eedlings transplanted from
foreign nurseries, which were as watered gardens for the growth of
treason--were a perpetually organized band of conspirators and assassins,
with whom it was hardly an act of excessive barbarity to deal in somewhat
summary fashion. Doubtless it would have been a more lofty policy, and a
far more intelligent one, to extend towards the Catholics of England, who
as a body were loyal to their country, an ample toleration. But it could
scarcely be expected that Elizabeth Tudor, as imperious and absolute by
temperament as her father had ever been, would be capable of embodying
that great principle.

When, in the preliminaries to the negotiations of 1587, therefore, it was
urged on the part of Spain, that the Queen was demanding a concession of
religious liberty from Philip to the Netherlanders which she refused to
English heretics, and that he only claimed the same right of dictating a
creed to his subjects which she exercised in regard to her own, Lord
Burghley replied that the statement was correct. The Queen permitted--it
was true--no man to profess any religion but the one which she professed.
At the same time it was declared to be unjust, that those persons in the
Netherlands who had been for years in the habit of practising Protestant
rites, should be suddenly compelled, without instruction, to abandon that
form of worship. It was well known that many would rather die than submit
to such oppression, and it was affirmed that the exercise of this cruelty
would be resisted by her to the uttermost. There was no hint of the
propriety--on any logical basis--of leaving the question of creed as a
matter between man and his Maker, with which any dictation on the part of
crown or state was an act of odious tyranny. There was not even a
suggestion that the Protestant doctrines were true, and the Catholic
doctrines false. The matter was merely taken up on the 'uti possidetis'
principle, that they who had acquired the fact of Protestant worship had
a right to retain it, and could not justly be deprived of it, except by
instruction and persuasion. It was also affirmed that it was not the
English practice to inquire into men's consciences. It would have been
difficult, however, to make that very clear to Philip's comprehension,
because, if men, women, and children, were scourged with rods, imprisoned
and hanged, if they refused to conform publicly to a ceremony at which
their consciences revolted-unless they