In his service, or, rather, in his household, he had ever young men of much distinction, they deeming it an honour to serve him.
Besides his customary hospitality, he several times entertained the Queen sumptuously, and at an expense of many thousand pounds.
He built three fine houses—one in London, on the Strand, another at Theobalds, and a third at Burleigh. All these houses were, though large and grand, still more remarkable from their neatness and general convenience.
Though thus spending both liberally and magnificently, Burleigh was ever prudent and careful. He took good heed as to how his money went. He kept rigid accounts, and attended carefully, even minutely, to all domestic matters.
Writing to a friend respecting household arrangements, he says:
"My house of Burghley is of my mother's inheritance, who liveth and is the owner thereof. I am but a farmer; yet, when I am in the country, I must buy my grain, my beef, my mutton; and, for my stable, I buy my hay for the greatest part, my oats and my straw totally."
When in the country he loved to walk about and talk to the country folk, and would often stop to soothe little children in their troubles, or watch them in their play, so gentle was his temper, so abundant was his good-nature.
At his death, notwithstanding his liberal and magnificent expenditure, and though he was so little avaricious that he made less during his forty years of office than most men at that period would have made in seven, so prudently had he managed his affairs, that he left about £4,000 a year in land, £11,000 in money, and about £14,000 in valuable effects.
Although Sir Edward Coke, Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench during the reign of James I., was not a member of the Ancient and Honourable Society of Gray's Inn, yet, as his portrait hangs in the Great Hall, and as he occupied himself much in the affairs of this Inn of Court, a few words respecting this eminent lawyer may not be misplaced here.
There has probably never been a more consummate master of his profession than Sir Edward Coke. His interest in it amounted to enthusiasm. He loved to grapple with every legal difficulty, and brought to bear upon all its intricate technicalities a dispassionate calmness that unfortunately failed him in the ordinary affairs of life. For this reason he was even a greater man during the periods of his disgrace than when most triumphant.
During these seasons of enforced retirement he could devote himself to a subject that he loved, and with which he was thoroughly conversant, whereas the too great energy of his character, whilst in the enjoyment of successful power, led to his giving way to intemperate violence both of expression and action.
Like most distinguished lawyers, success came to him early in life. One of his first cases was a remarkable one, and brought him much credit.
Mr. Edward Denny was Vicar of Northlinham in Norfolk, and the then Lord Cromwell, who lived in the neighbourhood, procured two persons to preach several sermons in Mr. Denny's church.
Both these persons took the opportunity thus afforded them of inveighing against the Book of Common Prayer, styling it superstitious and impious.
For this reason, the Vicar, having learnt they had no license, when one of them came next to preach would have prevented him, but the man being protected by Lord Cromwell insisted on preaching, and did preach.
This proceeding caused warm words to pass between Lord Cromwell and the Vicar, the former saying:
"Thou art a false varlet, and I like not of thee."
To which the latter replied:
"It is no marvel that you like not of me, as you like those others" (meaning the preachers) "that maintain sedition against the Queen's proceedings."
Upon this Lord Cromwell brought an action against the Vicar, de scandalis magnatum. The defendant justified, thereupon the plaintiff demurred, and the bar was held insufficient; but upon a motion in arrest of judgment, that the declaration was insufficient, the Court gave judgment for the defendant.
Lord Cromwell then brought another action, and so the matter went on for years until Coke became engaged in the case, and he so skilfully seized the opportunity of managing and reporting it that his name was at once brought favourably before the public.
His marriage with Bridgett, daughter and co-heiress of John Paxton, Esq., a lady, with whom he had £35,000, and who was allied to some of the most powerful families in the kingdom, doubtless aided him in his career, although in after life he was wont to boast that he had triumphed neither by "pen nor purse," signifying thereby that he had never craved any man's help, nor had he ever opened his purse to buy any place.
His perfect knowledge of the laws of England, and his wonderful memory in recalling every technical circumstance bearing on or connected with those laws, was something marvellous. For this reason his judgments on all legal points have ever been held to be of exceeding value.
Unhappily in criminal trials his warmth of temper and his violence of language tended much to injure his reputation and to lessen him in the opinion of the world. Still, in spite of these great defects, his unequalled talents forced men to yield to his judgment, and however much they might condemn him they bowed to his will.
A notable instance of this occurred during the famous trial of Sir Walter Raleigh.
Sir Edward Coke, who was then Attorney-General, conducted the case on behalf of the Crown, and expressed himself with such energy against the prisoner, that Lord Cecil at length interfered and desired him to be more patient.
Much offended, Coke at once sat down, and preserved an angry silence. At length the Commissioners were compelled to entreat him to continue his address. For some time he refused; then suddenly rising, with a power and skill that electrified all present, he recapitulated the charges. So powerful were his words, so lucid were his arguments, that it was evident from that moment that the prisoner's doom was sealed.
The scene that day in the Court at Winchester, where the trial took place, must have been alike impressive and sorrowful.
The handsome, gallant Sir Walter Raleigh, the quondam favourite of the Queen, for years the popular hero of the nation, now worn and bent by age and many troubles, is standing at the bar, to be tried for his life, accused of treason against his Sovereign and against his country.
Brave he has ever been, brave he is now, and the noble face, though pale and haggard, is stern and composed. Unmoved in look or action, he listens attentively to the words of one who is urging the Judges, with all the might of burning eloquence, to pronounce him worthy of death.
Perchance for one moment a gleam of hope may have entered the prisoner's breast when he heard Lord Cecil speak, but if so, it must have been speedily dispelled when the Attorney-General addressed the Court.
Spare in form, exquisitely neat in dress, passionate in action and emphasis, the fiery and searching eye of the great lawyer seems to scan alike the thoughts as well as the faces of those on whom he looks. And his voice, deep yet penetrating, has a ring that stirs men's hearts, and brings conviction in its very accents.
With terrible minuteness, and with crushing legal skill, he states every circumstance that can tell against the accused, and each powerfully-worded sentence that fell from the lips of the Counsel for the Crown must, to the friends of the unhappy man, have been as another nail driven into the coffin that awaited him.
Long ere that famous speech was ended, hope and suspense must have been over for the prisoner. The evidence against him had been slender, but Coke's eloquence prevailed. Sir Walter was found guilty, and condemned to death.
