not done what the pope commands in this matter, he is to be formally excommunicated.' In the same way, at this time, Pope Honorius interested himself in obtaining the pecuniary assistance, of which, as had been represented to him, the English king stood so much in need. Thus he writes to the archbishops and other prelates in Ireland, asking them to contribute liberally to their sovereign, out of their ecclesiastical revenues. "The liberties of the Church," he says, "are not injured but rather strengthened, if, according as times and circumstances demand, their defender is helped liberally." Now the English sovereign stands in great need of money, and “as we have ordered an aid to be given to him by the clergy of England, we have determined to exhort, ask, and by our Apostolic letters order all of you" to do the same," since the kingdom of Ireland is recognised as belonging to him."2 The pope's fatherly care of the young king was manifested in many other ways. His legate in France, Romanus, was directed to induce Louis, whilst attacking the Albigenses, to abstain from interfering in any way with the dominions of King Henry in France. At the same time Honorius writes to the English king warning him not to help Raymund of Toulouse against Louis. The latter, at the request of the pope, had undertaken to repress the heresy that was rife in the dominions of the former. In making this demand on the French king for this service to the Church, the pope had acted upon the order of the General Council, that where any temporal ruler either could not or would not extirpate heretical opinions in his territory, it was the duty of the pope to invite someone else to undertake the work. This being so, Honorius warns Henry, whom he "loves with greater affection than other princes," 3 Bouquet, xix. 771. 1 Rymer, i. 181. 2 Ibid. not to assist Count Raymund in any way, "for since he is excommunicate, with all his abettors," he says, "besides the stain it will be upon the purity of your faith (if you do so), it will involve you in the same sentence of excommunication."1 On the other hand, the pope exerted himself, by all means in his power, to preserve the peace, which was at best of a very precarious nature, between this country and France. His legate in the latter country was constantly warned to do all in his power to avert the outbreak of active hostilities between the two countries, and to secure a safe conduct and a proper treatment for Henry's messengers to the Curia, whenever they were passing through the French king's dominions. Henry on his part, who was on the point of invading France when he received the pope's prohibition, read the letter to his counsellors, asked their advice, and, in accordance with it, put off his proposed expedition.' The king's brother, Richard of Cornwall, was also forbidden by Honorius to take any part against Louis during his crusade against the Albigenses of Toulouse. As might be expected, the pope was not always well informed, in individual cases, about the facts. As a rule, however, his decisions were protected from error and his judgements rendered sound, by the employment of commissioners in the country to try the issues. Occasionally this useful and necessary precaution appears to have been neglected, with corresponding evil results. One such case happened at this time in regard to the wife of Falkes de Breauté, whose case had been, for some not quite obvious reason, warmly espoused by the pope. On the submission of de Breauté, after the fall of Bedford Castle, the wife of 1 Royal Letters, i. 545. 2 Brit. Mus. Add. MS., 15,352, ff. 325, 335. 3 Roger de Wendover, ii. 544. that noble pleaded for the king's protection. Before the archbishop of Canterbury she sued for a divorce, on the ground that she had been married by force and had never given her consent.' She had been the widow of Baldwin, earl of Albemarle, and when Falkes de Breauté had earned the gratitude of King John, in 1213, by his cruelties perpetrated in Wales, John, as his reward, bestowed the Countess Margaret, with all her possessions, upon him." Archbishop Langton appointed a day to consider her case, and finally her lands and possessions were restored to her by Henry, and she was placed under the protection of the earl of Warrenne." The pope was approached on the subject by the friends of Breauté. Possibly the late nuncio, Otho, on his return to Rome, had represented this aspect in the case, about which Honorius was specially interested, in which he had taken the view that the baron had been unfairly treated, and to which he had specially instructed its representative to try and secure a settlement with Henry. The report that de Breauté had received an additional injury in being separated from his wife, would tend not unnaturally to rouse the pope's displeasure, particularly in view of the repulse of Otho's offer of mediation in the matter. On 11th July, 1226, Pope Honorius wrote two letters on the subject. The first, directed to Archbishop Langton and others, expressed his desire to arrange the difficulties which existed between the king and de Breauté. In the second, addressed to the archbishop alone, he speaks in very strong language about the matter in hand, and it is abundantly clear that he was entirely mistaken in the whole business; for he imagined that the wife of Falkes was detained from 1 Roger de Wendover, ii. 281. 3 Wendover, ut sup. 2 Matth. Paris, ii. 538. Brit. Mus. Add. MS. 15,352, f. 341. him, apparently against her will, and as part of the manifest injustice with which he had been treated. "When we think of the great learning given you by God," he writes to Langton, "we wonder how a counsellor, imbued as you are with a knowledge of divine scripture, can approve of advice which must result in offence to God and manifest danger to souls. Not to speak of other injuries which our beloved son, Falkes de Breauté, has suffered against his deserts, how can you take it upon your soul to support those who detain the wife of the said noble from him, and, to the scandal of many and to the danger of their own souls, violate the Sacrament of marriage?" He then warns Langton for the sake of his own reputation to remember the account that will be demanded of him at the last day. From one in his high position more is looked for and more will be required, and therefore he specially appeals to him to try in every way to get the king to do what he has written to tell him in this matter.' 2 During the year 1226 an election to the See at Durham caused some difficulty. Richard Marsh, the bishop, died suddenly at Peterborough, on 1st May; the chronicler, Matthew Paris, seeing in this an instance of the divine punishment on one who was "from the first, a persecutor of monks and religious." The bishop was actually on his way to London with a number of legal advisers, to prosecute his quarrel against the monks of his cathedral, and had halted to pass the night at the abbey. Next morning he was discovered dead in his bed, having retired to rest apparently in his usual health. The monks of Durham applied to the king for leave to proceed to the election of a successor. Henry offered them his chaplain Luke, pressing them to accept him as their bishop. The electors replied Royal Letters, i. 547. 2 Ibid., iii. 111. 1 that they would receive no one without a canonical election, and they remained firm in this resolution, in spite of the royal threat that, if they did not choose his nominee, they should wait seven years for a bishop.' On proceeding to the actual election the convent came to the unanimous conclusion that the king's chaplain was unworthy of so high a dignity. They therefore made choice of the archdeacon of Worcester, William de Stechil, and presented him to the archbishop of York for confirmation,2 and to the king for approval. The king refused his consent; and the archbishop, probably on that account, withheld confirmation. An appeal was made to Rome, but the case apparently dragged on for more than two years. The elect himself and several of the monks went thither to support the election, and the king dispatched the bishop of Chester and the prior of Lenton to oppose it, and to prevent if possible the papal ratification of the monks' choice. In December, 1226, Pope Honorius wrote to the metropolitan of York to know why he had taken no steps in regard to the election of William the archdeacon, who had been commended to the Curia for approbation as "prudent, upright, learned and worthy." If within two months the archbishop has not held his canonical inquiry and certified the Roman authorities of the result, then the pope declares that he will himself proceed to consider and determine the case.* The metropolitan then evidently held his inquiry, and reported against the form of the election. For Robert Graystones, the historian of Durham, records that at length, on the vigil of the Ascension, 1228, the case was settled. Honorius III was dead, and his successor, Gregory IX, pro 1 Roger de Wendover, ii. 309. 2 Hist. Dunelmensis Scriptores tres (Surtees Soc.). App., li. 68. A Hist. Dunelmensis Scriptores tres, ut sup. |