Note 5 — Chapter I · —How the King of France cajoled the English after the Duke of Burgundy’s Death, for fear they should have interrupted him in the Conquest of the Territories belonging to the said Duke.—1477.

“John Morton was born at Bere in Dorsetshire, of a private gentleman’s family, in the year 1410. He received his earliest education at the Abbey of Cerne, from whence he was removed to Balliol College, Oxford, where he devoted himself to the study of the civil and canon law, and took with great distinction the degree of LL.D. He then went to London, and practised as an advocate in Doctors’ Commons, where he soon became the decided leader, and rose to such distinction by his learning and eloquence, that he gained the good opinion of Cardinal Bourchier, who recommended him to Henry VI. He was sworn of the Privy Council by that sovereign, was made prebendary of Salisbury, and had the rich living of Blakesworth bestowed upon him. On the accession of Edward IV. he made submission to the House of York, and the new king continued him a privy councillor, appointed him Master of the Rolls, and conferred on him great ecclesiastical preferment, crowned with the Bishopric of Ely. Richard III. imprisoned him, but he contrived to escape to the Continent. Immediately after the battle of Bosworth, Henry VII. recalled him, raised him to the see of Canterbury on the death of Cardinal Bourchier, procured a cardinal’s hat for him from Pope Alexander VI., and made him Lord Chancellor. He continued in this office, and in the unabated favour and confidence of his royal master, down to the time of his death, a period of thirteen years, during which he greatly contributed to the steadiness of the government and the growing prosperity of the country. Several important statutes were passed on his recommendation, including that which protects from the pains of treason all who act under a de facto king. In 1494, Morton was made Chancellor of the University of Oxford, and on the 13th of September, 1500, he died, after a lingering illness. Notwithstanding some arbitrary acts of government, which should be judged of by the standard of his own age, he left behind him a high character for probity as well as talents. His munificence was great, and he was personally untainted by the vice of avarice which disgraced the sovereign. Sir Thomas More, who was brought up in his house, says of him: ‘He was a man no less venerable for his wisdom and virtue than for the high reputation he bore. He was of a middle stature, in advanced years, but not broken by age; his aspect begot reverence rather than fear. He spoke both gracefully and mightily; he was eminently skilled in the law; he had a comprehensive understanding, and a very retentive memory; and the excellent talents with which nature had furnished him were improved by study and discipline. The king depended much on his counsels, and the government seemed to be chiefly supported by him; for from his youth he had been constantly practised in affairs, and having passed through many changes of fortune, he had, at a heavy cost, acquired a great stock of wisdom, which, when so purchased, is found most serviceable.’”—See Lord Campbell’s Lives of the Chancellors, vol i. pp. 417-425.