was furthermore recommended “to deal with the three seigniors according to the example of the Spanish Governments in its intercourse with the envoys, Bergen and Montigny, who are met with a smiling face, but who are closely watched, and who will never be permitted to leave Spain alive.”  The remainder of the letter alludes to supposed engagements between France and Spain for the extirpation of heresy, from which allusion to the generally accepted but mistaken notion as to the Bayonne conference, a decided proof seems to be furnished that the letter was not genuine.  Great complaints, however, are made, as to the conduct of the Queen Regent, who is described as “a certain lady well known to her Highness, and as a person without faith, friendship, or truth; the most consummate hypocrite in the world.”  After giving instances of the duplicity manifested by Catherine de Medici, the writer continues:  “She sends her little black dwarf to me upon frequent errands, in order that by means of this spy she may worm out my secrets.  I am, however, upon my guard, and flatter myself that I learn more from him than she from me.  She shall never be able to boast of having deceived a Spaniard.”

An extract or two from this very celebrated document seemed indispensable, because of the great importance attached to it, both at the Dendermonde Conference, and at the trials of Egmont and Horn.  The contemporary writers of Holland had no doubt of its genuineness, and what is more remarkable, Strada, the historiographer of the Farnese family, after quoting Margaret’s denial of the authenticity of the letter, coolly observes:  “Whether this were only an invention of the conspirators, or actually a despatch from Alava, I shall not decide.  It is certain, however, that the Duchess declared it to be false.”

Certainly, as we read the epistles, and observe how profoundly the writer seems to have sounded the deep guile of the Spanish Cabinet, and how distinctly events, then far in the future, are indicated, we are tempted to exclaim:  “aut Alava, aut Diabolus;” either the envoy wrote the despatch, or Orange.  Who else could look into the future, and into Philip’s heart so unerringly?

As the charge has never been made, so far as we are aware, against the Prince, it is superfluous to discuss the amount of immorality which should belong to such a deception.  A tendency to employ stratagem in his warfare against Spain was, no doubt, a blemish upon his—­high character.  Before he is condemned, however, in the Court of Conscience, the ineffable wiles of the policy with which he had to combat must be thoroughly scanned, as well as the pure and lofty purpose for which his life’s long battle was fought.