by its
authors upon the need of popularity for the new reign. They were not
sorry to hit Ralegh with the same stone. A question was raised at the
Board whether the office of wine licenser were not a monopoly. Until the
Council should have decided, the levy of all dues was suspended. A large
part of Ralegh's income was at once cut off. He was summoned a few days
later to the Council Chamber at Whitehall, to be informed that the King
had appointed Sir Thomas Erskine, afterwards Earl of Kellie, Captain of
the Guard. To this he is related to have in very humble manner submitted
himself. His enemies knew they could in this as in other ways wound him
with a certainty of applause for the gratification of their spite.
Within a month of the Queen's decease a prayer of 'poor men' had been
addressed to James against monopolies. The manifesto contained an
especial allusion to Ralegh, of whom it wildly spoke as about to be
created Earl of Pembroke. So, on the occasion of the dismissal from the
command of the Guard, Beaumont, the French Ambassador, informed his
Court that Cecil had induced the King to make the change on the ground
of Ralegh's unpopularity, which would render his removal highly
acceptable to the country. Henry Howard, before the demise of the Crown,
when the effect of Ralegh's blandishments upon James was feared, had
preached to the King on the same text. He reported a refusal by
Elizabeth of the command of a regiment to Northumberland, for the reason
that 'Ralegh had made the Earl as odious as himself, because he would
not be singular, and such were not to be employed by princes of sound
policy.'

For the present a semblance of consideration was preserved. The loss of
the Captaincy was apparently sweetened by the elimination from his
patent for the Governorship of Jersey of the reservation of L300 a year
to the Crown or Seymour, and by the condonation of some arrears due from
him. His fall elicited from him no symptom of anger against the King. If
a letter purporting to be addressed by him to James be genuine, though
the evidence for it is not strong, he was not as placid with respect to
others. There the loss of his captaincy is angrily imputed to Cecil, who
is accused of having brought about the deaths both of Essex and Queen
Mary. Chronology must have forbidden James to attach weight to the
latter allegation, if he had cared for it. On the former he would be
better inclined to credit Howard, who asserted that Ceci