For a month he lay in prison, daily expecting his execution. Then he was reprieved, and sent to the Tower, where he remained a prisoner for sixteen long years.
After his release, he organised an expedition to Guiana, but, failing in this, he returned to England, where he was soon after seized, imprisoned, and beheaded, not for any fresh crime or misdemeanour, but solely on the strength of his former trial and condemnation nineteen years previously. He was executed in Old Palace Yard, 1618, and died, as he had lived, a brave and resolute man.
Coke's speech on this occasion, and also another made at the trial of Sir Everard Digby, are masterpieces of skill and intelligence; but, although such brilliant displays of eloquence and learning increased his reputation as a lawyer, or rather as an orator, it was felt by the world in general that he had permitted himself a license of expression not seemly in one who held so high and responsible a position.
These speeches, nevertheless, led to his promotion, for soon afterwards he was appointed Chief Justice of the Common Pleas.
This place fulfilled all his ambition, and here he would have willingly remained, but his bitter tongue, his caustic remarks, his intolerance of the least opposition, made him many enemies, many detractors.
His foes calculated that were he placed in a position of greater power, and therefore of greater prominence, his many faults of temper would, notwithstanding his profound legal knowledge, speedily lead to his downfall.
They suggested, therefore, that his talents merited a higher post, and after a time they succeeded in having him raised to the more elevated, but, in those days, perilous position of Chief Justice of the King's Bench, or as he styled himself, Chief Justice of England.
They calculated, and the result showed they were correct, that on account of the class of cases ordinarily brought within the jurisdiction of the King's Bench, the Chief Justice would ere long find himself at antagonism with the Court.
The annals of the Law Courts at this period of English history are terrible to read. It is frightful to see on what slight grounds men were accused, tried, convicted, and executed for treason.
Verily, in those days our laws appeared to have been written in blood; but, notwithstanding their severity, it was for having shown too great leniency in an affair that occurred about two years after he was made Chief Justice that Sir Edward lost the King's favour.
This extraordinary and dreadful business was the discovery that Sir Thomas Overbury had been murdered in the Tower, and as light was gradually thrown on this dark matter, it became more and more evident that great and powerful personages were deeply implicated, not only in the foul murder, but also in other crimes of the most heinous and disgraceful description.
In tracing and detecting the secrets of this black business, Lord Chief Justice Coke showed so much zeal and diligence that he succeeded in having apprehended and brought to justice some of the (apparently) principal culprits, in spite, not only of the attempts that were first made to enable them to escape, but of the influence that was afterwards employed to stay their execution.
Richard Weston, who had been Overbury's keeper in the Tower, was early brought to trial. At first he seemed resolved to be silent on every subject, induced thereto, it is said, by an immense bribe from the Earl of Somerset, but at length he was prevailed on to plead.
Poor wretch, the "persuasions" to which he yielded were the thumbscrew and the rack, but no sooner did he plead than he was speedily convicted and executed. Even at the foot of the gallows the miserable creature was not left in peace. Lord Clare, Sir John Wentworth, and Mr. Lumsden (friends of Somerset) attended him to the scaffold, and vehemently urged him to declare, in these his last moments, that a conspiracy had been concocted against Somerset.
So evident was it that Overbury's murder concealed even darker secrets, and that these secrets implicated powerful and therefore formidable personages, that Sir Edward, with his keen legal foresight, early foresaw peril. So imminent, indeed, did he consider the danger, that he went to the King at Royston to beg His Majesty would appoint a commission to assist him during the necessary investigations, and thus in some degree enable him to share the onus with others.
It has been hinted by some historians that the King knew more about this hateful matter than he cared to acknowledge.
James I. was a shrewd and prudent man; he was timid also, and ever shrank from allowing his name to be involved in any way with affairs that would be distasteful to, or unpopular amongst, his newly-acquired people. His shrewdness and his fears, however, led in several instances to his acting in both a cowardly and a treacherous manner.
In this case, whatever may have been the knowledge the King possessed, he skilfully concealed his suspicions from the chief person implicated. When informed of Overbury's murder, without a moment's delay he despatched a messenger to the Chief Justice, desiring him to arrest Lord Somerset.
Sir Edward Coke at that time lived in the Temple, and so methodically did he measure out his time, that every hour had its appointed usage. One of his rules was to go to bed at nine of the clock, and to rise at three in the morning.
The Royal messenger arrived at the Temple about 1 a.m., and at once proceeded to Sir Edward's lodging. Sir Edward's son was there, and also some friends, but the Chief Justice was in bed.
Mr. Coke therefore received the messenger, who said:
"I come, sir, from His Majesty the King, and must have instant speech with your father."
"Though you come from the King," said Mr. Coke, "you cannot and shall not see my father, for if he be disturbed in his sleep he will not be fit for any business; but if you will do as we do, you shall be welcome. In two hours my father will rise, and you can then do as you please."
To this proposal the messenger was compelled to assent, so he waited.
At three o'clock, Sir Edward rang a little bell to give notice to his servant to come to him.
The Royal messenger then entered, and gave the King's letter to the Chief Justice, who at once made out the warrant for Somerset's apprehension.
The messenger went post-haste back to Royston with the warrant, and on being introduced into the Royal presence, found the King sitting with his arm round the favourite's neck.
When the officer with the fatal document entered the room, James was saying to the man whom he himself was causing to be arrested on a charge of murder: "When shall I see thee again?" the favourite being on the eve of his departure for London.
Somerset, when arrested by Sir Edward's warrant, exclaimed indignantly at the affront thus offered to a peer of the realm, even in the presence of the King's Majesty. In his anger he appealed to James.
"Nay, man," said the King, "if Coke sends for me, I must go."
No sooner, however, was Somerset out of the room, than his wily master added:
"Now the de'il go with thee, man, for I will never see thy face any more."
It is difficult to understand what was really the King's belief, or what were really the King's motives, on this occasion.
To some persons he asserted that he did not believe Somerset had anything to do with the actual murder. Yet it was he who caused his favourite to be arrested; and when that arrest had been made and the Chief Justice had arrived at Royston, the King spoke with exceeding angry energy, charging Sir Edward to prosecute the affair with the utmost diligence.
