first taken at Windsor and then at Hampton Court for his commission of treasury: wherein I do my part, and it is reasonable well; but better would it be, if instruments were not impediments. I ever rest Your Lordship's most obliged friend and faithful servant, 27 Oct. Wednesday. FR. VERULAM, Canc. Friday will not end the business; for to-morrow will but go thorough with the King's evidence. TO THE LORD CHANCELLOR.1 My honourable Lord, Since I wrote unto your Lordship in the behalf of Mr. Garrard, I have been informed so much of the case of the other side (as this enclosed paper will let your Lordship know) that it deserveth in all appearance much commiseration-and therefore must I recall any assistance my former letters sought to give him, and desire your Lordship to favour for my sake what you may the poor gentlewoman in her suit. Your Lordship's faithful friend and servant, G. BUCKINGHAM. My very good Lord, TO THE LORD CHANCELLOR.* I have already moved you in favour of Mrs. Garrett, whose cause, though I esteem safe in your justice, yet deserves I should again witness my care and well-wishing of it. Your Lordship shall I hope find it as well worthy of your compassion and respect; which I will then entreat of you with the same earnestness the poor gentlewoman now desires them. To whose hearty prayers which thereby your Lordship shall undoubtedly purchase, give me I pray leave to add the most affectionate thanks of Your Lordship's faithful servant, G. BUCKINGHAM. 1 Tanner MSS. 74, f. 231. Orig. Docketed "Oct. 29, 1619. The Lo. Marq Buck to your Lp. on the behalf of one Mrs. Garrard." 2 Tanner MSS. 74, f. 229. Orig. Docketed "The Marqs of Buck" to your Lp. in the behalf of Mrs. Garrett." No date. 1619.] SENTENCE UPON THE EARL AND COUNTESS. TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.1 My very good Lord, 55 My Lord of Suffolk's cause is this day sentenced. My Lord and his Lady fined together at 30,000l. with imprisonment in the Tower at their own charges. Bingley at 2000l. and committed to the Fleet. Sir Edward Cooke did his part, I have not heard him do better, and began with a fine of an 100,000l. but the Judges first, and most of the rest, reduced it as before. I do not dislike that things passed moderately; and all things considered it is not amiss, and might easily have been worse. There was much speaking of interceding for the King's mercy; which in my opinion was not so proper for a sentence. I said in conclusion, that mercy was to come ex mero motu, and so left it. I took some other occasion pertinent to do the King honour by shewing how happy he was in all other parts of his government, save only in the manage of his treasure by these officers. I have sent the King a new bill for Sussex; for my Lord of Nottingham's certificate was true, and I told the Judges of it before, but they neglected it. I conceive the first man, which is newly set down, is the fittest. God ever preserve and prosper you, etc. Your Lordship's most obliged friend, 13 November, 1619. FR. VERULAM, Canc. TO THE LORD CHANCELLOR.2 My honourable Lord, I have acquainted his Majesty with your letter, who commanded me to give your Lordship thanks for your speed in advertising those things that pass and for the great care he seeth you ever have of his service. I send your Lordship back the bill of sheriffs for Sussex, wherein his Majesty hath pricked the first, as your Lordship wished. His Majesty would not have you omit this opportunity of so gross an 1 Stephens's second collection, p. 102. From the original in the Earl of Oxford's library. 2 Harl. MSS. 7006. f. 150. Original. Docketed by Meautys "14 Nov. 1619. My Lo. of Buck to yr Lp. shewing the King's dislike to be troubled with new names for Sheriffs. Requiring memorand. to be given to the Judges to prevent the like hereafter." : oversight in the Judges, to admonish them of their negligence in suffering such a thing to come to his Majesty, which needed his amending afterward and withal to let them know that his Majesty observeth that every year they grow more and more careless of presenting fit men unto him for that place; and that you advise them to be more wary hereafter that they may give his Majesty better satisfaction. And so I rest Your Lordship's faithful friend and servant, Royston, 14 November, 1619. G. BUCKINGHAM. The foregoing correspondence passing between persons to whom the nature of the case was otherwise known, does not sufficiently explain it to a modern reader; and as it is usual for modern writers to treat all government prosecutions of those days as merely devices. for the pulling down of one great man to serve the interests or please the humours of another, it may be worth while to show how the thing appeared to one who heard the trial and had no personal interest in the matter on either side. Among our State papers is a report sent to Carleton by a correspondent whose name does not appear, but who seems to stand in this position, and whose enumeration of the particular charges, though not to be taken for an authentic record, leaves no doubt as to their general character. He had been present, it seems, during the whole trial, which lasted ten days, and also at the censure; and reports what he could recollect" being but a small parcel of that great mass which was there laid open to the knowledge of all men." The charges were distributed under five heads-" fraud in jewels, indirect dealing concerning the Ordnance, abuse in the Allum works, misemployment of the King's treasure, and extortion upon. the subject." The offence under the first head was found to be covered by a general pardon, and was therefore not prosecuted. In the matter of the Ordnance, the payment of a sum of 6500l. without requiring the proper certificate of the due employment of it; and in that of the Allum works, the cancelling of a contract and making of a new agreement without the consent of the Chancellor of the Exchequer -causing a loss to the Crown of 310,000l.,—were the offences imputed. Under the head of misemployment of Treasure, "it was alleged that his Majesty's important services, as payment of the navy, army of Ireland, aud buying in of pensions, had been neglected; and that moneys appointed for these purposes were 1 S.P. Dom. James I., vol. cxi. no. 18. 