outweigh in the cautious calculations of Granvelle; distinct admissions in favor of persecution.  Egmont in truth stood in fear of the inquisition.  The hero of Gravelingen and St. Quentin actually trembled before Peter Titelmann.  Moreover, notwithstanding all that had past, he had experienced a change in his sentiments in regard to the Cardinal.  He frequently expressed the opinion that, although his presence in the Netherlands was inadmissible, he should be glad to see him Pope.  He had expressed strong disapprobation of the buffooning masquerade by which he had been ridiculed at the Mansfeld christening party.  When at Madrid he not only spoke well of Granvelle himself; but would allow nothing disparaging concerning him to be uttered in his presence.  When, however, Egmont had fallen from favor, and was already a prisoner, the Cardinal diligently exerted himself to place under the King’s eye what he considered the most damning evidence of the Count’s imaginary treason; a document with which the public prosecutor had not been made acquainted.

Thus, it will be seen by this retrospect how difficult it is to seize all the shifting subtleties of this remarkable character.  His sophisms even, when self-contradictory, are so adroit that they are often hard to parry.  He made a great merit to himself for not having originated the new episcopates; but it should be remembered that he did his utmost to enforce the measure, which was “so holy a scheme that he would sacrifice for its success his fortune and his life.”  He refused the archbishopric of Mechlin, but his motives for so doing were entirely sordid.  His revenues were for the moment diminished, while his personal distinction was not, in his opinion, increased by the promotion.  He refused to accept it because “it was no addition to his dignity, as he was already Cardinal and Bishop of Arras,” but in this statement he committed an important anachronism.  He was not Cardinal when he refused the see of Mechlin; having received the red hat upon February 26, 1561, and having already accepted the archbishopric in May of the preceding year.  He affirmed that “no man would more resolutely defend the liberty and privileges of the provinces than he would do,” but he preferred being tyrannized by his prince, to maintaining the joyful entrance.  He complained of the insolence of the states in meddling with the supplies; he denounced the convocation of the representative bodies, by whose action alone, what there was of “liberty and privilege” in the land could be guarded; he recommended the entire abolition of the common councils in the cities.  He described himself as having always combated the opinion that “any thing could be accomplished by terror, death and violence,” yet he recommended the mission of Alva, in whom “terror, death, and violence” were incarnate.  He was indignant that he should be accused of having advised the introduction of the Spanish inquisition; but his reason was that the term sounded disagreeably