He was to search into the very bottom of the conspiracy, and to spare no man, however great he might be; the King concluding his adjuration thus:
"God's curse be upon you and yours if you spare any of them, and God's curse be upon me and mine, if I spare any one of them."
Not only the Earl of Somerset, but his wife, the young and beautiful Countess of Somerset, was also arrested as being implicated in the crime; and whilst their trials were in course of preparation, many other persons of inferior rank were tried, condemned, and executed.
On the 7th November, Mrs. Anne Turner, who had been about Lady Somerset from her childhood, was tried, convicted, and hanged.
On the 16th of the same month, Sir George Ellways, Lieutenant of the Tower, was also convicted, and was hanged on Tower Hill on the 20th.
A week later, namely, on the 27th, James Franklin was tried, convicted, and, a few days afterwards, hanged.
It might have been supposed that so many trials and executions showed no want of zeal on the part of the Chief Justice and the other Commissioners. Yet notwithstanding so sanguinary a list, Sir Edward fell into disfavour for not hunting down and giving over to the gibbet more of these miserable victims—victims who in all probability had been but the creatures and tools of those who were far more deeply implicated, and far more deeply culpable.
It has been supposed that the friends of Somerset trusted that the nation would at length weary of so much bloodshed, and that time and political events would cause the recollection of one black crime to fade away.
At any rate, the delays which were for ever arising before Lord and Lady Somerset could be brought to trial, were mainly attributed to the unwillingness of many great personages (if not actually the Court) to have certain secret transactions disclosed.
At length, however, the trial took place, Lord Chancellor Ellesmere sitting as High Steward.
The King's instructions were produced to the Commissioners, by which they were directed to try, first:
"Whether there were good grounds to believe the Lord and Lady guilty, and if not, they were then to inquire after the authors of the conspiracy."
The same instructions were afterwards produced to the Lords, both as evidence of the King's care and impartiality, and also as proof of the Commissioners' diligence in this business.
Lady Somerset, who was tried first, gave her judges but little trouble. Great as had been her position, brilliant as were her surroundings, to this young and beautiful, but most erring and passionate woman, life had early lost its charms. She was sated both with its pleasures and its crimes, and when placed on her trial at once pleaded guilty.
The next day, May 25th, her husband, Lord Somerset, was placed at the bar, and after a trial that lasted twelve hours, his peers pronounced the verdict of guilty.
The Lord Chief Justice considered himself entitled to, and, indeed, gained much credit from the nation generally, for the zeal and acuteness he had displayed throughout the whole progress of this terrible and mysterious affair; but though the King had expressed himself with such vehemence when commanding the matter should be thoroughly sifted, from the period of this trial Sir Edward fell into disfavour, both with His Majesty and with all the Royal favourites.
From this moment they, one after another, endeavoured to accomplish his ruin. They seized every opportunity of misrepresenting his conduct to the King, and as, unfortunately for the Chief Justice, serious disputes had arisen both in the Court of Chancery and in the Court of King's Bench, the proceedings of Coke were impugned on all sides.
His arrogant temper, his haughty manner of speech, the intolerance he displayed to all who might presume to differ from him, made him many personal enemies, and created around him a very army of foes.
The very fact, also, of his being so able a lawyer, so consummate a master of his profession, did but increase the rancour of those whom he had so haughtily rebuffed.
In all such encounters he almost invariably proved he was right both in law and in fact, and then the bitter words of his scorn stung the vanquished like a whip of scorpions.
There were very few persons, therefore, who would not rejoice in his humiliation and his fall; but amongst his many opponents, the most inveterate, the most powerful, and the most rancorous, was Lord Villiers, afterwards Duke of Buckingham.
Sir Edward had opposed with no small decision some matter that concerned the favourite's imperious will and pleasure, and Villiers exerted to the utmost his powerful influence to ruin the Chief Justice.
These intrigues resulted in Coke's being suspended from his office on June 30th, 1616. Sir Randolph Carew was commissioned to go Circuit, and in the following November, Sir Henry Mountague received the appointment of Lord Chief Justice.
It was during this enforced retirement from Court and public life, that Sir Edward Coke's higher qualities exhibited themselves in their most favourable light, and he showed the world with what calmness and courage he could support adversity.
The dignity that his vehemence had so often endangered during the days of his prosperity, now in the hours of adversity never failed him; and however bitter and undeserved the attacks made upon him, he either passed them over without notice, or replied to them in words of calm moderation.
His many legal works, his many letters to friends at this period, indicate with what resignation, nay, even with what content, he bore the loss of the power that had been so dear to him. Both his actions and his words testify how cheerfully he contemplated the end of all his ambitious projects, and looked forward to a life of complete retirement.
But so admirable a lawyer, so able a judge, was not destined to be long unemployed.
After his disgrace, men of far inferior talent had been placed in high stations; but ere much time had elapsed it soon became evident that the new Ministers and judges were unfit for the places to which they had been appointed.
When the ship is in danger or in a difficult position, the best pilot, however disagreeable he may be, must be called to the helm; and thus even those who had been most active in bringing about Sir Edward's fall, found it to their own interest to smooth the way towards his restoration to the King's favour.
For some time there had been serious differences amongst the Ministers, and at length the quarrel between the Lord Keeper Bacon and Mr. Secretary Winwood rose to such a pitch that they refused to sit in Council together.
It was at this juncture that the aid of so talented a man as the late Chief Justice was imperatively needed.
Unhappily, Coke was not content to let matters take their course, and to remain quietly on the pedestal he had so deservedly gained for himself, namely, to rest on his great reputation of being the soundest and most skilful lawyer in the United Kingdom. He thought to strengthen his position by an alliance with the family of the still powerful favourite, the Earl, afterwards the Duke of Buckingham, the famous "Steenie." For this purpose he negotiated a marriage between his youngest daughter by his second wife, Lady Hatton, and Sir John Villiers, the Earl's eldest brother.
Lady Hatton, a proud, violent woman, who was incessantly insulting and quarrelling with her husband, professed the greatest indignation that their daughter should be disposed of in marriage without her (Lady Hatton's) will and pleasure having been consulted in the matter. She forthwith, therefore, carried off the young lady, and shut her up in Sir Edmund Withipole's house, near Oatlands.
