CHAPTER II.

"Now hatred is by far the longest pleasure,

Men love in haste, but they detest at leisure."

_Don Juan_, xiii., 16.

Rivals in love, rivals in law, rivals for place, Coke and Bacon, while

nominally friends, were implacable enemies, but they sought their ends

by different methods. When James I. had ascended the throne, Bacon

began at once to seek his favour; but Coke took no trouble whatever

for that purpose, and he was not even introduced to the royal presence

until several weeks after the accession. Bacon, then a K.C., held no

office during the first four years of the new reign; but his literary

fame and his skilful advocacy at the Bar excited the jealousy of Coke.

On one occasion, Coke grossly insulted him in the Court of Exchequer,

whereupon Bacon said: "Mr. Attorney, I respect you but I fear you not;

and the less you speak of your own greatness, the more I will think of

it." Coke angrily replied: "I think scorn to stand upon terms of

greatness towards you, who are less than little--less than the least."

Lord Campbell says that Sir Edward Coke's arrogance to the whole Bar,

and to all who approached him, now became almost insufferable, and

that "his demeanour was particularly offensive to his rival"--Bacon.

As to prisoners, "his brutal conduct ... brought permanent disgrace

upon himself and upon the English Bar." When Sir Walter Raleigh was

being tried for his life, but had not yet been found guilty, Coke said

to him: "Thou art the most vile and execrable traitor that ever lived.

I want words sufficient to express thy viprous treasons." When Sir

Everard Digby confessed that he deserved the vilest death, but humbly

begged for mercy and some moderation of justice, Coke told him that he

ought "rather to admire the great moderation and mercy of the King, in

that, for so exorbitant a crime, no new torture answerable thereto was

devised to be inflicted upon him," and that, as to his wife and

children, he ought to desire the fulfilment of the words of the Psalm:

"Let his wife be a widow and his children vagabonds: let his posterity

be destroyed, and in the next generation let his name be quite put

out." According to Lord Campbell, Coke's "arrogance of demeanour to

all mankind is unparalleled."

Towards the end of the reign of Elizabeth, Coke, as Attorney-General,

had had another task well suited to his taste, that of examining the

prisoners stretched on the rack, at the Tower. Volumes of examinations

of prisoners under torture, in Coke's own handwriting, are still

preserved at the State Paper Office, which, says Campbell,

"sufficiently attest his zeal, assiduity and hard-heartedness in the

service.... He scrupulously attended to see the proper degree of pain

inflicted." Yet this severe prosecutor, bitter advocate and cruel

examiner, became a Chief Justice of tolerable courtesy, moderate

severity, and unimpeachable integrity.

If he had everything his own way in the criminal court and the torture

chamber, Coke did not find his wishes altogether unopposed in his

family. To begin with, he suffered the perpetual insult of the refusal

on the part of his wife to be called by his name. If her first husband

had been of higher rank, it might have been another matter: but both

were only knights, and it was a parallel case to the widow Jones,

after she had married Smith, insisting upon still calling herself Mrs.

Jones. Lady Elizabeth defended her conduct on this point as

follows:[3] "I returned this answer: that if Sir Edward Cooke would

bury my first husband accordinge to his own directions, and also paie

such small legacys as he gave to divers of his friends, in all cominge

not to above L700 or L900, at the most that was left unperformed, he

having all Sir William Hatton's goods & lands to a large proportion,

then would I willingly stile myself by his name. But he never yielded,

so I consented not to the other." Whether Hatton or Coke, as an Earl's

daughter she was Lady Elizabeth, by which name alone let us know her.

Campbell states that, after the birth of Frances, Sir Edward and Lady

Elizabeth "lived little together, although they had the prudence to

appear to the world to be on decent terms till the heiress was

marriageable." Coke had been astute enough to secure a comfortable

country-house, at a very convenient distance from London, through Lady

Elizabeth. Her ladyship had held a mortgage upon Stoke Pogis, a place

that belonged formerly to the Earls of Huntingdon,[4] and Coke, either

by foreclosing or by selling, obtained possession of the property. As

it stood but three or four miles to the north of Windsor, the

situation was excellent.[5] Sir Edward's London house was in the then

fashionable quarter of Holborn, a place to which dwellers in the city

used to go for change of air.[6] As Coke and his wife generally

quarrelled when together, the husband was usually at Holborn[7] when

the wife was at Stoke, and _vice-versa_. It was almost impossible that

Miss Frances should not notice the strained relations between her

parents. Nothing could have been much worse for the education of their

daughter than their constant squabblings; and, unless she differed

greatly from most other daughters, she would take advantage of their

mutual antipathies to play one against the other, a pleasing pastime,

by means of which young ladies, blessed with quarrelsome parents,

often obtain permissions and other good things of this world, which

otherwise they would have to do without.

