MarginaliaAn. 1556. Iuly.she? None. Did she then drowne it, or cast it in some ponde, as we read of the strompetes at Rome, whose childrēs heads were takē vp by Pope Gregoryes mote, by hundrethes, what time Priestes began first to be restrained of lawful wedloke: witnes þ^e epistle of Volusianus.  

MarginaliaVide supra pag. 1320. col. 2.pag. 1320.MarginaliaA story of yong infantes murdered in Lenton Abbay, and found in þ^e 8. yeare of Q. Elizab. or els did she throw it by the walles into some priuie corner, as I am credibly certified, þ^t in þ^e viij. yeare of Q. Elisabeth, certeine scalpes & other yong infantes bones were found & taken out with a sticke in þ^e hole of a stone wall in Lenton Abbay, by certein Gentlemen w^tin þ^e County of Nottyngham, Iames Barusse, Rich. Loueyt, & W. Louelace walkyng in the Priors chamber: witnes the sayd W. Louelace, with other which saw the bones aforesayd? Or otherwise did she take any hurtfull drinke to impotionate the child within her, as commonly it is reported, few Nonneries to haue bene in England, wherin such a tree hath not bene growing w^tin their ground, meete for practising of such a purpose? Neither so, nor so. What then? did she purposely and wyttyngly thrust her selfe in ieoperdy, to the destruction of her childe, when she needed not, MarginaliaPope Ioane murderer of her childe.as Pope Ioane, whē she might haue kept her bed, would needes aduenture forth in procession, where both she her selfe. and her infant perished in the open streete?  

[Back to Top]

Wel then, thus much by this hetherto alledged and graunted, we haue gottē this womā here to be accused of murderyng her child, which neither layd hand vppon it, nor vsed weapon agaynst it, neyther vsed any other practise, in drowynyng, hangyng, breakyng, burying, poysoning, or any other wilfull meanes, wherby to destroy it. And how then? by what maner of way was this womā a murderer of her yong babe? Forsoth, (sayth M. H.) MarginaliaHow and by what reason M. Harding proueth Perrotine to be a murderer.when she was accused and condemned to be burned, she did not clayme the benefite of her bely, whereby the life both of her selfe for the tyme might haue bene delayd, and the child preserued.

[Back to Top]

Whether she did or no, I haue not perfectly to say: no more, I weene, hath M. H. Howbeit this is certeine, and by witnes knowen, that she vttered no lesse to her ghostly father in confession. And what if she had opened the same vnto the Iudges? They would (sayth he) haue spared her life for the tyme, and so the innocent had ben preserued. And how is M. H. sure of this, MarginaliaLady Iane thought to be with childe at her death.more thē was the lyfe spared of the yong Lady, and mistres sometime of M. H who suffered, notwithstandyng she was reported of some to be with child? MarginaliaThe law beneficiall to women claming the benefite of their belly.Because the law (sayth he) is beneficiall to women in her case, clayming the benefite therof.

[Back to Top]

The law so giueth, I graunt. But it foloweth not therfore, what soeuer the law giueth or prescribeth, the same to be put by and by in executiō. But many times the law goeth as pleaseth them which haue the handlyng of the law. As for example, MarginaliaVnlawfull proceding in the death of Perrotine.the law willeth none to be condemned by sentēce of death, for heresie, which the first time reuoke their opinion, and yet contrary to this law, they condemned her vnlawfully. Agayne, the lyke law prescribeth, none to be executed for heresie, before the writte be sent down de comburendo, and yet cōtrary to this law, w^tout any such writ (as farre as I yet vnderstād) they burned her most cruelly. And what law then was here to be looked for of these men, who in their doynges herein seemed, neither to obserue law, nor to regard honesty, nor much to passe for charitie? And albeit she had claimed neuer so much the priuiledge of the law, what had that auayled with those men, whose hūtyng altogether (as by their procedynges may appeare) seemeth to be for the houshold goodes of these women, which after their death immediatly they encroched into their owne handes.