Sir Edward Coke, highly incensed that his authority should be thus set at naught, wrote to Lord Buckingham, requesting him to procure immediately, from the Privy Council, a warrant that would enable him to regain possession of his daughter. Unfortunately, before the warrant could be conveyed to him, he had learnt where Miss Coke was, and, with his usual impetuosity, without waiting for legal powers, he and his sons proceeded to Sir Edmund Withipole's house and took the young lady away from thence by force.
Upon this imprudent action, Lady Hatton, who, by her letters, appears to have been beside herself, so frenzied was she by rage, not only appealed to the Privy Council, but, by her personal entreaties, gained over the Lord Keeper Bacon to her side, he, probably, being nothing loth to have again an opportunity of attacking his old enemy.
Buckingham, however, was not a man to brook contradiction, and both he and his mother, Lady Compton, treated the Lord Keeper with extraordinary rudeness. Bitterly angry, the latter appealed to the Star Chamber, and also filed an information against Sir Edward Coke.
Thus this foolish marriage became a State business, and for many months the war of words and of law processes raged with exceeding fury. As might have been expected, the favourite eventually had his way, and, somehow or other, the two ladies who had been foremost in the fight. Lady Hatton and Lady Compton, came at length to a good understanding.
The marriage, therefore, was arranged. Sir Edward Coke was admitted to the presence of the King, and made a member of the Privy Council.
On the Michaelmas Day following, Sir John Villiers was married to Mrs. Frances Coke at Hampton Court, with all imaginable splendour.
Sir Edward's plans had succeeded. He had been restored to the King's favour, he had married his daughter to the brother of the Royal favourite; but he paid dearly for these triumphs. Not only had he to bestow on his daughter the sum of £10,000, to be paid down in money on the day of the marriage, but he had to assure to Sir John Villiers a rent charge of 2,000 marks per annum during his (Sir Edward's) life, and another one of £900 during Lady Hatton's life.
He engaged, also, to settle the manor of Stoke, in Buckinghamshire, a property he had destined for his other two daughters, on Sir John and Lady Villiers and their heirs.
Lady Hatton also had from her private fortune, which was considerable, to make large settlements upon her daughter.
Lady Hatton, who, by her own showing, must have been an intolerable woman, self-willed, passionate, and overbearing, had by this time become reconciled to her son-in-law and his friends; but she still pursued her quarrel with her husband with unrelenting acrimony.
Many letters still in existence testify to the heat and resentment of both parties. At length the dispute became quite a public matter, many persons of consideration interesting themselves keenly on one side or the other.
So fiercely did the warfare rage between all the partisans, that at one time Lord Houghton (formerly Sir John Hollis) was committed to prison for having, in conjunction with Lady Hatton, framed some scandalous libels respecting Sir Edward Coke.
This most disagreeable and trying wife seems to have lost no opportunity of insulting her husband both by word and deed. One of her means of annoyance was to give costly entertainments to the King, the Duke of Buckingham, and the whole Court, ostentatiously omitting her husband.
Not only was happiness far from this divided and discordant household, but the fluctuations in Sir Edward's fortunes were frequent.
During the early session of 1621, important matters occupied the attention of the House of Commons; liberty of speech, the increase of Popery, and many popular grievances were eagerly debated.
Sir Edward spoke strongly and warmly on all these questions, and his speeches are much commended by Camden. However, his views were not those either of the Court, nor of the favourite, and were indeed so ill received by the Government, that at the end of the year Coke was committed to the Tower; his chambers in the Temple were broken open, and his papers were delivered to Sir Robert Cotton and Mr. Wilson for examination.
Soon after his committal, Sir Edward was charged with having concealed circumstances relating to the trial of the Earl of Somerset.
Notwithstanding the assertions of his enemies, nothing could be proved against him, so after a short imprisonment he was released from the Tower. He regained his liberty, but at the same time he was made to understand that he had signally incurred the Royal displeasure. He was turned out of the Privy Council, the King observing:
"That Sir Edward was the fittest instrument for a tyrant that ever was in England."
Posterity does not endorse this opinion, because His Majesty's indignant remark was called forth by Coke's having resisted an undue exercise of the Royal prerogative.
He was never again reconciled to the Court during the life of King James, and even when Charles I. came to the throne, efforts were made to keep him out of Parliament by pricking him for Sheriff.
Sir Edward objected, and successfully, that it would not be seemly in one who had held the great office of Chief Justice of England, to attend the judges at the Assizes.
He was subsequently elected Knight of the Shire for Bucks, and during the sessions of 1628, distinguished himself more than any other man in Parliament, by his bold and skilful arguments in defence of the liberty of the subject, by the energy with which he urged upon the Government the necessity that existed for the redress of many grievances, and by the strenuous support he gave towards maintaining the privileges of the House of Commons.
It was during this same Parliament that he did the greatest service to his country that was, perhaps, ever done by a private man.
He it was who proposed and framed the "Petition of Rights," and it was Sir Edward Coke also, who successfully vindicated the right of the House of Commons to proceed against any subject whatever, however exalted the position of that subject might be.
After the dissolution of this Parliament in 1629, Sir Edward retired to his country house at Stoke-Pogis, Buckinghamshire, and there he spent the remainder of his days.
Though his life was prolonged to the great age of eighty-six, he retained his marvellous memory to the last. Were a passage quoted from any of his favourite authors, he would remember and mention, not only the context, but often the page in which the words would be found, and on all legal matters he would bring forward the papers he had written on the subjects in question.
His industry in committing to writing everything that interested him was beyond example, and posterity will never cease to admire his learned and laborious works on the laws of this country.
He also wrote some religious pamphlets, for he loved much to study the great doctrines of Christianity. He especially delighted to dwell on the sublime teachings of Our Lord, and during his last years, when the interests of this life, with all its pains and pleasures, were rapidly fading away, he, like Cardinal Wolsey, frequently lamented that he had not studied Divine laws with the same care and earnestness that he had devoted to the consideration and thorough understanding of temporal laws.
Our Saviour's own prayer was the one he best loved, and the last faint words that were feebly murmured by his dying lips were:
"Thy Kingdom come. Thy will be done."