Lady Elizabeth found a friend and a sympathiser in her domestic

worries. Francis Bacon, the former lover of her fortune, if not of her

person, became her consoler and her counsellor. Let not the reader

suppose that these pages are so early to be sullied by a scandal.

Nothing could have been farther from reproach than the marital

fidelity of Lady Elizabeth, but it must have gratified Bacon to annoy

the man who had crossed and conquered him in love, or in what

masqueraded under that name, by fanning the flames of Lady Elizabeth's

fiery hatred against her husband. Hitherto, Coke had had it all his

own way. He had snubbed and insulted Bacon in the law courts, and he

had snatched a wealthy and beautiful heiress from his grasp. The wheel

of fortune was now about to take a turn in the opposite direction.

About the year 1611, King James entertained the idea of reigning as an

absolute sovereign. Archbishop Bancroft flattered him in this notion,

and suggested that the King ought to have the privilege of "judging

whatever cause he pleased in his own person, free from all risk of

prohibition or appeal." James summoned the judges to his Council and

asked whether they consented to this proposal. Coke replied:--

"God has endowed your Majesty with excellent science as well as great

gifts of nature; but your Majesty will allow me to say, with all

reverence, that you are not learned in the laws of this your realm of

England, and I crave leave to remind your Majesty that causes which

concern the life or inheritance, or goods or fortunes of your subjects

are not to be decided by natural reason, but by the artificial reason

and judgment of law, which law is an art which requires long study and

experience before that a man can attain to the cognizance of it."

On hearing this, James flew into a rage and said: "Then am I to be

_under_ the law--which it is treason to affirm?"

To which Coke replied: "Thus wrote Braxton: 'Rex non debet esse sub

homine, sed sub _Deo et Lege_.'"[8]

Coke had the misfortune to offend the King in another matter. James

issued proclamations whenever he thought that the existing law

required amendment. A reply was drawn up by Coke, in which he said:

"The King, by his proclamation or otherwise, cannot change any part

of the common law, or statute law, or the customs of the realm." This

still further aggravated James.

Meanwhile Bacon, now Attorney-General, was high in the King's favour,

and he was constantly manoeuvring in order to bring about the downfall

of his rival. He persuaded James to remove Coke from the Common Pleas

to the King's Bench--a promotion, it is true, but to a far less

lucrative post. This greatly annoyed Coke, who, on meeting Bacon,

said: "Mr. Attorney, this is all your doing." For a time Coke

counteracted his fall in James's favour by giving L2,000 to a

"Benevolence," which the King had asked for the pressing necessities

of the Crown, a benevolence to which the other judges contributed only

very small sums. This fair weather, however, was not to be of long

duration.

In 1616 Coke again offended the King. Bacon had declared his opinion

that the King could prohibit the hearing of any case in which his

prerogative was concerned. In the course of a trial which shortly

afterwards took place, Bacon wrote to the judges that it was "his

Majesty's express pleasure that the farther argument of the said cause

be put off till his Majesty's farther pleasure be known upon

consulting him." In a reply, drawn up by Coke and signed by the other

judges, the King was told that "we have advisedly considered of the

said letter of Mr. Attorney, and with one consent do hold the same to

be contrary to law, and such as we could not yield to by our oaths."

James was furious. He summoned the judges to Whitehall and gave them a

tremendous scolding. They fell on their knees and all were submissive

except Coke, who boldly said that "obedience to his Majesty's command

... would have been a delay of justice, contrary to law, and contrary

to the oaths of the judges."

