passing into a dream before the chilling influences of a more critical and less spacious age, even as daily at the appointed hour the Italian arcade before us and its flanking wings of ruddy brick lose the rich radiance of the westering sun and turn again to shadow. England possesses larger houses than Hatfield; and there are, doubtless, some among them which compel the eye with a more imposing splendour. But there is probably none where the stately presence of a bygone world wears a more friendly face, none where the warm hues of mellowed brick blend more kindly with wood and glade and garden, none where the heart may warm itself more readily at ancestral fires, or the spirit find a better contentment in the subtle influences of history and tradition.

Salisbury spent to our knowledge about £40,000 1 on the House with its amenities of garden and vineyard; and there may have been more disbursed of which we have no record. At the very lowest estimate this would represent £120,000 of our money. Still the work was very far from being done regardless of expense. The papers show that Salisbury looked carefully into the liabilities he was incurring; and as time went on the building was shorn of some elements of its intended splendour. There had been, for example, an idea of covering the roof with copper, which would have cost 19d. a square foot; and lead, which cost only 12d. the square foot, was ultimately chosen. But to say that some expense was spared is not to say that no trouble was taken. Advice and materials were sought where they were best to be had. Caen-stone was brought over to relieve the brick. Inigo Jones was employed to carry through a negotiation for some work executed in Antwerp.3 A French

1 This figure is given me by Mr. R. T. Gunton, who has made a most thorough investigation of the bills, etc., relating to the house. 2 Hatf. Estate Papers, Genl., 3/11.

3 Hatf. MSS., Agents' Accts., 8th November 1610.

1607-12] PLANTING AND BUILDING

329

painter-Lewis Dolphin (Louis Dauphin)-was employed to design some, though not all, of the chapel windows.1 And as much thought was taken for the grounds as for the house itself. Salomon de Caux, a Frenchman in the service of the Prince of Wales, constructed the fountain 2 in the gardens which one, Mountain Jennings, was laying out. Tradescant scoured France and the Low Countries to procure for his master what was choicest in fruit and flowers.4 Four hundred sycamore trees were sent by Sir Edward Cecil from the Netherlands.5 Five hundred mulberry trees, in the introduction of which James had greatly interested himself, were bought by Salisbury, presumably to plant at Hatfield. And from M. de la Boderie there came thirty thousand vines,' a number more than sufficient to furnish "that most pleasant and delicious vineyard," watered by the Lea," which " (as Chauncy puts it), "having performed her devoir there, hastens away to Essendon."

8

Was it a time to plant vineyards, and to build houses, and to add acre to acre and field to field? Among the endless bills there is one which turns one suddenly cold :-" Mr. Steward, this bearer, Mr. Colt, having this morning brought my Lord a model of his tomb and demanded fifty pounds in imprest towards his workmanship of the three chimney-pieces at Hatfield, his Lordship commanded that you should deliver him so much money. Withall first November 1609." Did Salisbury guess thus soon that it was not towards the spacious rooms and sunlit 1 Hatf. MSS., Agents' Accts., 8th and 22nd November 1609.

2 Ibid., 31st January 1612.

3 Ibid., 14th December 1609 and 26th February 1611.

See Hon. Mrs. E. Cecil's History of Gardening in England, p. 152. Cp. Hatf. MSS., Agents' Accts., 3rd November 1609.

'Hatf. MSS., Box V, 71, 25th February 1610.

• Hist. of Gardening in England, p. 139.

'S. P. Dom., Jas. 1., 61/50.

8

Chauncy, Antiq. of Hertfordshire, p. 3.

• Presumably Roger Houghton. In the original, ‘Stuard.'

gallery of the great house but to the narrow chamber of the tomb that his steps were even then most swiftly tending? We cannot tell. We do not even know whether he ever slept beneath the roof he had been at so great pains to raise. The presumption perhaps lies that way, for in May 1611 the report runs: "If this chapel were despatched, your Lordship might have use of your house to lie in,"1 and on 1st July the works are said to be nearly completed, and the house shortly to be ready for his reception. But nothing can be argued from the fact that the King saw the place in that same month,3 for it is likely enough that he came over from Theobalds for the day only. So we have no assurance, and, it may be, the tragic issue was unrelieved. All we know for certain is that the workmen were not out of the house before its master had gone to his long home.

It only remains to mark the milestones on that last journey. The failure of the Great Contract was the point at which, so far as can be seen, Salisbury definitely entered upon his last decline. The disappointment had been doubtless aggravated by a suspicion that he had lost the King's favour and by the knowledge, which Lake communicated in confidence, that Carr was intriguing against him." James, indeed, to give him his due, wrote not unkindly to his old servant, affirming, what was no more than the truth, that he was never accustomed to withdraw his affection from any man, except "the cause were," as he put it," printed on the other's forehead." If their personal relations were unaltered, there was, however, no concealing the fact that, in regard at 2 Ibid., 65/3.

1 S. P. Dom., Jas. 1., 63/88.

This is shown by the bills at Hatfield for July 1611. But they are only labourers' and gardeners' bills.

4 Hatf. MSS., 128/171.

' Ibid., 134/144: “All that know me do know that I never use to change my affection from any man except the cause be printed on his forehead" (James to Salisbury).