Sir Edward died September 3rd, 1634, in the eighty-sixth year of his age.
He left behind him a vast mass of manuscripts and writings of all sorts, amongst them his will, in which he disposed of his very large fortune in the manner he judged best, between his children and his descendants.
On the very day of his death his papers were seized and carried away by an order from the Privy Council. Amongst other valuable documents was this will, and it is a remarkable fact, as connected with the wills of great lawyers, that this will of Sir Edward Coke's was never again found, to the great prejudice and detriment of his family and heirs.
In the long list of eminent lawyers who were members of Gray's Inn, are to be found the names of three of the Yelverton family: Sir William Yelverton, Justice of the King's Bench in 1443; Sir Christopher Yelverton, Justice of the King's Bench in 1602; and also his son, Sir Henry Yelverton, Justice of the Common Pleas in 1625.
Emblazoned on the glass of the great window in the Hall are the arms of Guido Fairfax, called Serjeant from Gray's Inn in 1463. Also those of John Ernelye, Chief Justice of the King's Bench in 1519; of Sir Anthony de Fitzherbert, Justice of the Common Pleas in 1522; with those of Lord Riche, whose son Robert, also a member of Gray's Inn, was, in 1618, created Earl of Warwick; of Justice Stamford, Justice of Common Pleas in 1554, and of Dr. Thomas Wilson, Secretary to Queen Elizabeth in 1577, and who ultimately succeeded Sir Thomas Smith as Secretary of State.
Amongst the most ancient escutcheons on the walls are those of Sir William Gascoigne, Sir John Markham, Chief Justice of the King's Bench in 1400 and 1462, Lord Burghley, Sir Nicholas and Sir Francis Bacon, Thomas Moyle, Reader of the Society in 1534, and in 1542 Speaker of the House of Commons, Thomas Cromwell, afterwards Earl of Essex, of Henry Cromwell, the second son of the Protector, and of Sir John Holt, Chief Justice of the King's Bench in 1689.
The following sketch of Lord Chief Justice Holt is given in the fourteenth number of the Tatler:
"He was a man of profound knowledge of the laws of his country, and as just an observer of them in his own person. He considered justice as a cardinal virtue, not as a trade for maintenance. Wherever he was judge, he never forgot that he was also counsel. The criminal before him was always sure he stood before his country, and, in a sort, before a parent of it. The prisoner knew that though his spirit was broken with guilt, and incapable of language to defend itself, all would be gathered from him which could conduce to his safety, and that his judge would wrest no law to destroy him, nor conceal any that could save him."
Sir John Fortescue, of whom mention has been made (an ancestor of the present Lord Fortescue), was Lord High Chancellor of England under Henry VI.
In 1430 he was made Serjeant-at-Law, in 1441, King's Serjeant. The following year he became Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench, and soon afterwards was raised to the dignity of Lord High Chancellor.
But he lost all on the deposition of the King. He was ever faithful to his old master, and for many years, therefore, remained in exile with Queen Margaret, and her son, Prince Edward.
When the Queen and the Prince returned to England, Sir John Fortescue accompanied them, but soon after the decisive battle of Tewkesbury, he was thrown into prison and attainted with other Lancastrians.
He was, however, subsequently pardoned by Edward IV.
Sir John, who was a man of great learning and a sound lawyer, wrote many valuable legal works. One of these, entitled, "The Difference between an Absolute and a Limited Monarchy as it more particularly regards the English Constitution," has passed through many editions.
The last of these editions, with amendments, was published as late as 1719.
Another of Sir John's works is "A Commentary on the Politic Laws of England."
He also wrote many other works, some of which are still in manuscript. It is in these papers that he describes the customs and practices of the Inns of Court.
Stephen Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester and Chancellor of England in the sixteenth century, was an able lawyer, a learned divine, and a shrewd statesman.
Few men have risen higher by mere force of ability, few men have suffered greater changes of fortune, few have been more magnified and commended, and few more insidiously disparaged and outrageously treated than this famous Prelate, not only during his lifetime, but also after his decease.
The accounts given of him by contemporary historians are so confused and contradictory, that it is difficult to arrive at any just conclusion with regard either to Gardiner's character and disposition, or to fathom his motives as a churchman, or his measures as a statesman.
Some writers, amongst others, Hall and Fox, describe him as a very "devil incarnate," of a most fierce and sanguinary disposition, delighting in bloodshed. They declare also that he was the principal inciter to all the cruelties practised during the reign of Queen Mary.
Others again, according to Pitt and Persons, assert that the Bishop of Winchester was a very "angel of light," being of a singularly mild and compassionate nature, and so tender was his heart that it was through his influence and exertions that so many Protestants escaped death.
All agree, however, that this celebrated man had great abilities, much learning, and also an amount of general knowledge considerably in advance of the age. He had, however, many failings, and some vices, and either the natural bent of his mind, or the dangerous condition of his position, induced him to adopt a policy so tortuous, that even now it is difficult to trace the motives of some of the wisest and best, as well as those of some of his most injudicious and apparently cruel actions.
He was born at Bury St. Edmund's, Suffolk, but the year of his birth as well as his parentage he ever held secret. Some believe his parents were very obscure persons; but Dugdale, a great authority in such matters, asserts that he was the illegitimate son of a prelate nobly descended and royally allied—namely, of Dr. Lionel Woodville, Bishop of Salisbury, and brother of Queen Elizabeth Woodville, consort of King Edward IV. Certain it is that for many years neither he nor his brother bishop, Bonner, born under the same circumstances, ever used the surnames by which they were afterwards known. One called himself Dr. Stephens, the other Dr. Edmunds, until Gardiner, on obtaining place, assumed the surname he has made so celebrated.
At Trinity Hall, Cambridge, where he completed his education, Gardiner was early distinguished for his talents and his quick parts, especially for his extraordinary skill in Greek, and for the grace with which he spoke and wrote Latin. In process of time he applied himself to the study of Civil and Common Law, and his reputation both as a scholar and a lawyer speedily made him known to some of the famous men of that age.
He was first taken under the protection of a generous and powerful patron, Thomas, Duke of Norfolk, but soon afterwards was brought to the notice, and then received into the household of Cardinal Wolsey, as secretary to that great statesman, then in the zenith of his power. He was thus early initiated into the skilful yet dread policy that for so long a period made the powerful Cardinal the de facto ruler of this country.