1619.] OFFENCES LAID TO THEIR CHARGE. 57 employed to their private uses, or paid to private men upon extorting and strict terms." Thus a sum of 3000l. received in part payment for the surrender of the Cautionary Towns, had been kept in Suffolk's own hands for two years, for his own and his Lady's use, -under pretence of employing it in the buying in of pensions; and sums severally of 2000l. and 10007. out of the Irish money, had been in like manner kept in their own hands for several periods to their own use. It was alleged further that money had been issued upon blank orders and acquittances: and had likewise been transferred from one hand to another-from the navy to the Irish army, and from the army to the wardrobe,-to serve private turns and keep it in their own hands,-by which sleight Sir John Bingley had kept 10007. in his hands for 5 years, and 9007. for 4 months. Under the head of extortion, the particulars were many; consisting of sums received from various persons, and varying in amount from 300l. to 30007., all for favour in transactions with the Treasury. Thus we find one item of 19007. from Turner, a dealer in the Allum works, for favour in obtaining assurance, and otherwise; another of 10007. "of Sir Francis Ipsley for their favour about Allum works;" 3001. from Lord Ridgway "for favour in passing his accounts and payment of the army": 1000l. per ann. offered by Sir H. Dockwray for favour in paying the army, of which part had been received: "divers sums of money from Lord Powerscourt, and other Commanders in Ireland, for favours done unto them": 30007. of the Merchant Adventurers," to suffer their renewed charter to pass," which could not be despatched before by reason of his (the Earl of Suffolk's) opposition 15007. yearly from the Farmers of the Customs, " as a gratuity out of the 10,0007. lent his Lordship for which he paid no use, upon pawn of the lease of Oswestry, which my Lord got back into his hands and cancelled;" besides several other sums of considerable amount, apparently for assistance in obtaining payments of money due from the Exchequer to those who gave them. Such was the character of the charges. The result of the trial is thus stated by the same reporter. 66 Concerning these objections aforesaid, the Earl denied all indirect dealing, and justified his proceedings. "The Countess denied some part, and blanched her confession in other. "Sir John Bingley confessed some gratuities, and excused his other actions concerning blank orders and translations as occasioned by necessity of his Majesty's service, and not otherwise: which answer was accepted of in good part, but in divers particulars they found him a great scraper in his office, or as they called it colore officii; a taker of bribes, a broker for my Lord and Lady of Suffolk, and a manifest dealer in most of these extorting affairs: that by my Lady of Suffolk's letters, which were intercepted and read in Court, he appeared no less: as also by a book of particular bribes, receipts, and disbursements, kept by Humphreys, my Lord's servant, and recovered out of my Lady's hands, being after the greatest evidence and tell-tale against them. "And for the Earl, that although in many of these misemployments and extortions he had no immediate finger, yet it was very apparent that he gave way underhand to all the business: for when my Lady and Sir John Bingley had made their bargains, my Lord was ready to subscribe, and not before. Then upon a sudden my Lord became tractable to deal with, and would give fair language. The Chequer door was open, and the men they dealt with had their moneys paid them according to their bargain agreed upon. Before they had concluded, no business could be suffered to pass his Lordship was not to be moved upon any condition. "Nevertheless it appeared that divers of these bribes were restored by my Lord and Lady when they suspected the matters would be brought in question. So as though the offence remained, the bribes were brought to a less number. For one of them my Lady caused a bill to be given, that the party might swear when he was examined that the money was lent and not given, but withal took care that the bill might be restored again when these troubles were at an end. So as, howsoever she laboured to uphold her credit, yet she was not willing' to forego her profit. Though it did not appear that my Lord was in any great arrearages to his Majesty upon the conclusion; for at their first calling in question, for fear of a strict account, their consciences summoned them to salve their errors the safest and readiest way they were able, which indeed did somewhat extenuate their offence." "Thus I have laid down" (he concludes), "the things that appeared to be of greatest consequence against the delinquents, and to which they could give no sufficient or satisfying answer. Now I will briefly relate the censure. "Sir Edward Cooke was the first, and produced many precedents of former times, which made mention of divers great men punished for wasting or misspending the King's treasure. Amongst the rest were Ranulph the Briton in the time of Henry III.; Petrus de Rivalls in the time of Edward III.; Walter de Langton, Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, in the time of Edward I.; Roger Earl of March in the time of Edward IV., etc., whose cases were like the Earl of Suffolk's, and their punishment, some by fine and imprisonment, and some by ransom; also aggravating the Earl's offence to a high extent. So he fined my Lord and Lady at 100,000l., to be imprisoned severally in the Tower during the King's pleasure at their own charge, and to make restitution of the moneys ''not unwilling' in M.S. |