line of argument. Even to him, simply issuing a warrant for execution of the 1603 sentence seemed unduly arbitrary, but he wanted no public or semi-public hearing either. The King knew his man too well. There was, he wrote, a risk that this 'would make [Ralegh] too popular, as was found by experiment at the arraignment at Winchester, where by his wit he turned the hatred of men into compassion for him'.
51
There was also, of course, something inconsistent in executing a sentence punishing conspiracy with Spain on a man who had so recently attacked and plundered a Spanish settlement in the New World. Mindful of Coke's bungling fifteen years earlier, the King favoured another course. Ralegh should be called before the Commissioners alone, 'those who have been the examiners of him hitherto'. There would be no supernumerary nobility, no additional gentlemen of quality who might sympathize with the prisoner and then spread favourable opinions of his arguments and behaviour. Examinations would be read out, the Attorney General and Solicitor General would inform against him, Ralegh might speak, and 'others confronted with him, who were with him in this action'. On one point James agreed with the Comnssioners: the French dimension should be disregarded. It would suffice to say that Ralegh had intended to escape on a French ship. A hint was safe enough.

The conclusion is blunt. His Commissioners envisaged a process of law, with at least a show of impartiality. The Council and judges would advise the King whether he might proceed to execute the attainder. By now, however, James was determined that Ralegh should die: 'And then', he wrote, 'after the sentence for his execution which hath been thus long suspended, a declaration [should] be presently put forth in print, a warrant being sent down for us to sign for his execution.' There is an undeniable logic to the course that he advocated, but in setting out his logical argument James could not rise above the personal. On the back of the sheet he urged his Commissioners to emphasize Manoury's testimony, Ralegh's open bragging that he would if necessary pursue the Spanish silver fleet, and, particularly, 'his hateful speeches of our person'.
52