was even appointed prince of Wales.  The duke of Clarence had received much such another declaration in his favour during the short restoration of Henry.  What temptations were these precedents to an affronted prince!  We shall see soon what encouragement they gave him to examine closely into his nephew’s pretensions; and how imprudent it was in the queen to provoke Gloucester, when her very existence as queen was liable to strong objections.  Nor ought the subsequent executions of Lord Rivers, Lord Richard Grey, and of Lord Hastings himself, to be considered in so very strong a light, as they would appear in, if acted in modern times.  During the wars of York and Lancaster, no forms of trial had been observed.  Not only peers taken in battle had been put to death without process; but whoever, though not in arms, was made prisoner by the victorious party, underwent the same fate; as was the case of Tiptoft earl of Worcester, who had fled and was taken in disguise.  Trials had never been used with any degree of strictness, as at present; and though Richard was pursued and killed as an usurper, the Solomon that succeeded him, was not a jot-less a tyrant.  Henry the Eighth was still less of a temper to give greater latitude to the laws.  In fact, little ceremony or judicial proceeding was observed on trials, till the reign of Elizabeth, who, though decried of late for her despotism, in order to give some shadow of countenance to the tyranny of the Stuarts, was the first of our princes, under whom any gravity or equity was allowed in cases of treason.  To judge impartially therefore, we ought to recall the temper and manners of the times we read of.  It is shocking to eat our enemies:  but it is not so shocking in an Iroquois, as it would be in the king of Prussia.  And this is all I contend for, that the crimes of Richard, which he really committed, at least which we have reason to believe he committed, were more the crimes of the age than of the man; and except these executions of Rivers, Grey, and Hastings, I defy any body to prove one other of those charged to his account, from any good authority.

(8) Grafton says, “and in effect every one as he was neerest of kinne unto the queene, so was he planted nere about the prince,” p. 761; and again, p. 762, “the duke of Gloucester understanding that the lordes, which were about the king, entended to bring him up to his coronation, accompanied with such power of their friendes, that it should be hard for him, to bring his purpose to passe, without gatherying and assemble of people, and in maner of open war,” &c. in the same place it appears, that the argument used to dissuade the queen from employing force, was, that it would be a breach of the accommodation made by the late king between her relations and the great lords; and so undoubtedly it was; and though they are accused of violating the peace, it is plain that the queen’s insincerity had been at least equal to theirs, and that the infringement of the reconciliation commenced on her side.