side. There was one man in England, however, who had been for some time trying to teach men that there

something better than force. John Wyclif was a learned priest. He began by arguing against the power of the pope in England. The popes had long

ceased to do any good to England, and all that was known of them was that they were always asking for English money, and trying to help their Italian friends by giving them church offices in England. In the reign of Edward III. and Richard II. laws were made by the English Parliament to stop this.

H

Wyclif argued against the pope in this affair. Then he argued against the wealth and power of the clergy. Clergymen, he said, ought to preach and visit the poor. Unless they did their duty they had no right to so much money. Wyclif translated the Bible, and sent out a number of men called the Poor Priests

to explain it to the people. The great poet Chaucer, who lived at this time, is thought to have had Wyclif in his mind when he described a good priest, and told how he taught the doctrine of Christ and of his apostles, but followed it first himself. By-and-by Wyclif attacked some of the doctrines which were then believed in the Church. He found people of different kinds to support him. In the first place there were those who learnt to believe what he taught. These people were called Lollards, from a word which means to sing, just as if they had been called Psalm-singers. In the second place he was supported by great noblemen, who were very pleased to hear him say that clergymen ought not to have money unless they did their duty. What Wyclif meant was that the clergymen ought to do their duty. What the great noblemen meant was that they ought to take the clergymen's money away from them, without trying to make them do their duty. For some time Wyclif seemed to be prospering. But there were two things against him. Printing had not yet been discovered, so that Bibles were very expensive, as each copy had to be written out, and even if poor people could have afforded to buy them, they had never been taught to read. Then again, the great gentlemen had been frightened by

the insurrection of the peasants. They had thought it a fine thing to take away the money of the clergymen because they did not do their duty, without really caring whether they did their duty or not. They had now found out that the peasants could ask gentlemen whether they had been doing their duty, and whether they really cared for anything except for money and enjoyment. The consequence was that

SOLDIER WITH HAND-GUN, FIFTEENTH CENTURY.

they did not care to listen any longer to a man like Wyclif, and that they began to look upon him as a disturber of the peace. He was prevented from teaching at Oxford, and forced to go to his parish at Lutterworth, where he died not long after.

3. Richard II. and his Uncles.-The rest of the reign of Richard II. was taken up with a long struggle for power, between the king on the one

side, and his uncles, supported by some of the great nobles, on the other. Richard, when he reached manhood, showed that he could sometimes be as cool and daring as he had been on the day when he faced Wat Tyler and his mob. 'Tell me,' he suddenly said to his uncle, the Duke of Gloucester, 'how old I am.' 'Your Highness,' was the answer, is in your twenty-second year.' 'Then,' said the king, 'I am surely of age to manage my own affairs,' and he turned his uncles out of the council. But he did not know how to use the government when he had it. His only idea of being a king was that it gave him plenty of money to spend. His uncles did not know what to do with power any better than he did. Sometimes they were strong enough to seize the government, and to put Richard's chief councillors to death. Sometimes he was strong enough to seize the government, and to put his chief opponents to death. He had one of his uncles, the Duke of Gloucester, murdered; and had another great nobleman, the Earl of Arundel, executed. He seemed to be completely master of England.

4. End of the Reign of Richard II.-At last only two of the great noblemen who had been Richard's enemies were left. One of these was Thomas Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk. The other was Henry of Bolingbroke, Duke of Hereford, the son of John of Gaunt, and in this way Richard's first cousin. The king had pardoned them, but he was very well pleased to hear that they had quarrelled, and that they intended to settle the quarrel, as men did in those days, by fighting. The fight was to take place

at Coventry, and Richard was there to see fair play. Just as they were going to begin, the king stopped the fight and banished them both, Mowbray for life, and Bolingbroke for ten years. As they had committed no crime proved against them in any court of law, this was most unjust. Before long, Richard acted more unjustly still. John of Gaunt died, and Richard took possession of his lands, instead of allowing his son, the banished Bolingbroke, to have them. Honesty would have been a better policy. Every man in England who had any property at all, was afraid that if he died his son would be treated in the same way. Bolingbroke understood how many friends Richard had made for him by this act of injustice. He sailed for England and landed in Yorkshire, asking only for his father's lands. Thousands flocked in to support him, and Richard was deserted. Henry then claimed the crown, and Richard, left without support, was obliged to give it up. He was thrown into prison. In those days there was but a short step for kings from the prison to the grave, and, like his grandfather, Edward II., Richard II. was murdered not long after his dethronement.

(HENRY IV, 1399. HENRY V., 1414. HENRY VI., 1422.)

1. Henry's Title to the Crown.-Henry IV., as Bolingbroke was now called, was the first king of the