151) anonymous Frenchman wrote that Francis had destroyed his own people, emptied his kingdom of money, and that the Emperor or some other would soon have a cheap bargain of the kingdom, for he was more unsteady on his throne than people thought.[420] Even the treason of Bourbon, which contributed so much to the French King's fall, was rumoured three years before it occurred, and in 1520 he was known to be "playing the malcontent".[421] At the Field of Cloth of Gold Henry is said to have told Francis that, had he a subject like Bourbon, he would not long leave his head on his shoulders.[422] All these details were reported to the English Government and placed among English archives; and, indeed, at the English Court the general anticipation, justified by the event, was that Charles would carry the day.
[Footnote 418: "To hear how rich and poor lament the war would grieve any man's heart" (Fitzwilliam to Wolsey, 18th Jan., 1521-22, _L.

and P._, iii., 1971).] [Footnote 419: _L.

and P._, ii., 3702-3.] [Footnote 420: _Ibid._, iii., 378.] [Footnote 421: _Ibid._, iii., 404; _cf._ iii., 2446 _ad fin._] [Footnote 422: Michelet, x., 131.] No possible advantage could accrue to England from such a destruction of the balance of power; her position as mediator was only tenable so long as neither Francis nor Charles had the complete mastery.

War on the Emperor was, no doubt, out of the question, but that was no reason for war on France.

Prudence counselled England to make herself strong, to develop her resources, and to hold her strength in reserve, while the two rivals weakened each other by war.