440

rumours

454

473

505

rumour.

1, Insert note, "so in the copy sent to me. But Lordship' must be

a mistake for 'Lord."

7, dele "to."

523

3 (up)

565

22

572

2 (up), insert in blank, "it."

* An error in Birch's copy which I had overlooked.

In introducing the first order issued by the Commissioners for the Treasury (24th July, 1618),' I ought to have mentioned how it came that the Treasury was then in commission.

On the 12th of July, 1618, some complaint had been made against the Earl of Suffolk, then Lord Treasurer, (of what nature does not clearly appear) for misconduct in his office. On the 16th he was directly accused by a former servant of illegal exaction. On the 19th he was deprived of his staff-the sub-treasurer, Sir John Bingley, being at the same time sent to prison.1

The private history of such a transaction, that is, the private conjecture as to its history made by the quidnuncs of the time,— is easy to imagine. Buckingham could not allow any high office in the State to be held by the head of a rival faction: it was necessary that Suffolk should be deposed: it was easy to find a pretext: a pretext was found: and he was deposed accordingly. If the report of news-writers be admitted as evidence, I dare say it would be easy to produce evidence of all this: for this is no doubt what people

1 Vol. V. p. 317.

3 Thesaurarius insimulatur de rebus Fisci male curatis. Camden. Annalium Apparatus.

Humfreis, ab Epistolis Vicecomitis Wallingfordiæ, scriniis excussis in custodiam datur. Thesaurarium et alios repetundarum accusat. Ib., Ibid.

4 Comes Suffolcia, Anglia Thesaurarius, bacillo adempto abdicatur, repetundarum accusatus. . . et Jo. Bingley, ejus subminister, in custodiam committitur. Ib.

VOL. VII.

B

would say, and it is the business of news-writers to report what is said. But as it does not appear that any such complaint was made by Suffolk himself; as it does appear that between himself and his wife there had been corruption enough going on to make his removal from the office both just and expedient; and as I find no evidence worth mentioning that Buckingham took any part in the matter; I am content for my own part to believe that Suffolk was dismissed from his place because he had been detected in practices which proved that he was unfit to hold it any longer; and that he acquiesced because he had no justification to offer. The Commissioners who were appointed to discharge the duties of his office were also required to examine the charges which had been brought against him; and while their report was expected, nothing more was done. On the 8th of November, as we learn again from Camden, there was a consultation about them. And the result will best appear from a letter addressed by Buckingham himself to the Earl, -one recently found among the Fortescue Papers and printed by Mr. Gardiner for the Camden Society:

THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM TO THE EARL OF SUFFOLK.2

The care I have to acquit myself according to the profession of my friendship toward your Lp. makes me acquaint you at this time with something that fell out concerning you in the time of his M's. last being at Whitehall.3 Some two days before his remove from thence, the Lords and other Commissioners for enquiry touching the misspending of his treasure repaired to his M. and gave him an account of all their labours, and amongst the rest what they had found against your Lp. and your wife, and in conclusion did all upon their knees beseech his M. to be pleased that both your Lp. and your wife together with Sir John Bingley might be called to the Star-chamber, there to be censured for your misdemeanours in your office. The reasons for which they moved his M. to yield to this order were two: first, for his M's. own honour who could not otherwise be cleared except by such a public and legal course in regard of his taking the staff from you, and for stopping the mouths of those that reported that your Lp's. office was taken from you not upon just grounds but only by the partiality of a Court faction. The other reason was that by this legal and public proceeding there might an example be made for securing his M. and his posterity from being ill-served by any that shall exercise that place hereafter. But though his M. (as himself told me soon after) disputed with them that it had been for his M. honour to grant you first a hearing upon all the points that you are to be

1 Consultatur de corruptelis nuperi Thesaurarii et aliorum. Ib.

2 Fortescue Papers, p. 77. Draft. Docketed "My Lord to the E. of Suffolk, 11 Jan. 1618."

3 He left London for Theobald's on the 8th of January. See Nichols's Progresses.

1619.]

CHARGE AGAINST THE EARL OF SUFFOLK.

3

charged with before a certain number of Lords before the time that you should be brought to any public trial, his M. alleging that many things might appear fouler to them than peradventure they would prove when you should be heard to answer for yourself, and that then upon your answer his M. might best discern whether your offences were of so high a nature or not as to make you to be brought to a public trial, yet they all in one voice insisted in their former suit, affirming that to give you first a more private hearing was against all custom in such cases, and that you could object no material thing against that that was to be laid to your charge, because you were accused of nothing that was not proved by oath of divers witnesses, and altogether undeniable. So as though his M. as every man knows be merciful in his own nature, yet could he not resist this their suit, specially they adding to the former reasons that the burden would be upon them as upon partial surmisers and promoters, if the verity of this cause were not once publicly cleared, leaving it then to his M's. mercy to pardon and spare as should please him.

I confess, my Lord, I wish I could acquaint you with better news, but the sooner you be informed of the truth you may the better prepare you for it, and bethink you what you would have his M. moved in, and how far; assuring you that I shall ever faithfully represent to his M, what your Lp. shall be pleased to employ me in.

As to the expiring of their commission, it is now expired for so much as may have reference to your Lp., but in some other things which do very much import his M. service they do yet go on. This my private advertisement to your Lp. I wish may be kept secret to yourself, for I assure you upon mine honour never one of my fellow Councillors knows of this letter, nor of my acquainting your Lp. privately any ways of this purpose. And so I rest,

G. B.

Of this matter we shall hear a great deal more as we proceed.

2.

But there was another case with which the Council had been long occupied, though it has not yet appeared in the correspondence, and of which it will be necessary now to give some account. Sir Thomas Lake's daughter was married to Lord Roos, grandson of the Earl of Exeter. An arrangement about the conveyance of property, said to have been unfairly extorted by the Lakes, and in which the Earl, whose consent was necessary, refused to join, led to a quarrel between the families. To force Lord Roos's consent, he was threatened with scandalous accusations; and when he put himself personally out of reach by going over to Italy, the quarrel was transferred to his kindred. The Countess of Exeter, his grandfather's second wife, was accused of an incestuous connexion with