divers acts of parliament,* therein styled himself chief justice of England. To complete sir Edward Coke's humiliation, Suffolk, the lord treasurer, insolently reflected on him for allowing his coachman to ride before him bareheaded, imputing it to sir Edward as an arrogant assumption of state, which he was not entitled to challenge. Sir Edward's removal followed soon after (Nov. 1616), the place of chief justice of the king's bench being given to sir Henry Montague.

With regard to the disgrace of sir Edward Coke, it is remarkable that those persons, who were most active in bringing it about, were personally benefited by his removal. Sir Francis Bacon had long been opposed to him, from a cause already stated, and was, moreover, not a little apprehensive that sir Edward would be thought a more eligible person than himself to succeed the lord-chancellor Ellesmere. Sir Henry Montague, who was another of the king's counsel and one of those to whom the dispute between the courts was referred, was promoted to the office of chief justice in the room of sir Edward. Sir Henry Yelverton, the solicitor-general, was a servant of the Howards and owed his promotion to Somerset, and therefore had private differences with sir Edward Coke on account of the business of Overbury; and he favored Bacon's suit for the great seal in order to obtain the post of attorneygeneral. If these facts are not enough to lead us to suspect the motives of those, who produced the downfal of sir Edward Coke, we shall be satisfied of the true cause of it by referring to Bacon's Letters, an authority, which, in an affair so nearly concerning the writer, must be considered absolutely incontestable. According to the statements in these letters it appears that, during the earl of Somerset's prosperity, sir Edward Coke agreed, on the resignation of the then incumbent, sir John Roper, to admit two persons to hold the lucrative office of chief clerk for enrolling pleas in the king's bench in trust for the favorite. Upon the fall of Somerset, an overture was made to the chief justice by sir Francis Bacon, that he should admit trustees for the new favorite, sir George Villiers, afterwards duke of Buckingham; to which sir Edward made no other reply than that he was old and could not struggle. This being understood to signify compliance, sir John Ro

* See the rolls and statutes to this effect cited in the third Institute, pp.

74, 75.

per imme of lord T now of ar posal, he salaries o much exa be change

accommo

inary con he should of Villiers Thus it sacrificed that sir Ed a judge; fo ble enough imperiousn incorrupt in that he was censure, is been restor to comply The grea rank, and t prevented after his dis wood, secre interest with Ralph what by the lady John Villiers being commu king in Scotl peared that th persons intere ceed with fac occasioned gr

in

of

process
Hatton, disple
to this match,
her daughter
and concealed
New Series,

per immediately surrendered (July 1616) and received the title. of lord Teynham as a recompense. But sir Edward Coke was now of another mind; and the office being entirely at his disposal, he intimated a design of making use of it to augment the salaries of the judges in his court; at which Villiers was so much exasperated that he caused sir Edward's suspension to be changed into removal, for the purpose of finding a more accommodating chief justice; and it was then made a preliminary condition to sir Henry Montague's appointment, that he should enter into a written obligation to admit the trustees of Villiers.

Thus it was that the ornament of English jurisprudence was sacrificed to the intrigues and avarice of a court minion. Not that sir Edward Coke was wholly free from imperfections as a judge; for he was frequently charged with, what it is proba ble enough was among his faults, a tendency to pride and imperiousness of deportment. But that he was eminently incorrupt in the administration of justice none can deny; and that he was guilty of no misconduct, which called for high censure, is plain from the circumstance that he might have been restored to his office, if he could have humbled himself to comply with the requisitions of Buckingham.

The great consequence, which sir Edward Coke's wealth, rank, and talents gave him, and the activity of his disposition, prevented his continuing long in disgrace. A few months after his displacement, having business with sir Ralph Winwood, secretary of state, who was known to have great interest with Buckingham, he voluntarily proposed to sir Ralph what he had before discountenanced when attempted by the lady Hatton, a match between the earl's brother, sir John Villiers, and his own youngest daughter. The proposal, being communicated to Buckingham, then attending upon the king in Scotland, met with his approbation. But it soon appeared that the match, notwithstanding the greatness of the persons interested in promoting it, was not in a way to proceed with facility; and this domestic arrangement not only occasioned great disquietude in sir Edward Coke's family, but in process of time ripened into an affair of state. For lady Hatton, displeased with her husband for his former opposition to this match, and resenting his present endeavor to dispose of her daughter without her leave, carried away the young lady and concealed her in the house of sir Edmund Withipole. Sir New Series, No. 8.