A mere accident gained for Gardiner the favour of the King. Wolsey and the Emperor of Austria had been at one time such intimate friends that the latter, when writing (which he did frequently) to the Cardinal, always signed his letters with his own hand, subscribing himself, "Your son and cousin, Charles."
After the battle of Pavia, when the French King was taken prisoner, Wolsey unexpectedly changed sides, and from being a friend of the Emperor's, became a strong partisan of France's. This sudden change of sentiment may possibly have arisen from compassion, but Guiscard suggests another and less worthy motive.
Some months previously, and for some unexplained reason, the Emperor had ceased to write personally to the Cardinal, and only communicated with him through his secretary in the same manner as he did with other persons. According to Guiscard, Wolsey deeply resented this change and lapse of friendship, hence, therefore, his animosity.
Soon after the battle of Pavia, the Cardinal projected a treaty which was to change the aspect of affairs in all civilised Europe, which, indeed, it did. While this treaty was in progress, the King, coming unexpectedly to More Park, in Hertfordshire, found Gardiner busily employed in framing several of the important articles.
Few princes understood business or could transact it better than Henry; he rapidly, therefore, formed a favourable estimate of Gardiner's abilities. Not only did he appreciate the secretary's talents, but he was also pleased by his manner and conversation, and, above all, admired the fertility of invention of which Gardiner had already given convincing proofs. In short, Gardiner was the very man of whom the King at that moment had especial need.
Henry was bent upon obtaining his divorce from Queen Katherine; but though he had obtained many fair promises from Rome, he had failed to induce the then Pontiff, Clement II., to do anything towards advancing his suit. It was in the highest degree expedient, therefore, to send a delegate to Rome who was not only a wary diplomatist, but also a shrewd and skilful lawyer; above all, he must be one in whom the King could fully confide. In Gardiner were found all these essential qualifications, and the King did not hesitate to inform the Cardinal of the favourable impression his secretary had made.
With all his faults, there was nothing mean in the character of Wolsey. He was truly great in this particular, that he feared no man's rise, and grudged to none the reward due to talent. Though overbearing in temper, haughty in manner, tyrannical and revengeful in action, it was yet this noble quality that so strongly attached his adherents to him.
Far from viewing with displeasure the favourable impression made upon the King, he aided his secretary's interests with all his powerful influence; and in February, 1528, Gardiner, together with Dr. Fox, Provost of King's College, Cambridge, left England on a special mission to Rome.
It is evident, from many documents still extant, that the entire confidence, both of the King and of his Minister, had been reposed in Gardiner.
Respecting his conduct in Rome, historians are again at variance as to his motives; but all agree in praising his talents, his dexterity, and his diligence.
Some writers assert that he honestly endeavoured to carry out the King's and the Cardinal's wishes; others, on the contrary, maintain that, in order to secure his own advancement, he betrayed the Cardinal in this embassy, and that for this end he urged forward with the greatest eagerness proceedings which he knew his master in his heart desired might be spun out as lengthily as possible.
However, it must be admitted that such statements are barely compatible with the affection which Wolsey ever entertained for his secretary.
When writing to Gardiner, the Cardinal calls him "the half of himself, than whom none was dearer to him;" and in recommending him to the Pope, he says, when His Holiness hears him speak, it will be as if he heard the Cardinal himself.
At any rate Gardiner spoke boldly at Rome. His diligence and activity also were so great, that between the conflicting interests and exertions of the various Courts of England, France, Spain, and Austria, the unfortunate Pontiff was so pressed and harassed that he fell dangerously ill.
The perplexities of his mind seriously increasing the sufferings of his body, for some time he was like to die, a contingency that offered fresh occasion for the intrigues that were so rife at that period.
Had the Pope died, every effort would have been made to procure for Wolsey the suffrages of the Conclave; and at one time there appeared every probability that he would have succeeded to the Pontifical throne, but Clement recovered, and matters returned to their normal condition.
No sooner did the Pope's health enable him to transact business, than the matter of the English commission was again pressed forward. An extraordinary amount of care and skill were now required, not only to obtain the Pontiff's consent, but to pen the commission in such terms as would satisfy Henry, and dispose the Cardinal Legate Campegio to come to England with a good disposition towards the affair.
At length the important papers were obtained, and Fox at once forwarded them to the King.
The joy with which they were received by Henry, the Cardinal, and Anne Boleyn, was exceedingly great, and their satisfaction was expressed, not only by letters, but also by the valuable presents they made to the successful delegates.
To Gardiner, however, were allotted the greatest honours, for though Fox had nominally been the leading personage of the mission, yet Gardiner had in fact taken the chief part throughout the negotiations; and so impressed was Henry by the talents evinced by his clever agent, that the latter was speedily recalled from Rome, in order to be entrusted with the management of the case before the Legatine Court.
Indeed, so great at this time was the Secretary's influence, that without his advice the King was unwilling to commence his suit. No sooner had Gardiner arrived in England than he was made Archdeacon of Norwich, and soon after, the King took him from Wolsey's service and made him Secretary of State.
The suit had now begun; but whether Wolsey secretly sided with Rome in this matter, or whether he was only suspected by Henry of so doing, the King ere long became furious with his Minister on account of the delays that were for ever occurring to hinder the progress of the divorce.
The Pope's behaviour added much to the difficulties into which he was thrown; and believing that the Cardinal, while apparently aiding, was in reality fomenting the troubles by which he was beset, the King felt convinced that either he was being duped by his Minister, or that his Minister was allowing himself to be egregiously duped by the Court of Rome. In either case, Henry determined to trust Wolsey no longer, and only waited a favourable opportunity to effect his fall.
This opportunity soon presented itself. The successor who was needed was at hand, and again an accident furnished the King with the adviser that he so urgently required.
Dr. Cranmer, a tutor in the family of one Mr. Cressy, of Waltham Cross, was with his pupils at their father's house at Waltham, when the King with his Court passed a night there during one of the Royal progresses.
Drs. Gardiner and Fox were in attendance on His Majesty, and Cranmer had supper with them.
