supply for his Holy War. Considerable sums flowed into his exchequer
that were never used for their destined purpose, but the duke cannot
be justly accused of actual bad faith in amassing them. His intention
to make the Eastern campaign remained firm for some years.

[Illustration: STATUE OF CHARLES THE BOLD AT INNSBRUCK]

In another matter, his despotic exercise of personal authority, far
without the pale of his jurisdiction inherited or acquired, shows no
shadow of excuse.

In the bishropic of Utrecht the ecclesiastical head was also lay
lord. Here the counts of Holland possessed no voice. They were near
neighbours, that was all. Philip ardently desired to be more in this
tiny independent state in the midst of territories acknowledging his
sway.

In 1455, the see of Utrecht became vacant and Philip was most anxious
to have it filled by his son David, whom he had already made Bishop of
Thérouanne by somewhat questionable methods. The Duke of Guelders
also had a neighbourly interest in Utrecht and he, too, had a pet
candidate, Stephen of Bavaria, whose election he urged. The chapter
resolutely ignored the wishes of both dukes and the canons were almost
unanimous in their choice of Gijsbrecht of Brederode.[4]

A very few votes were cast for Stephen of Bavaria, but not a single
one for David of Burgundy.

Brederode was already archdeacon of the cathedral and an eminently
worthy choice, both for his attainments and for his character. He was