[Back to Top]

But be it admitted, that neither she demaunded this benefite of the law, nor that the Iudges would euer haue denyed her, if she had so done: yet had it bene the part of a graue accuser, before he had descēded into such

a raylyng action of murder agaynst a poore womā now dead and gone, first to haue aduised wisely with him selfe, whether it might be, that she had no such intelligence, what benefite the law would haue giuen, in case it had bene required. MarginaliaPerrotine defended by simple ignorance.For not vnlike it is, and well may be thought rather yea, then no, that the simple woman, brought vp all her life long in her mothers house in an obscure Ilelād, and in such an outcorner of the realme, farre of from the Court, and practise of English lawes, neuer heard before of any such benefite of the law: and therefore vpon mere simplicite, and for lacke of skill required it not, because she knew not what to require. Peraduenture also her senses might be so astoyned with the greatnes and sodenes of the feare, that it was out of her remembrance. Certes, MarginaliaLacke in þ^e Iudges.it had bene the duetie of the Iudges, which knew the law, and hauing the woman before them could not be ignorant of her case, to haue questioned with her therof, and to haue holpen her simplicitie in that behalfe. Or at least, if they had disdayned, MarginaliaThe priest to blame.yet it had bene the priestes part, who was her ghostly father, and made priuy therunto, eyther to haue instructed her, or to haue stayed the execution of her death, for sauegard of the childe.

[Back to Top]

But all thys denyeth M. H. and to aggreuate the matter, inferreth, that she, not of any simple vnskilfullnes of the law, MarginaliaReioynder fol. 185. pag. 1.but only of mere wilfulnes, for auoyding of worldly shame, concealed her owne turpitude, and so became a murderer of her babe. &c. These be the wordes of M. H. written by him not of any sure ground, but only vpon his catholike coniecture: for other demonstration certenly to proue this true, he bringeth none. MarginaliaM. Hardinges ground onely vpon cōiectures.Wherfore to answere coniecture by coniecture, thus I reply to him agayne, that in case she had bene asked the question of the Iudges and Inquisitours, whether she had ben with child, and then had denyed the same: or els if she, by any other colorable meanes, had cloked her being with child, wherby it should not appeare, this accuser might haue some probable aduantage agaynst the woman. Now, as she was neuer demaunded of their partes any such question, nor did euer deny any such matter:MarginaliaPerrotine as she did not open her being with child: so neither dyd she euer deny it. so to answere this man with as good probabilitie, I hold, that in case they had inquired that matter of her, she would neuer haue denyed it. And therfore where as she is accused for her not vttering of her child: why may she not, by as good reason againe be defended for not denying the same.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaThe state of Master Hardings accusation.But she should haue vttered it, saieth he. It had bene well done, say I. And I would she had, but yet þ^t is not þ^e question betwene him and me, what she should haue done, but why she did it not. M. Harding wandring in his blind surmises, phantasieth the cause only to be, for hyding her dishonesty, and for that she would not shame the Gospell. So that in Summa, to this effect tendeth all his accusation.

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaM. Hardinges argumēt.Perotine beyng byg with child at her condemnation did not shew it to the Iudges.

Ergo, she did it to conceale her turpitude, and because she would not shame the Gospell.

MarginaliaThe Argument answered.But here this accuser must vnderstand, if he haue not forgotte his Logike, that such argumentes which truly do hold, a Signis, do alwayes presuppose, that the signes which go before the thinges signified, must be necessarie, perpetuall, and firme, as is bewene causes naturall and their effectes. Otherwise, if the signes bee doubtfull, voluntarie, or accidentall, there is no firme consequent can procede therof. MarginaliaArgumēts of signes and coniectures how they holde.

[Back to Top]

Now, if the sayd accuser should be put to his proofe, how to iustifie this his sequele to be true by euident demōstration, that she did it onely for couering her dishonestie: I suppose verely he should be found to say more, then he is able to make good, and in conclusion should be brought into the like case, as were the phariseis, who cōming to accuse the adulteresse before Christ, went a-

[Back to Top]