of Bedford and put in good way by the Bishop of Bath and Wells,1 concerning the restoring to preach of a famous preacher, one Doctor Burgess; who though he hath been silenced a great time, yet he hath now made such a submission touching his conformity, as giveth satisfaction. It is much desired also by Gray's-Inn (if he shall be free from the State) to choose him for their preacher and certainly it is safer to place him there than in another auditory, because he will be well watched, if he should any ways fly forth in his sermons beyond duty. This may seem. a trifle; but I do assure you, in opening this man's mouth to preach, you shall open very many mouths to speak honour of you; and I confess I would have a full cry of puritans, of papists, of all the world to speak well of you; and besides I am persuaded (which is above all earthly glory) you shall do God good service in it. I pray deal with his Majesty in it. I rest Your devoted and bounden servant, FR. BACON. June 13, 1616. What was the immediate effect of Bacon's motion, we are not informed. But I find that in December 1616 Dr. Burgess was allowed to preach again;2 and in the following July we hear of him delivering a sermon at Paul's Cross. But I believe he never became preacher of Gray's Inn. 5. Bacon's next employment,-though merely ministerial, and such as no other Attorney-General would have been held morally accountable for, has been regarded in him as a serious betrayal of justice. It was the drawing of a pardon for the Countess of Somerset. This was of course an office which he could not have declined if he was to hold his place, for it was one of the regular duties of it. But I have no reason to think that it was unwelcome to him. What were his personal feelings with regard to sanguinary punishments, we have indeed no means of knowing. His official duty had never required him to take part in them. In the prosecution of unconfessing offenders to conviction and sentence, he was active and firm: so much was required for the vindication of the law. In what cases and how far the sentence should be carried into effect, was another question, and one upon which he was never called upon either to decide or advise. 1 Dr. James Montague: concerning whom see Vol. IV. p. 40, note. 2 Carew Letters. 3 Chamberlain to Carleton, 5 July 1617. In this case however it seems to me most probable that he acquiesced without remonstrance, outward or inward, in the known determination of the King to use in Lady Somerset's favour the prerogative which by law undoubtedly belonged to him. The right could not be disputed. Nor can it be truly said that justice was materially compromised by the exercise of it in this instance. It is true that the Countess, having been the prime mover in the matter, may seem to have been of all the party least entitled to mercy; and if justice required that the measure of punishment should always be in proportion to the moral culpability, it would not be easy to justify a distinction in her favour. Between the suborner and the suborned, indeed,-between the person who procures a murder under the passion of hate or fear, and the person who undertakes and executes it in cold blood for hire,—a question might be fairly raised which is morally the more culpable. But it is not a question which we need settle. The true principle of judicial punishment is not moral retribution, but self-defence: its proper and only legitimate object is to deter people from committing acts injurious to society. And if in the proceedings against the murderers of Overbury the object was to make it notorious that murder could not be committed with impunity by high or low, it cannot be denied that the lesson was effectually taught. The severity which was needed to enforce it fell heaviest upon those who came first; who happened to be the meaner instruments in whom a sufficiently striking example could not be made by any punishment short of death on the gallows; and the long interval which passed before the case against the greater persons could be ready for adjudication, together with the immense difference in their condition of life, made some alteration in the question. Ignominy, and the utter ruin of so splendid a fortune,-sudden precipitation from such a height to such a depth,-was itself an example sufficient to warn and deter: and it is quite conceivable that the public execution of a young and beautiful woman might have interfered with the effect of it, by turning indignation into pity. I have heard it said by a wise man who had had much experience of the working of penal enactments, that he had no faith in the efficacy of punishments "except where they express and exasperate the general indignation of society against the delinquents." We have it upon Camden's authority that when the Countess received her sentence the general feeling among the bystanders was pity; and I do not find any evidence that the pardon was at the time unpopular. Posterity simplifies these problems by forgetting half the conditions; but even Posterity would perhaps have taken her part if the King had been relentless. Sir, To SIR GEORGE VILLIERS.1 I send you inclosed a warrant for my La. of Somerset's pardon, reformed in that main and material point of inserting a clause (that she was not a principal, but an accessary before the fact, by the instigation of base persons). Her friends think long to have it dispatched, which I marvel not at, for that in matter of life moments are numbered. I do more and more take contentment in his Majesty's choice of Sir Oliver St. Johns, for his deputy of Ireland, finding upon divers conferences with him his great sufficiency; and I hope the good intelligence which he purposeth to hold with me by advertisements from time to time shall work a good effect for his Majesty's service. I am wonderful desirous to