36

with great consideration, and engaged in many important commissions, of which he acquitted himself to the entire satisfaction of his master. His old enemy, sir Francis Bacon, now lord-chancellor, seeing sir Edward thus highly esteemed and apparently aiming at the post of lord-treasurer, dropped his animosity and began to represent him in a more favorable light to the duke of Buckingham and king James. Sir Edward is charged with making use of his power, during this turn in his affairs, to punish his former persecutors; and it is very certain that, in several instances, he was enabled to make them feel the weight of his resentment, although he does not seem ever to have sought for such opportunities. As instances of this we may notice the cases of lord Suffolk and sir Henry Yelverton, both of whom, as we have seen, were enemies of sir Edward Coke. While the latter, as privy counsellor, was commissioned to sit in the court of star-chamber, Suffolk and his lady underwent a severe prosecution for corruption; and sir Edward acted a distinguished part in the investigation of their crime. Not long afterwards sir Henry Yelverton was prosecuted in the same court, for inserting some clause in a charter for the city of London without any warrant; and on this occasion sir Edward Coke is affirmed to have made a long and bitter speech in the star-chamber, and then pronounced a heavy sentence, which, however, the rest of the court mitigated. If sir Edward did allow his personal feelings to influence his opinion in these cases, we shall presently see that he conducted very honorably and delicately with regard to another distinguished criminal, who had formerly been opposed to him, namely, the lord-chancellor St Albans.

The king's affairs at this period (1621) absolutely requiring a parliament to be called, the lord-chancellor undertook to prepare things for the meeting, and received every assistance from sir Edward Coke; but when the parliament was assembled, it appeared that sir Edward, who was returned a member, intended to do very differently from what was expected of him by the court; for he spoke very warmly in the many debates in this parliament on the subject of freedom of speech, on the increase of popery, and on the abuses of prerogative. In the charges, which the same parliament made against the lord-chancellor, sir Edward was on the committee for preparing the articles, and conducted himself mildly, but with firmness; so that we may believe the animosity once subsisting

between these eminent men was now entirely extinguished;
and happy would it have been for them both, if, instead of
indulging it so long, they had always conspired to promote
only the good of their common country. The vigorous pro-
ceedings of the commons on account of the imprisonment of
sir Edwin Sandys by the king, for his activity in the house,
having produced a rupture between the king and commons, in
consequence of which the principal members of the house
were imprisoned or despatched upon some foreign mission, we
find that sir Edward Coke and sir John Philips were com-
mitted to the tower as the two leading men in the opposition
(Dec. 27, 1621). Sir Edward's chambers in the temple were
also broken open and his papers delivered to sir Robert Cot-
ton to examine. A week or two afterwards (Jan. 6, 1622)
the parliament was dissolved. On the very day of its dis-
solution an attempt was made by the ministry to prove sir
Edward guilty of misconduct in the affair of the earl of
Somerset, but without success; whereupon he was again se-
questered from the council, James being so much incensed as
to say that he was the fittest instrument for a tyrant that ever
was in England,—with how much truth the cause in which sir
Edward suffered will bear witness. We will mention one
more remarkable fact, which, at the same time, shows the hos-
tility of the court to sir Edward, and the estimation in which he
was held by one of the most eminent of his contemporaries.
After sir Edward's chamber had been searched and he himself
expelled the council, a prosecution was set on foot against him
by the court for a pretended debt of old standing due sir Wil-
iam Hatton. A trial was had, but nothing being proved, not-
withstanding the industry of his old antagonist, sir Henry Yel-
rerton, a verdict was given for the defendant. When a brief in
his cause was offered to the prince's attorney-general, sir John
Walter, afterwards chief baron of the exchequer, he rejected
t with these memorable words: Let my tongue cleave to the
・oof of my mouth whenever I open it against sir Edward Coke.
What it was, that occasioned such a sudden revolution in sir
Edward Coke's sentiments and converted him from a confi-
lential servant of the crown into one of its warmest opponents,
t is impossible at this day to ascertain. There is some rea-
son to suppose, however, that the death of his friend, sir
Ralph Winwood, which happened not long before this change,
leprived him of his firmest support in the council and with

the king.

measures

ways leane circumstan the beginn Edward's

bench. W ward's con zealous de side his ex commissio practice of and keep h Edward ex where told: Buckinghan Coke, in the title of savio of its vindic sir Edward ed out of fa At the be much prepo tance to his upon him i court found ing the want being chosen He did all tha took exceptio attorney-gene of the five ob was amended. and he, venera the judges at t of England.* sir Edward w Bucks, with a the crown, on In this parlian