The life of Dr. George Abbot, Lord Archbishop of Canterbury / by the Rt. Hon. Arthur Onlsow, late speaker of the House of Commons ... a description of the hospital which he ... endowed in ... Guildford; correct copies of the charter and statutes of the same ... To which are added the lives of his ... brothers, Dr. R. Abbot ... and Sir M. Abbot.

Arthur Onslow

Date:: 1777

Credit: The life of Dr. George Abbot, Lord Archbishop of Canterbury / by the Rt. Hon. Arthur Onlsow, late speaker of the House of Commons ... a description of the hospital which he ... endowed in ... Guildford; correct copies of the charter and statutes of the same ... To which are added the lives of his ... brothers, Dr. R. Abbot ... and Sir M. Abbot. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Cover
Title Page
Cover

30/182 page 22

as no doubt it did, great fatisfaclion, an affair that happened about the fame time, difturbed him not a little. This was the famous cafe of divorce between the Lady Frances Howard, daughter to the Earl of Suf¬ folk, and Robert, Earl of Effex, her hufband ; which has been always confidered as one of the great- eft blemifhes of King James’s reign, though the part a<5ted therein by the Archbifhop of Canterbury, added much to the reputation he had already acqui¬ red, for unfhaken and incorruptible integrity, [d The Ei TJnfhaken and incorruptible integrity.] This affair of the divorce, was by the King referred to a court of delegates, confiding of his Grace the Archbifhop of Canterbury, the Bifffops of London, WincheAer, Coventry and Litchfield, ,ant'd Rochefter, Sir Julius Caefkr, Sir Thomas Parrey, Sir Daniel Dunn, Dr John Bennet, Dr Francis James, and Dr Thomas Edwards. This affair was drawn out into a great length, and many accidents happened in the courfe of it, which gave the Archbifhop infinite difquiet. He faw plainly, that the King was very defirous the Lady fhouldbe divorced, and, on the other hand, he was in his judgment diredlly againft the di¬ vorce. He laboured all he coulcf to extricate himfelf from thefe difficulties, by having an end put to the caufe iome other way than by fentence, but it was to no purpofe ; for thofe who drove on this affair, had got too great power to be refrained from bringing it to the conclufion they deiired. The Archbi¬ fhop was told, that a predeceffor of his, which was Archbifhop Grindall, had buffered about Dr. Julio’s divorce, and fo might lie ; but this, however, did not at all move him ; on the con¬ trary, he prepared a fpeech againft the nullity of the marriage, which he intended to have fpoken in the court at Lambeth, Sep¬ tember 25, 1613, but he did not makeufe of that fpeech, be- caufe the King ordered them to deliver their opinions in few words. He continued, however, inflexible, with regard to his opinion, and therefore, when fentence was pronounced, the court was divided in the following manner. The

Licence and re-use

Contents