the Third, it wil be no matter of triumph, since it appears that Richard’s cause was as good as King William’s, and that in both instances it was a free election.  The art used by Sir Thomas More (when he could not deny a pre-contract) in endeavouring to shift that objection on Elizabeth Lucy, a married woman, contrary to the specific words of the act of parliament, betrays the badness of the Lancastrian cause, which would make us doubt or wonder at the consent of the nobility in giving way to the act for bastardizing the children of Edward the Fourth.  But reinstate the claim of the lady Butler, which probably was well known, and conceive the interest that her great relations must have made to set aside the queen’s marriage, nothing appears more natural than Richard’s succession.  His usurpation vanishes, and in a few pages more, I shall shew that his consequential cruelty vanishes too, or at most is very, problematic:  but first I must revert to some intervening circumstances.

In this whole story nothing is less known to us than the grounds on which lord Hastings was put to death.  He had lived in open enmity with the queen and her family, and had been but newly reconciled to her son the marquis Dorset; yet Sir Thomas owns that lord Hastings was one of the first to abet Richard’s proceedings against her, and concurred in all the protector’s measures.  We are amazed therefore to find this lord the first sacrifice under the new government.  Sir Thomas More supposes (and he could only suppose; for whatever archbishop Morton might tell him of the plots of Henry of Richmond, Morton was certainly not entrusted with the secrets of Richard) Sir Thomas, I say, supposes, that Hastings either withstood the deposition of Edward the Fifth, or was accused of such a design by Catesby, who was deeply in his confidence; and he owns that the protector undoubtedly loved him well, and loth he was to have him lost.  What then is the presumption?  Is it not, that Hastings really was plotting to defeat the new settlement contrary to the intention of the three estates?  And who can tell whether the suddenness of the execution was not the effect of necessity?  The gates of the Tower were shut during that rapid scene; the protector and his adherents appeared in the first rusty armour that was at hand:  but this circumstance is alledged against them, as an incident contrived to gain belief, as if they had been in danger of their lives.  The argument is gratis dictum:  and as Richard loved Hastings and had used his ministry, the probability lies on the other side:  and it is more reasonable to believe that Richard acted in self-defence, than that he exercised a wanton, unnecessary, and disgusting cruelty.  The collateral circumstances introduced by More do but weaken(17) his account, and take from its probability.  I do not mean the silly recapitulation of silly omens which forewarned Hastings of his fate, and as omens generally do, to no manner of purpose; but I speak of the idle accusations put into the mouth