superior seamanship, the superior quality of English ships and crews,
that the Spaniards attributed their defeat. Where did these ships come
from? Where and how did these mariners learn their trade? Historians
talk enthusiastically of the national spirit of a people rising with a
united heart to repel the invader, and so on. But national spirit could
not extemporise a fleet or produce trained officers and sailors to match
the conquerors of Lepanto. One slight observation I must make here at
starting, and certainly with no invidious purpose. It has been said
confidently, it has been repeated, I believe, by all modern writers,
that the Spanish invasion suspended in England the quarrels of creed,
and united Protestants and Roman Catholics in defence of their Queen and
country. They remind us especially that Lord Howard of Effingham, who
was Elizabeth's admiral, was himself a Roman Catholic. But was it so?
The Earl of Arundel, the head of the House of Howard, was a Roman
Catholic, and he was in the Tower praying for the success of Medina
Sidonia. Lord Howard of Effingham was no more a Roman Catholic than--I
hope I am not taking away their character--than the present Archbishop
of Canterbury or the Bishop of London. He was a Catholic, but an English
Catholic, as those reverend prelates are. Roman Catholic he could not
possibly have been, nor anyone who on that great occasion was found on
the side of Elizabeth. A Roman Catholic is one who acknowledges the
Roman Bishop's authority. The Pope had excommunicated Elizabeth, had
pronounced her deposed, had absolved her subjects from their allegiance,
and forbidden them to fight for her. No Englishman who fought on that
great occasion for English liberty was, or could have been, in communion
with Rome. Loose statements of this kind, lightly made, fall in with the
modern humour. They are caught up, applauded, repeated, and pass
unquestioned into history. It is time to correct them a little.

I have in my possession a detailed account of the temper of parties in