to the point, make up his mind to part with so large a portion as was expected; while his wife was averse to the match altogether, and having a will about as strong as his own, and accustomed to choose the other way, was not likely to be accommodating. Already he was engaged in a dispute with her concerning the administration of her first husband's property, which had to be brought before the Council table; whereby the domestic dissension became the lawful property of Paul's walk, and supplied the newsmen of the time with very good entertainment in the absence of the Court. It happened also very unluckily that a suit for damages was at the same time pending against him on account of an act done while he was Chief Justice; he having taken ordinary bail for the appearance of an Englishman to answer a charge of piracy against France, and thereby let him escape: an act which it seems no one but himself would undertake to justify; and which there were several willing enough to aggravate. Our knowledge of the proceedings in Council to which these things led happens to come from persons who had unusually good means of information; and (being very good reporters) they shall tell the story themselves.

On the 15th of March, Chamberlain wrote to Carleton:

"The Lord Coke is left in the suds, but sure it is God's doing, according to the old saying, perdere quos vult Jupiter prius dementat. For if he had had the grace to have taken hold of the match offered by Sir John Villiers, it is assuredly thought that before this day he had been Lord Chancellor. But standing on terms to give but 10,000 marks with his daughter, when £10,000 was demanded, and sticking at £1000 a year during her life, (together with some idle words that he would not buy the King's favour too dear, being so uncertain and variable), he hath let slip the occasion, and brought himself in danger (besides the disgrace) of paying double that sum, if he be convicted in the Star Chamber of somewhat that it is thought will be proved against him.""1

On the 18th of May we hear of him again from a still better authority, Secretary Winwood writing to Sir Thomas Lake:

"We have had before us the Lady Hatton and Sir Edward Coke. I could have wished between themselves by common friends their differences had been determined. I believe he will acquit himself of that imputation which is laid upon him. But I doubt the matter of the bail in the cause of the governor of Dieppe will lie more heavy upon his heart. For his brother Judges do clear themselves, and it cannot be denied but the carriage was foul, and satisfaction must be made either by him or by the King. On Wednesday next Sir Ed. Coke is to appear before the Lords in both causes."

112

1 S. P. Dom. James I. vol. xc. no. 122.

2 Ibid. vol. xcii. no. 27.

Again on the 24th Chamberlain reports to Carleton:

....

"The Lord Coke and his Lady have great wars at the Council table. What passed yesterday I know not yet. But the first time she came accompanied with the Lord Burghley and his Lady, the Lord Davers, the Lord Denny, Sir Thomas Howard and his Lady, with I know not how many more, and declaimed bitterly against him, and so carried herself that divers said Burbage could not have acted better. Indeed it seems he hath carried himself very simply (to say no more) in divers matters, and no doubt he shall be sifted thoroughly; for the King is much incensed against him still, and by his own weakness he hath lost those few friends he had." 1

The nature of the dispute between the husband and wife is partly explained by another of Carleton's correspondents-George Gerrard : who writes on the 4th of June :

"The Lady Hatton accused her husband by way of petition to the Council table for a contempt against the King in menacing her that if she set her hand unto those articles which the King had commanded him and my Lord of Exeter, he would make himself whole, double and treble, out of her estate. The business concerned Sir Rob. Rich and Sir Chr. Hatton. Upon the delivery of this petition Sir Edward Coke was sent for before the Council. A day was appointed for hearing of this business, when I was present. It grieved me to hear such differences between man and wife; but counsel of both sides speaking, the business was extremely aggravated. She chargeth him of menacing her of defeating her of her jointure; of having a propriety in her purchased land which he will not relinquish; His counsel make answer and charge her for having disfurnished and taken away out of three of his houses all hangings, plate, and household stuff, and also that she gave him to his face or by letter these unfit words of false treacherous villain. My Lord Keeper, willing to shut up this business, made a motion for the referring of it to the Lord Carew and the Chancellor of the Exchequer; who have since compromised the differences to both their contentments.'

That the differences were settled for the time to their mutual satisfaction, we know by a letter from Winwood to Lake; which contains also intelligence of the result of the inquiry concerning the bailing of the pirate, and presents Coke in an attitude in which we have not hitherto seen him-acknowledging an error.

"The differences between Sir Edward Coke and his Lady are fully accommodated and determined to their mutual contentment. Now Sir Ed. Coke doth treat with the French Ambassador, and doth offer very

1 S. P. Dom. James I. vol. xcii. no. 42.

2 Ibid. no. 62.

frankly £2000 for the error he committed about the bail he took in the King's Bench. The ambassador doth stand stiffly for the whole sum of £4800, which is beyond all moderation, considering that the three sureties are liable to the sentence, against whom he may proceed. My care is to end this dispute, because his M. is particularly engaged in his honour to the satisfaction of the governor.' "1

The terms in which Coke's quarrel with his wife was made up are not stated, but from Chamberlain's report (4 June, 1617) I gather that he did not succeed in carrying it all his own way.

"Sir Edward Coke and his Lady after so much animosity and wrangling are lately made friends; and his curst heart hath been forced to yield to more than ever he meant; but upon this agreement he flatters himself that she will prove a very good wife. He hath likewise compounded with the French ambassador for the bailing of a pirate which lay heavy upon him. Wherein the Queen by Mr. Secretary Winwood's means stood him in great stead: though it hath cost him the setting on, some say very near £4000. But though he held it out a great while, yet he was driven at last to the old rule redimas te captum quam queas minimo."2

2.

