legate to Scotland, as well as to England.' By Otho's advice Henry summoned the nobles to meet him at York, on 14th September, 1237, and by the legate's invitation the king of Scotland came to the meeting, where terms were satisfactorily arranged, and a treaty of friendship entered into between Alexander II and Henry. The Scotch king renewed his fealty at this meeting, and every occasion of quarrel was thus happily removed.

Before leaving the northern parts, Otho proposed to cross the border into Scotland and there to discuss certain ecclesiastical affairs relating to that kingdom, as he was proposing to do in the forthcoming synod for England. King Alexander, however, practically refused to allow him to do as he proposed. He did not remember, he said, that any legate had ever visited Scotland; there never had been an occasion to ask for one, he said, and now, thanks be to God! everything was well in his country and did not require any change. He warned Otho that the men of the north were rough country people, and he told him he would not answer for his safety if he attempted to enter Scotland. This was sufficient for Otho, and he elected to remain with "the king of England who was obedient to him in everything."

1 Brit. Mus. Add. MS., 15,354, f. 19.

2 Matth. Paris, iii. 414. The Scotch king, of course, must have meant that no legate to England had ever claimed to visit Scotland as legate. The Bull of Clement III addressed to William, king of the Scots, on 13th March, 1188, makes it quite clear that legates from Rome to the Scotch Church were by no means unknown. Pope Clement speaks to the king of the "love and devotion which you have from long past had to the Roman See," and also that "as the Scottish Church is the special daughter of the Apostolic See, it ought to be specially and immediately subject to it." For this reason" it is lawful for no one except the Roman pontiff, or the legate a latere sent by him," to pronounce any general sentence of excommunication or interdict, etc.; and, further, that "no one might exercise the office of legate," unless specially sent by the pope for that purpose. (Haddan and Stubbs, Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents, II., i. 273.)

Great preparations were made for the November syno at St. Paul's. The legate had a sumptuous throne prepared for himself at the western end of the church, and the archbishops, bishops, abbots, and other prelates, as well as representatives of all the conventual and cathedral chapters, were summoned to assist personally or by proxy at the meeting. All obeyed the summons, and a vast assembly gathered together on the appointed day, 18th November. At the first session, on 19th November, Otho was not present, since the bishops had asked him to allow them a day in which to examine the statutes he proposed to enact, and to discuss their provisions among themselves. The following day, however, the cardinal presided over the meeting, having first taken the precaution of getting the king to station some two hundred soldiers about the church in unseen places, as the rumour had gone about that pluralists and others, who were likely to be affected by legative legislation, would probably not hesitate to offer him personal violence. So large was the multitude of people present, says the chronicler, that Otho only with difficulty could pass through the throng. After he had been vested in full pontificals at the altar, a procession was formed to the throne, the archbishops of Canterbury and York walking in front of the legate, the former upon the right the latter on the left. Before the real business

of the meeting commenced, the archbishop of York claimed the right of sitting in the first place, but, by the exercise of a little tact, Otho settled the difficulty in favour of Canterbury. Upon the formal opening of the meeting a message was brought to the assembly from the king by two nobles and a canon of St. Paul's, forbidding the passing of statutes in any way repugnant to the prerogatives of his Crown, and William de Raleigh, the above

named canon, remained to watch the subsequent proceedings on Henry's behalf.

The preliminaries were not even yet concluded, for Simon Langton, the archdeacon of Canterbury, requested that the formal document of the legate's commission should be read. This was followed by the publication of a privilege, granted by Pope Gregory to England, for the universal keeping of St. Edward's day, and of the Bull by which he had canonised St. Dominic and St. Francis. The burning question of the day was that relating to the holding of more benefices than one by any one individual; this the Council of Lateran had forbidden, and by reason of the murmurings and manifestations of resentment, which even the rumour of coming legislation had brought to light, certain members of the nobility were formed into a bodyguard to protect the person of the legate in coming and going to the synod.

After the gospel "I am the good shepherd" had been read, and the Veni Creator, with the proper prayers had been said, the legate opened the deliberations with an address, after which he caused the statutes he had prepared to be read to the meeting. These celebrated articles, known as the Constitution of Cardinal Otho, for centuries formed the principal basis of the ecclesiastical law in this country. They made no pretence to be exhaustive, for, as the cardinal expressly declared, "the other canons of the church were supposed to be observed," but they were merely intended to form a useful code which would certainly tend "to strengthen and improve the ecclesiastical state in England," if passed "by the vote and consent of the assembled council." That there was considerable discussion upon certain matters is apparent from what the historian relates 1 Matthew Paris, iii. 420.

concerning the statute as to plurality of benefices. Upon the words of the article being read, the bishop of Worcester, Walter de Cantelupe, taking off his mitre, made an appeal for some consideration towards those who were then pluralists and had not received the dispensation declared to be necessary by the Council of Lateran. By means of these benefices, he pleaded, they had been accustomed in England to keep up an honourable state, and to dispense their charities to the poor. To take away their benefices now would in many cases necessitate giving all this up. For himself, he said, he had resolved, when called to the ecclesiastical state, that if any of his benefices had to be surrendered, he would surrender all of them; and as he feared there were many of the clergy in the same mind, he begged that the legate would refer the matter again to the fatherly consideration of the pope.

The bishop further appealed for some mitigation of the statutes which regarded the Benedictines, by which it was proposed to forbid entirely the use of flesh meat. He said that this, in his opinion, would be a very harsh measure to many, on account of their poverty, and in particular to the nuns, who were weak and delicate, and for this reason alone this law required to be wisely relaxed. In this case also the bishop petitioned that the pope might be approached on the subject before the statute was made obligatory. To this the legate replied by saying that if the archbishops and bishops agreed with Bishop Cantelupe in these requests, he would willingly write to the pope on the matter. He added that, as he had heard that some thought the statutes proposed by him would only remain in force during the time he held the office of legate, it was necessary to let it be clearly understood that this was not the case, but that such legislation would be permanent. At his command, his clerk

read a certain decree he pointed out in the register of the lord pope, which declared that such legatine statutes had a lasting authority.' On the third day of the meeting the business of the synod came to an end, and after appropriate prayers Otho dismissed the Fathers with his blessing. They departed, says Matthew Paris, "not too well satisfied with their experiences." 2

Apparently about the time of this assembly, the archbishops, in the name of the whole clergy, presented a long list of grievances which-so they considered-they had against the king. Henry had given them a charter of liberties, and had sworn to keep it. By his suggestion and assent, and with the consent of all prelates and nobles, a general sentence of excommunication was pronounced publicly against all who violated its provisions. Notwithstanding this, the king himself was now in fact indifferent to it. They complained also about many instances of a complete disregard of ecclesiastical law and privilege, and of lay judges claiming to determine whether a cause was to be tried in civil or ecclesiastical courts. The authority of the king had been invoked, and used, to stay religious causes, and to compel bishops to assign reasons why they refused to induct persons presented to certain livings by patrons, or confirm elections made in abbeys and other religious houses. People excommunicated for perjury and other offences against the Church, appealed to lay courts to oblige the ecclesiastical authorities to show cause why they should not be compelled to remove the censure; and generally they urged that the rights of clerics and others were either disregarded altogether, or deliberately infringed. For this state of things they begged that the legate would find full and immediate remedy.