Although Coke was now in terrible disgrace at Court, he might have

retained his office of Chief Justice, if he would have sanctioned a

job for Villiers, the new royal favourite. George Villiers, a young

man of twenty-four, since the fall of the Earl of Somerset had

centralised all power and patronage in his own hands. The chief

clerkship in the Court of King's Bench, a sinecure worth L4,000 a

year, was falling vacant, and Villiers wished to have the disposal of

it. The office was in the gift of Coke, and, when Bacon asked that its

gift should be placed in the hands of Villiers, Coke flatly refused

and thus offended the most powerful man in England. Nothing then

became bad enough for Coke and nothing in Coke could be good. His

reports of cases were carefully examined by Bacon, who pointed out to

the King many "novelties, errors, and offensive conceits" in them. The

upshot of the whole matter was that Coke was deprived of office. When

the news was communicated to him, says a contemporary letter, "he

received it with dejection and tears."[9]

It would be natural to suppose that by this time Bacon had done enough

to satisfy his vengeance upon Coke. But no! He must needs worry him

yet further by an exasperating letter, from which some extracts shall

be given. It opens with a good deal of scriptural quotation as to the

wholesomeness of affliction. Then Bacon proceeds to say:[10]

"Afflictions level the mole-hills of pride, plough the heart and make

it fit for Wisdom to sow her seed, and for grace to bring forth her

increase. Happy is that man, therefore, both in regard of Heavenly and

earthly wisdom, that is thus wounded to be cured, thus broken to be

made straight, thus made acquainted with his own imperfections that he

may be perfect. Supposing this to be the time of your affliction, that

which I have propounded to myself is, by taking the seasonable

advantage, like a true friend (though far unworthy to be counted so)

to show your shape in a glass.... Yet of this resolve yourself, it

proceedeth from love and a true desire to do you good, that you,

knowing what the general opinion is may not altogether neglect or

contemn it, but mend what you may find amiss in yourself.... First,

therefore, behold your Errors: In discourse you delight to speak too

much.... Your affections are entangled with a love of your own

arguments, though they be the weaker.... Secondly, you cloy your

auditory: when you would be observed, speech must either be sweet, or

short. Thirdly, you converse with Books, not Men ... who are the best

Books. For a man of action & employment you seldom converse, & then

but with underlings; not freely but as a schoolmaster with his

scholars, ever to teach, never to learn.... You should know many of

these tales you tell to be but ordinary, & many other things, which

you repeat, & serve in for novelties to be but stale.... Your too much

love of the world is too much seen, when having the living" [income]

"of L10,000, you relieve few or none: the hand that hath taken so

much, can it give so little? Herein you show no bowels of

compassion.... We desire you to amend this & let your poor Tenants in

Norfolk find some comfort, where nothing of your Estate is spent

towards their relief, but all brought up hither, to the impoverishing

of your country.... When we will not mind ourselves, God (if we belong

to him) takes us in hand, & because he seeth that we have unbridled

stomachs, therefore he sends outward crosses." And Bacon ends by

commending poor Coke "to God's Holy Spirit ... beseeching Him to send

you a good issue out of all these troubles, & from henceforth to work

a reformation in all that is amiss, & a resolute perseverance,

proceeding, & growth, in all that is good, & that for His glory, the

bettering of yourself, this Church & Commonwealth; whose faithful

servant whilest you remain, I am a faithful servant unto you."

If ever there was a case of adding insult to injury, surely this piece

of canting impertinence was one of the most outrageous.

FOOTNOTES:

[3] _Life of Sir Edward Coke._ By H.W. Woolrych. London: J. & W.T.

Clarke, 1826, pp. 145-48.

[4] Lipscomb's _History and Antiquities of the Co. of Bucks_, 1847,

Vol. IV., p. 548.

[5] Gray made the churchyard of Stoke Pogis the scene of his famous

Elegy, and he was buried there in 1771.

[6] _Ency. Brit._, Vol. XIV. Article on London.

[7] Lady Elizabeth's house in Holborn was called Hatton House. A

letter (_S.P. Dom._, James I., 13th July, 1622) says: "Lady Hatton

sells her house in Holborn to the Duke of Lennox, for L12,000."

Another letter (ib. 26th February, 1628) says that "Lady Hatton

complained so much of her bargain with the Duchess of Richmond for

Hatton House, that the Duchess has taken her at her word and left it

on her hands, whereby she loses L1,500 a year, and L6,000 fine."

[8] "Under no man's judgment should the King lie; but under God and

the law only."

[9] Letter from John Castle. See D'Israeli's _Character of James I._,

p. 125.

[10] _Cabala Sive Scrina Sacra_: Mysteries of State and Government. In

_Letters of Illustrious Persons, etc_. London: Thomas Sawbridge and

others, 1791, p. 86.

The Curious Case of Lady Purbeck: A Scandal of the XVIIth Century · 第 2 / 13 章