So far, Coke's cause was not prospering. For it does not appear that Buckingham interceded in his behalf; and the King was supposed to be very well pleased with the result of the proceedings. Finding therefore that he had either over-estimated the force of the attraction or under-estimated the force of resistance on the other side, and that he must give way in the lesser matter if he would have his way in the greater, he made up his mind to mend his offer. About the middle of June he imparted his wishes to Winwood, who immediately conveyed them to Buckingham. His wish was to be restored to the King's favour, "without which, he at length professed, he could no longer breathe." He " acknowledged with much sorrow his former respectless behaviour" to Buckingham in relation to the treaty of marriage; "desiring that the same might be renewed, with very advantageous proposals on his part." It was on the 16th of June that Winwood sent Buckingham an account of this overture, which appears to have taken effect immediately. The treaty of marriage was at once reopened and pursued with eagerness

1 Winwood to Lake, 2 June, 1617. S. P. Ibid. no. 57.

2 Ibid. no. 61. A letter from Gerrard of later date (22 July) states £3500 as the sum actually paid. Ibid. no. 101.

3 See Robert Stephens's introduction to his first collection, p. xlii.; which is my only authority for the contents of this letter. But it agrees very well with the rest of the story.

on both sides; that is to say, by Coke himself on one side, and by the relations of Sir John Villiers on the other. The daughter, so far as I can make out, was passive. Not so the mother. In the articles of agreement upon which the husband and wife had so lately made peace, no provision had been made for this article of disagreement. Lady Hatton (who meaning to leave all her fortune to this daughter, thought she had a right to a voice in the disposal of her) vehemently opposed the match, and pretending that she was precontracted to the Earl of Oxford (who was away in Italy), carried her off privately to a place where she might be safe and free from persecution. And here it is that Bacon makes his first appearance in the business. What part he had taken in it at the Council Board or in private, or whether he had taken any part, we do not know. We have seen that the reference which withdrew their former domestic dispute from public discussion and brought about a reconciliation between the husband and wife was made upon his motion. But the question of the marriage of the daughter had not yet come before the Board, and we have no evidence that he had meddled in it. We shall find however by the next letter that he knew Winwood to have been a principal agent in the making or renewing of the marriage treaty, and that there had been some discussion about it among the Councillors.1 Now we know that about this time-at least as early as the 5th of July,2-he had a quarrel with Winwood; and it seems far from improbable that it arose out of a difference of opinion upon this question; which, being reported to Buckingham, had caused those ominous appearances that led Bacon's correspondent, writing from Edinburgh on the 28th of June, to pray that nothing in the report of his proceedings might be " soiled, heated, or cooled" in its passage to the King's ear. It is certain that Buckingham was already out of humour with him for some reason. But however that may be, it was impossible now for Bacon to keep clear of the business any longer. For on finding that the mother had stolen away the daughter from her father's custody, Lady Compton, the mother of the Villierses, applied to Bacon on Coke's behalf for a warrant to

See the expression "as we hear," twice repeated. The plural can only be understood, I think, as referring to members of the Council.

2 See Chamberlain's letter of that date. Bishop Goodman says, "The difference fell out upon a very small occasion, that Winwood did beat his dog from lying upon a stool, which Bacon seeing said that every gentleman did love a dog. This passed on; then at the same time having some business to sit upon, it should seem that Secretary Winwood sat too near my Lord Keeper, and his Lordship willed him either to keep or to know his distance. Whereupon he arose from table, and I think he did him no good office." Court of K. James I. vol. i. p. 283. The incident of the dog is probable enough as the occasion of such a quarrel, but hardly as the cause.

recover possession of her. If it is true, as stated by Stephens, that a warrant from the King to some of his Privy Council "to summon before them his wife and her confederates, in order to recover his daughter," had already been applied for by Coke through Buckingham, it may be that she made this application to Bacon (though for a very different thing) by Buckingham's direction: in which case his subsequent behaviour would be more easily accounted for. But if so, she certainly did not tell Bacon by whose authority she came : for he could not have written to Buckingham on the subject without taking notice of it; as we shall presently see that he did. The warrant which she asked for he declined to grant-with very good judgment, as the event showed; and at the same time resolved to make an appeal to Buckingham (whose feelings on the subject it is evident that he had not divined), advising him to interpose and forbid all further attempts to force the marriage against the mother's

consent.

This was the state of the case when the next letter was written: which I now leave to speak for itself. It comes from Stephens's. first collection, in which it is said to be printed "from the original;" one of the many originals known to Stephens of which I have not succeeded in finding any traces.

TO THE EARL OF BUCKINGHAM.1

My very good Lord,

I shall write to your Lordship of a business which your Lordship may think to concern myself; but I do think it concerneth your Lordship much more. For as for me, as my judgment is not so weak to think it can do me any hurt, so my love to you is so strong, as I would prefer the good of you and yours before mine own particular.

It seemeth Secretary Winwood hath officiously busied himself to make a match between your brother and Sir Edward Coke's daughter and, as we hear, he doth it rather to make a faction, than out of any great affection to your Lordship. It is true, he hath the consent of Sir Edward Coke (as we hear) upon reasonable conditions for your brother; and yet no better than without question may be found in some other matches. But the mother's consent is not had, nor the young gentlewoman's, who expecteth a great fortune from her mother, which without her consent is endangered. This match, out of my faith and freedom

1 Stephens's first collection, p. 207. From the original.