"That, _upon the fear of this
declaration_, also the people
may fall from _their evil_ opinions
conceived _now of late_ by
_seditious preachers_."

ARUNDEL.

"That the erroneous opinions
of the people, who perhaps
have conceived on this
subject otherwise than as the
truth of the fact stands, may
by this public declaration be
reversed."

The Archbishop declares his object to be the
substitution of the true statement of the affair of
Lord Cobham's condemnation, in place of the false
opinions which were abroad; not a word about
"fear," or "evil opinions from seditious
preachers."]

[Footnote 283: In the Lambeth account Sautre's
condemnation is dated, according to the
ecclesiastical reckoning, February 1400; but that,
according to our reckoning, is 1401.]

[Footnote 284: The writ is dated March 5,
1410.--Rymer.]

[Footnote 285: His escape must have been, at the
furthest, within fifteen days of his sentence; for,
on the 10th October, messengers were sent about,
forbidding any one to harbour "John Oldcastle, a
proved and convicted heretic."--Pell Rolls.]

[Footnote 286: If Cobham's escape was winked at by
the King, and _he knew_ of the King's kindness, it
is very improbable that he would immediately after
have been so basely ungrateful as to imagine the
death of his sovereign and benefactor. It is,
however, most probable that, had the King favoured
his escape, the royal interference would have been
kept a profound secret, as well from the prisoner,
as from the people at large.]

[Footnote 287: Walsingham (as quoted by Milner)
says that the Archbishop applied to the King for a
r