Men's minds were so occupied with the Royal divorce that little else was ever talked of; and the two courtiers, being already well acquainted with the great reputation for learning and solid judgment that Cranmer had gained for himself at Cambridge, sought to obtain his opinion on the matter.
Cranmer modestly declined to give an "opinion," but said that in his poor judgment it appeared to him that, if the marriage were unlawful, it was so by Divine precept; and if that were the case, then the Pope's dispensation could be of no effect either to confirm or annul it, for even the Pope could not make lawful that which God had declared to be unlawful. Instead, therefore, of continuing these long and fruitless negotiations with Rome, it might be better to consult all the learned men, or, indeed, all the Universities of Christendom, and then, according to their finding, the Pope must needs give judgment.
So much impressed were Gardiner and Fox by this advice, that the next day they laid the substance of it before the King.
Some writers say that Gardiner wished to make it appear that the opinion came from him, but that Fox, either from generosity to Cranmer or from spite to Gardiner, took care to mention from whence it was derived.
At any rate, these observations of Cranmer's caused him to be presented to the King, as Henry had at once perceived the importance of the suggestion thus thrown out.
Brilliant talents and an admirable judgment commanded respect, while the candour and uprightness of Cranmer's character secured for him the esteem of all who knew him. His rise in the King's favour was rapid, and honours were showered upon him.
In after times Henry might differ from his Minister, but he knew he need never distrust him. The King often said that the Archbishop of Canterbury (Cranmer) was the only Churchman he had ever known upon whom he could implicitly rely.
Unhappily, the haughty and hasty monarch occasionally succeeded in prevailing upon Cranmer to swerve from the strict line of wisdom and prudence to which his opinions inclined him, but although he yielded in action, the purity of his intentions and the honesty of his purpose were never doubted.
The new adviser's rapid advancement was the signal of Wolsey's fall.
While that powerful Minister was apparently enjoying the plenitude of his greatness, and triumphing in the magnificence of his position, destruction came upon him unawares. Great and brilliant had been his rise, equally great and fatal was his fall.
No sooner was his disgrace resolved upon than the Great Seal was taken from him, his vast possessions were confiscated, he was banished to his house at Asher, and informations were filed against him by the Attorney-General.
Such a tempest of misfortunes broke at once over the head of the unhappy man that his calamities seemed without end, and the ruin of his fortunes was speedily followed by the destruction of his health.
When great men fall, their pseudo friends of prosperous days fall away also. Such friendship but blossoms in the sunshine, it ever withers and dies when clouds obscure their sun.
In this time of cruel adversity, but very few of his many followers remained faithful to the once mighty Cardinal. Of these few the chief was his secretary, Thomas Cromwell, who proved his fidelity not only by his steady adherence to his master, but also by stoutly soliciting the Court in his favour.
As Cromwell's rank did not entitle him to admittance to the King's presence, he was compelled to have recourse to one of the Secretaries of State.
It was to Gardiner that he addressed himself, and it is to that Minister's credit that although, on account of Henry's hasty and tyrannical temper, the task involved considerable risk, the quondam secretary did not desert his old patron and master, but interceded for him with skill, if without much heartiness.
The unhappy Cardinal's letters at this time are most dismal. In one of them, to Thomas Cromwell, he says he has written it "with his rude hand and sorrowful heart," and he signs himself, "T. Carlis. Ebor misserrimus" (the most miserable Thomas, Cardinal of York).
Gardiner at this time was devoting himself to the difficult task of obtaining from the Heads of the Colleges and from the learned men belonging to the University of Cambridge, their declaration in the King's cause, a business that required no small amount of dexterity and artifice.
His efforts were successful. So brilliant an exploit must needs be rewarded, and his rise in the Church was rapid. In the spring of 1531, he was made Archdeacon of Leicester, and in November of the same year he was installed Bishop of Winchester.
"I have often squared" (meaning passed over) "with you, Gardiner," said the King, when he gave his Minister this valuable preferment, "but I love you never the worse, as the Bishoprick I now give will convince you."
The newly-made Bishop sat with Dr. Cranmer, then Archbishop of Canterbury, when that prelate declared Queen Katherine's marriage with the King to be null and void, May 23rd, 1533. He was then sent to Marseilles to intimate to the Pope and the French King, that in case difficulties should be made respecting the divorce, the King of England would appeal to a General Council.
On his return home he was called upon, together with all the other Bishops, to acknowledge Henry as Supreme Head of the Church; and his pen was henceforth constantly employed in vindicating Henry's proceedings, both respecting that monarch's divorce and subsequent marriage, and also with regard to his having thrown off the dominion of the See of Rome.
Gardiner's writings on these difficult subjects obtained for him at the time the highest reputation.
During this period of religious agitation, a strange spirit prevailed amongst all classes of people, of whatever denomination of religion they might be.
Though all needed tolerance, none would grant it. On the contrary, intolerance and bigotry seemed to rule every man's heart. Even those who, whilst they were themselves undergoing its sufferings, had groaned the loudest under persecution, were, when relieved, equally loud in their opposition to the smallest indulgence being extended to those who differed from them in opinion.
Whichever might be the party in the ascendant, its leaders were urged on to institute persecutions and trials, and to enforce executions whenever a doctrine was started to which they did not agree.
Some writers assert that Gardiner was vindictive and cruel; others, that he was forced tacitly to permit proceedings of which he disapproved, and of which he would willingly have mitigated the severity.
Others again say that the King's love of power, and his desire to show himself as a true son of the Church, although he had assumed her temporal headship, induced him to bear witness to his faith by severe measures, whenever her authority in doctrines was impugned by his subjects.
Certain it is, that now began a series of religious persecutions that cast shame and disgrace upon all who professed the name of Christ.
His holy Church on earth, far from being a tender mother to poor, suffering, and ignorant mortals, became a by-word for cruelty and bigotry, a very Moloch, who desired the sacrifice of her children both by fire and by the sword.
What can men deem are the chief attributes of the Almighty, that to give Him pleasure it is necessary to torture and put to death the children that His dear Son came to save?
It is sickening to read the list of those who suffered for religion's sake during the latter part of Henry's reign, and during the whole of the reign of his daughter, Queen Mary.