see that kingdom flourish, because it is the proper work and glory of his Majesty and his times. And his Majesty may be pleased to call to mind, that a good while since, when the great rent and divisions were in the Parliament of Ireland, I was no unfortunate remembrancer to his Majesty's princely wisdom in that business. God ever keep you and prosper you. Your true and most devoted and bounden servant, 1 July, 1616. FR. BACON. The warrant was accompanied with the following letter to the King, which I suppose was appended to it; and which I take from copy in the State Trials,' not having met with it elsewhere. the May it please your excellent Majesty,2 This Bill containeth your Majesty's gracious pardon unto the Lady Frances late Countess of Somerset, for being accessary before the fact, of the death and impoisonment of Sir T. Overbury. It hath inserted, as motives to your Majesty's mercy, four respects that is to say, The respect of her father, friends, and family. Her voluntary confession both when she was prisoner and at the Bar. The promise made publicly by the Lord High Steward, and the Peers, to intercede for your Majesty's mercy. 1 Fortescue Papers. Original: own hand. 2 From the State Trials,' p. 1007. And that the crime was not of a principal, but of an accessary before the fact, by the instigation of base persons. The like pardon formerly passed your Majesty's signature, and is now amended by your Majesty's special direction from your royal mouth, in two points: The one is, That imprisonment in the Tower or other confining at your Majesty's pleasure is not pardoned. The other, that the solemn promise made at her arraignment by the Lord High Steward and the Peers to intercede to your Majesty for your mercy, is inserted. FRANCIS BACON. 6. After the "great rent and divisions in the Parliament of Ireland," concerning which see Vol. IV. p. 382, there had succeeded a very quiet time; so quiet that History has forgotten most of the particulars. When they met again on the 11th of October 1614, the Speaker took the chair without opposition, inquiry into the disputed elections was not insisted on, the Government measures were readily passed, and the only thing which portended disagreement was a list of grievances, including one petition at least which the Government was not prepared to concede,-a petition that the recusant lawyers might again be permitted to practise. Nor was even this presented in a shape which threatened immediate embarrassment; for the concession of it was not made a condition of proceeding with business; and when they met again, after a few months' prorogation had given them full time to consider and agree upon their course, they made no difficulty in passing a Subsidy Bill. We hear of no quarrel between the Houses and the Deputy. Several bills had been passed, and some others were desired; and to give time for a reference of these to the English Council, the session was prorogued to the 24th of October 1615. So far therefore, the great experiment of introducing parliamentary government into Ireland seemed to be proceeding very happily. What followed is hard to understand. On the 22nd of August, orders were given for the dissolution, as soon as it met, of the Parliment which had been so conformable; and on the 20th of November, Sir Arthur Chichester, who had used his authority so judiciously and successfully, was required to hand it over to the Chancellor and Sir John Denham.1 From the tenor of the following letters, I incline to suspect that the cause of this was a difference of opinion between the Deputy and the Irish Council concerning the treatment of Recusants. It is 1 Gardiner, vol. ii. p. 323. evident from them that since Chichester's recall, the two Lords Justices who were left in authority pending the appointment of his successor had been pursuing or consenting in a policy towards recusant magistrates in towns, which Bacon thought dangerous, and which Chichester was not at all likely to have approved. It is probable enough that his own policy had met with insuperable obstructions at the Council-board, and that the differences had grown too great to allow of their working together any longer. Bacon's views on this matter were such as might have been anticipated from his former advices. He looked forward with confidence to the time when Protestantism would overgrow Popery in Ireland by a natural process of development; but until that time came he was against all attempts to eradicate or banish it by authority. And I think, if he had had the experience of the next two centuries to correct his judgment by, and had known how little way Protestantism was to make during those two centuries with the mass of the Irish people, he would have been content to let Popery flourish unmolested, as in a soil of which it was the natural growth. Sir, To SIR GEORGE VILLIERS.1 I think I cannot do better service towards the good estate of the kingdom of Ireland than to procure the King to be well served in the eminent places of Law and Justice; I shall therefore name unto you for the Attorney's place there, or for the Solicitor's place, if the now Solicitor shall go up, a gentleman of mine own breeding and framing, Mr. Edward Wrytington, of Gray's-Inn; he is born to eight hundred pound a year; he is the eldest son of a most severe justicer amongst the recusants of Lancashire, and a man most able for law and speech, and by me trained in the King's causes. My Lord Deputy by my description is much in love with the man. I hear my Lord of Canterbury, and Sir Thomas Laque, should name one Sir John Bear, and some other mean men. This man I commend upon God ever my credit for the good of his Majesty's service. preserve and prosper you. I rest 2 of July, 1616. Your most devoted and most bounden servant, FR. BACON, 1 Fortescue papers. Original: own hand. |