^{page 3 note 1} Other friars give similar evidence to the effect that the said John Ware had demanded instruction in the Catholic Faith, and had begun to learn the prayers, but that his zeal had cooled considerably, and he had never been known to attend Mass. The supplying food to heretics was considered as favouring them.

^{page 3 note 2} The ship called “Primrose ” may possibly be identical with a vessel of that name of 55 tons burthen mentioned in a list of ships in 1582 as belonging to Southampton. (El. Dom. St. P., vol. 156, No. 45.) It is obviously not identical with the more famous “Primrose ” of London. Shipping at Southampton was said to have much increased in recent years.

^{page 3 note 3} Smith's account of the destination and lading of the “Primrose ” is rather perplexing. Unless she intended to take in salt in Portugal, there appears to be no special reason why she should have gone to Cape St Vincent on her way to Newfoundland. Gilbert's sailing directions for Newfoundland in 1583 ordered the ships to proceed in a south-westerly direction as far as 43° or 44° — much to the north of St Vincent. (Hakluyt's Voyages, Hakluyt Soc. ed., vol. VIII, p. 45.) On the other hand, ships bound for the West Indies of course proceeded in a southerly direction. In 1587 Drake in laying down a plan for harrying the Spaniards, suggested a southward run to Cape Blanco and then to the Azores, and so to Cartagena, where the Mexican ships might be intercepted, and then on to Newfoundland. (Simancas Transcripts, 1587, p. 20, No. 21.) Without attributing such large designs to the “Primrose,” it may be suspected that her presence at Cape St Vincent was not wholly due to her desire to go to Newfoundland.

^{page 4 note 1} About this period French pirates were as active as English. Calais was a nest of marauders. A specially large amount of plunder taken by the French from English ships between 1575 and 1580, and their activity diminished but little during later years. Between 1562 and 1586 French seizures of English goods were estimated at about £127,331, while from 1560 to 1586 the English restored to France in compensation for goods plundered by English pirates only £56,807; but disproportion brtween the estimates of debts owing and debts actually paid will perhaps account for this difference. (Lansd. MSS., 148, No. 30, ff. 60–70.)

^{page 4 note 2} There is no further information about this man, who does not appear to have been called to give evidence. His name suggests that he might be of Cornish descent: for the residence of English merchants and factors in the Canaries, see Introduction, Part II.

^{page 5 note 1} The declaration of genealogy was asked to ascertain whether the prisoner was or was not of pure blood—that is to say, whether he was descended from Jews, Moors, heretics, or any persons penanced or reconciled by the Inquisition. To the Spaniard it was a matter of sufficient importance because of the disabilities such kinship entailed. In consequence of an edict promulgated in the Canaries in 1574 relating to persons making false declarations of “limpieza,” or pure blood, there was a number of denunciations of men suspected of being of Jewish origin, such declarations being made seemingly to obtain licence to go to the Indies, or to hold different offices otherwise closed to them.

^{page 6 note 1} The examination and evidence given by William Baker (Vaquer), of Southampton, Christopher Tristram of the same place, Peter Johnson of Poole (Lapola), Mark Colman of Studland (Hesteulan), William Ware of Southampton, and Richard Herman (Guerman), native of Dublin (Duielen), present no new features. The usual questions as to the services on board, and the religious condition of England were put to them. Most of the crew of this vessel were arrested for taking part in the services on board.

^{page 8 note 1} If a prisoner had means, he was obliged to pay for his own maintenance. Separate accounts were kept distinguishing those who paid and the poor who were to be maintained at the expense of the Holy Office. Slaves were maintained by their masters, members of a religious order by their superiors. The accounts are kept with great minuteness, as also the inventories of the clothing, etc., brought in with the prisoner, and fully illustrate the careful and precise methods employed by the Inquisitors. (For extracts from the Account Books see Birch, vol. I, 356–362.)

^{page 8 note 2} Many of the stages of this case have been omitted, being mere repetition of the evidence against the accused. The chief charges against him were that he had attended the English Church when, it was assumed, he had received instruction in the Catholic Faith, and also that, having demanded instruction in the Catholic religion, he did not act upon it.

^{page 9 note 1} In connexion with this alleged conduct of Lopez, it is interesting to note that a few years previously (1582) it was stated that the religious condition of Southampton was exceedingly lax. Atheists and “Papists ” were admitted to the best places in the town, and there was much “kicking and pricking against preaching ministers.” (Dom. St. P. Eliz., vol. 156, No. 43.)Google Scholar If Southampton was frequented by merchants who changed their religion with their latitude, religious enthusiasm was hardly to be expected. On the other hand, the constant intercourse maintained by this port with Southern European countries may have tended to perpetuate the “old religion.” At all events, Hampshire is said to have contained an unusual number of recusants.

^{page 12 note 1} The sentence concludes with the usual disabilities. The Inquisitors state that it would have been lighter on account of the prisoner's youth and for other reasons, but for his deceptive conduct during the trial, and his fictitious conversion. The case of Edward Stride, of the same ship, offers no novelty, the charges against him being much the same as against John Ware. Sentence of reconciliation was also passed on him. During the trial he was sentenced to be put to torture, and an order was given to “haul at the pulley,” at the end of which he was declared to be sound in all his limbs.

^{page 12 note 2} This witness was sentenced to receive fifty strokes for assisting Englishmen to escape. He stated that they were detained in Gomera from a shortage of water, and were there re-arrested. (Millares' Book, v, p. 104.)

^{page 13 note 1} The prisoners were on this occasion recaptured, and took part in the auto-de-fé on July 22, 1587. This was the ninth public auto celebrated in the Canaries, and apparently the first in which Englishmen appeared. The Englishmen penanced and reconciled in this auto were John Smith (in statue only, as he had died in hospital), John Ware, Peter Johnson, Edward Stride, John Gold, William Baker, Mark Colman, Richard Sanchez, Christopher Tristram, Michael James and William Roger, all of the “Primrose,” John Raymond (Reinan) of the “Falcon,” and Edward Francis. In this same auto George Gaspar of London was burnt in person for attacking the Catholic faith when in the public prison, and refusing to abjure. This was the only Englishman burnt in the Canaries. (Millares' Book, v, Chap, III.)