A Frenchman writing at this time from England, tells his friend in Latin:
"They have a strange way of managing in England, for those who are for the Pope are hanged, and those who are against him are burnt."
Henry also each year became more tyrannical and overbearing. He brooked neither opposition nor contradiction. His humours were so capricious that even his Ministers were constantly in personal danger, it being impossible to foresee how much involved the King might choose to consider them in the schisms that were being brought to the Royal notice.
Gardiner was certainly once in very considerable peril.
His young kinsman and secretary, Germain Gardiner, having been suspected of denying the King's supremacy, had been tried, condemned, and executed, and Gardiner's enemies sought to implicate the Bishop in his secretary's treasonable opinions.
Those who view Gardiner's character mercifully, urge that in order to secure his own safety and that of his relatives, he was driven into assenting rather than being a party to the numerous cruel executions that now sullied the history of this country.
Gardiner ultimately lost the King's favour, from having drawn up a paper of articles against Queen Katherine Parr.
It appears that, as usual, Henry had conceived some jealous suspicions of his Queen, and had directed the Bishop of Winchester to prepare these statements against her.
This important document having been confided to Chancellor Wriothesley, in order that the Queen should be committed to the Tower, he by accident or design let it drop from his bosom. It was picked up by a friendly hand, and immediately conveyed to the Princess.
Katherine so wrought upon the King's affection, that she not only succeeded in allaying his jealous fears and quieting his suspicions, but she also so excited his resentment against the writer of the accusations against her, that from that day Henry would never again see Gardiner.
It is also believed that this incident was the cause of the Bishop's name not being included in the list of the King's executors.
At one time, so high did Gardiner stand in the King's estimation, that Henry had resolved not only to nominate him as an executor, but also to direct that he should be a member of the Council to whom would be entrusted the executive power during the minority of his son.
Here again, however, is difference of opinion amongst historians, some writers asserting that it was not the animosity of Queen Katherine Parr, but the friendship of the Duke of Norfolk and his family, that proved the ruin of Gardiner's fortunes at this period.
Henry having become jealous of that powerful noble, seized upon every opportunity of humbling his relatives and friends.
But this, as well as most of the events of Gardiner's life, have been related by contemporary writers with such violence of partisanship, that it is difficult to ascertain the truth.
To Gardiner, however, must be assigned the merit that both during the life, and after the death of the King his master, he ever spoke and wrote of him in terms of much deference and respect.
Upon the accession of Edward VI. Archbishop Cranmer laboured earnestly to establish the great work of the Reformation on a firm basis, and was very desirous to obtain Gardiner's assistance, or, at any rate, his concurrence in his plans.
But this wily prelate would neither concur nor disagree with Cranmer's schemes. His ruling maxim had ever been to keep things quiet, and he asserted that this could not be done were any great alterations made either in Church or State.
He agreed in the wisdom with which the Archbishop sought to establish the Reformed religion, and also in his desire to do away with superstitious practices, but he saw grave objections to the innovation being attempted at present.
The King's youth and feeble health, the necessary absence of the Protector Somerset, who was detained in Scotland by military duty, made the future not only doubtful, but gloomy; and Gardiner was of opinion that it would be injudicious to disturb the present Church government.
However, Cranmer carried his point in so far as having a Royal Commission appointed for the purpose of visiting each diocese.
The Bishop of Winchester, notwithstanding his love of peace, opposed this measure, and refused to allow the Commissioners to enter his diocese. For this contumacy he was committed to the Fleet Prison.
His imprisonment there was not severe, the Warden of the Fleet being his friend, neither did it last long, and when released he returned to his diocese, and addressed himself zealously but quietly to his duties there.
This calm, however, was not of long duration, for within the year he was summoned to preach in London on St. Peter Day, and his doctrines so offended the Council that he was sent to the Tower where he remained a prisoner during the remainder of Edward's reign.
After Edward's death, Somerset visited Gardiner in prison with a view of effecting his release.
Gardiner readily expressed his approval of all that had been done to establish the Reformed religion, and promised for the future obedience to Royal authority, but he would not acknowledge that he had been guilty of contumacy in the past. On this point he was immovable, protesting that he was innocent in every respect.
He was brought before the Privy Council, and then three months were given to him for reflection.
When this period had expired, as the Bishop remained in the same sentiments, it was resolved to proceed judicially against him in order to deprive him of the See of Winchester.
He then refused to sign the articles that had been sent him previously, and to which he had in a measure assented, and he vehemently demanded to be tried as to the grounds of his imprisonment.
But the Privy Council refused his prayer, and his bishopric was sequestrated.
All these proceedings were much censured as being contrary to the liberties of Englishmen, and contrary also to all forms of legal procedure. It was thought very hard that a man should be put in prison solely from a complaint having been made against him, and still more hard that after two years' durance, and without further inquiry, articles should be put to him for his signature.
Such actions were quite indefensible upon any constitutional principles.
Archbishop Cranmer greatly deprecated this illegal harshness, for he foresaw the injurious consequences.
Such ill-timed severity would inevitably drive men like Gardiner, Tonstall, and Day, who had already acknowledged the King's supremacy, back to the Church of Rome, and the progress of the Reformation must thereby be sorely hindered.
And so it proved.
During the few remaining years of Edward's life, Gardiner remained in the Tower, a prisoner, and yet not strictly kept, for during this period he wrote many controversial pieces, and several Latin poems, besides putting into verse some of the most beautiful and poetical passages in the books of Ecclesiastes, Wisdom, and Job.
On the 3rd August, 1553, Queen Mary made her solemn entry into the Tower, when Bishop Gardiner, for himself, and also in the name of his fellow prisoners, the Duke of Norfolk, the Duchess of Somerset, Lord Courtney, and others of high rank, delivered a congratulatory speech to Her Majesty, who at its conclusion gave them their liberty.
On August 8th, he, with Archbishop Cranmer, and in the presence of the Queen, performed the obsequies of the late King Edward VI. The young monarch was buried in Westminster Abbey, and the ceremonial was the English funeral service.
The next day Bishop Gardiner again took possession of Winchester House, Southwark, after an imprisonment of rather more than five years. On the 23rd, he was declared Chancellor of England.
On the 1st October he had the honour of crowning the Queen, and on the 5th of the same month he opened the first Parliament of her reign.