SPEECH AGAINST COMMITTING TO THE TOWER FOR AN ASSAULT ON A MEMBER'S SERVANT. I have been a member of this House these seven Parliaments, and never yet knew above two that were committed to the Tower. The first was Arthur Hall, for that he said the Lower House was a new person in the Trinity; and (because these words tended to the derogation of the state of this House, and giving absolute power to the other) he was therefore committed. The other was Parry, that for a seditious and contemptuous speech made even there (pointing to the second bench) was likewise committed. Now this offence is not of the like nature, and very small, not done to the person of any member of this House. And therefore I think the Sergeant's custody is punishment sufficient." The conclusion was, that Holland and his man should both be in the Sergeant's custody for five days, and pay double fees. But the question which brought Bacon out in the mood least in accordance with his traditional reputation, was one relating to Charitable Trusts and it is a pity that the point in dispute is not more fully recorded. : An Act had been passed in the last Session to prevent the misapplication of the revenues of colleges, hospitals, and other charitable institutions. By this Act the bishops were armed with powers which were found or thought to be dangerous; a bill "to explain the meaning of the Statute" was accordingly brought in,2 and on the second reading referred to the Committee for Repeal of Statutes.3 In Committee it was agreed to repeal the existing Act and pass a new one. In the course of the new bill through its stages, a question arose whether the old Act should be repealed by the general Act for the Repeal of Statutes, or by the new one: that is, (if I understand the point rightly), whether it should be repealed or only amended. Bacon seems to have been, for some reason or other, extraordinarily eager against the repeal. The fragment of his speech which Townshend has preserved, does not enable me to understand the importance of the point in dispute, or the particular motives of his opposition; but the passage has a personal interest, as giving us a glimpse of him in a state of excitement to which he did not often give way in public. 1 Townshend, p. 260. Harl. MSS. 2283, fo. 70 b. 3 28 Nov. D'Ewes, p. 617. He said (we are told) among many other things That the last Parliament there were so many other bills for the relief of the Poor that he called it a Feast of Charity. And now this statute of 39° having done so much good as it was delivered to the House, and the Lord Keeper having told him that he never revoked but one decree of the Commissioners, we should do a most uncharitable action to repeal and subvert such a mount of charity; and therefore we should rather tenderly foster it than roughly cry away with it. I speak (quoth he) out of the very strings of my heart; which doth alter my ordinary form of speech; for I speak not now out of the fervency of my brain, etc. So he spake something more against the bill put in by Mr. Phillips for repeal: by reason Bishops' lands were put in, and inrolments, etc., which he said was a good fetch and policy for the sole practices' of the Chancery. Mr. Phillips answered, That he would not speak as he had spoken, rather out of humour than out of judgment; neither had he brought to the House a market-bill or mercer's bill concerning the state, etc. And so, after many persuasions for the bill, and bitter answers to Mr. Bacon, he ended with desire to put it to the question whether it should be repealed by the public act or by his private bill.2 A long debate followed, which ended in an agreement that it should be repealed by the general Act. Without knowing what were the provisions of the new bill, as originally proposed, it is impossible to guess what should have made Bacon so vehement; for the mere form of proceeding could hardly involve anything very material: but there is no doubt about the fact. Not only was it remembered and noticed in the House the next day, but it seems that the counsel of the night had not restored him to his usual composure. The next morning a question of privilege was under discussion. Sir Francis Hastings-whose brother, Lord Huntington, was one of the parties interested-was going to speak a second time, when the following dialogue occurred: "Mr. Bacon interrupted him, and told him it was against the course.' To which he answered, 'He was old enough to know when and how often to speak.' To which Mr. Bacon said, 'It was no Sic. qu. practisers? : 2 Townshend, p. 291; Harl. MSS. 2283, fo. 92 b. 3" In nocte consilium." Essay of Counsels, vi. p. 426. matter, but he needed not to be so hot in an ill cause.' To which Sir Francis replied, 'In several matters of debate a man may speak often so I take it is the order. He (pointing to Mr. Bacon) talks of heat. If I be so hot as he was yesterday, then put me out of doors.""'1 : And again in the afternoon, when two bills were to be debated, and there was some dispute which should have precedence, Townshend tells us that "Mr. Francis Bacon kept such a quoil to have the bill concerning Charitable Uses put to the question," that the other bill " was clean hushed up.”2 Nothing, however, remains to show what the points in dispute were: and in the end a new Act was passed for precisely the same purpose as the former-only with several new provisoes and some limitation of the power confided to the bishops-under the title of "An Act to redress the misemployment of lands, goods, and stocks of money, heretofore given to Charitable Uses;" whether satisfactory to Bacon or not, I cannot say. 1 Townshend, p. 297. Harl. MSS. 2283, fo. 97 b. 2 Ib. p. 298, fo. 98. 40 CHAPTER II. A.D. 1601-1603. DECEMBER-APRIL. ETAT. 41-43. 1. WHEN a man is afflicted with chronic disease of the purse his worst friend is a too liberal lender. In June, 1594, Anthony Bacon, in thanking his mother for assenting to some arrangement for the satisfaction and assurance of Mr. Nicholas Trott, described him as a friend who had shown more real confidence and kindness" towards himself and Francis, than "all their brothers and uncles put together would have performed, if they had been constrained to have had recourse to them in the like case."1 But in June, 1594, Francis was in continual expectation of being made Solicitor-General, and was beginning to be actually employed in business of the learned counsel. Before the end of 1596 the hope of the Solicitor-Generalship was extinct, his other prospects dim, his credit at a discount, and the kind and confident friend turned into the aggrieved and complaining creditor. As it usually happens in such cases, either story taken by itself sounds reasonable: and the evidence is not complete enough to give us the means of judging between them. Abuse of confidence is complained of on both sides; by the creditor, in the shape of promises unperformed; by the debtor, in the shape of usurious interest demanded; and on both sides, I dare say, the complaint was sincere; though in a transaction between friends the presumption is commonly against the borrower, because the lender can always behave like a gentleman if he will, whereas the borrower has not perhaps the means of doing so. Bacon, not being able to repay what he had borrowed, was forced at last to mortgage Twickenham Park; and it seems that the deed gave Trott a right of entry if the debt were not paid before November, 1601. To avoid this, Bacon,-now owner of all that his brother had left, and with 1 Vol. I., 323, note. 2 See Trott's letter to Anthony Bacon, 7 Aug. 1597. Lambeth MSS. 661, 170. And Anthony's to Francis, 7 Dec. 1596. Add. MSS. Br. Mu. 4122, 186. some ready money from Catesby's fine to help,-resorted to his The state of the account between Mr. Trott and him, first upon communication of mortgage of land, and in conclusion upon bond 1200 l. But then upon interest and I know not what reckonings (which I ever left to his own making) and his principal sum, amounting to 1700 l. was wrapped up to 2000 l., and band given according as I remember. And about August xliido Rnæ I borrowed of him upon the mortgage of Twicknam pk. So as all the monies that Mr. Trott lent at any time amount to the total of. 1 Lansd. MSS. lxxxviii. fo. 50. 950 l. 2650 l. |