17

France there was a great scarcity of money, and he was called upon to contribute a portion of his immense wealth in order to meet the expenses of that expedition, he got dreadfully angry with Edward, gave vent to the most abusive language, stayed away from his brother's presence, hardly spoke a word in council, and withdrew to a country seat where, shortly afterwards, his wife died in childbed(1477), which sad event Clarence was imprudent enough to ascribe to sorcery, and even to accuse his sister-in-law, Edward's Queen, of that crime. To this came in the year following (1478) another ground for anger. Clarence wanted to marry Mary of Burgundy, the only daughter of Charles the Bold, and heiress to vast domains, and immense wealth. As Edward was perhaps afraid that Clarence, once in possession of all that property, would come forward with claims upon the English throne, or as, according to others, the queen wanted to marry her brother, Lord Rivers, to the young heiress of Burgundy, he was against Clarence's marriage, and promoted the suit of the Duke Maximilian of Austria, who was finally successful. This exasperated Clarence exceedingly, and as about the same time two of his attendants were put to death upon frivolous pretences, he, under pretext of pleading for them, went to the council chamber, and openly accused the king of in justice, abusing him, and his ministers by the coarsest terms. When Edward, who was then at. Windsor, heard of this behaviour, he ordered Clarence to be put into prison, and afterwards to be tried before the parliament. Edward himself seems to have been his accuser, and a very violent scene to have ensued. Clarence's crimes appeared so great that he was found guilty of death. Edward seems to have wished to defer the execution of the sentence, but as a petition of the Commons asked that the execution was to be carried into effect, Clarence was put to death but two days after the sentence had been passed upon him, on the 18th of February 1478.(Halsted, Richard III.) It seems to be a tale without any ground that he was drowned in a butt of Malmsey wine.

This murder too has been imputed by Shakespeare to Richard, but the tale has been spread only many years after Richard's death when all sorts of atrocities were heaped upon the unfortunate head of the fallen foe of Henry VII. Even chronicles of later times which are no friends of his confess, that he remonstrated against the execution, at least apparently, whilst con- temporary writers are silent about the accusation ascribing it to the queen and her friends' influence. Even Thomas More says, that there is no certainty in the rumor. Lord Bacon thinks Richard implicated in the murder, but modern writers show, that there is not the least evidence for his guilt.(Pauli, Aufsätze. Oechelhäuser, Essay.) It is more than likely that Gloucester was not at London during Clarence's trial, but in the north, because there are documents still existing which are dated from his residences in the north. There had certainly been once a very angry quarrel between the two brothers about the property of their wives, but it had been settled by parliament years ago, and afterwards nothing has been known of a new quarrel taking place between them. Yet their intercourse was never a very intimate one.

Shakespeare brings the murder of Clarence into close connexion with the death of Edward. Edward is on his death-bed trying to reconcile the hostile parties of his court, and to win them for the support of his poor son, whom he is soon going to leave. All at once the startling news is spread, that his brother Clarence has been put to death in the Tower. Edward had intended releasing him; so the news of his death shakes him dreadfully, he is nearly beside himself with grief and remorse, he is sure such a monstrous deed will be severely punished, and he breaks