Mf^'tef dd2& 1£ YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY A BIOGRAPHICAL DICTIONARY OF TllB JUDGES OF ENGLAND 1066 — 1870 BY THE SAME AUTHOR. The Judges of England. With Sketches of their Lives, and Notices of the Courts at Westminster, from the Conquest to the Present Time. 9 Vols. 8vo. 126s. TabulSB Curiales; or, Tables of the Superior Courts of West minster Hall. Sho-wing the Judges -who sat in them from 1066 to 1864; -with the Attorney and Solicitor Generals of each reign. To -which is prefixed an Alphabetical List of all the Judges during the same period. Svo. 10s. Gd. 3Siosrap5ia S^urfiJica A BIOGRAPHICAL DICTIONARY OF THE JUDGES OF ENGLAND FEOM THE CONQUEST TO THE PRESENT TIME 1066 1870 BY EDWARD FOSS, P.S.A. OP THE INNER TEMPLE SU/E QUIsaUE FORTUN/€ FABER Saltust, de Republtca ordinanda, I. i. (on the Serjeant's ring of Chief-Justice Pinenx, 1486) LONDON JOHN MUERAY^ ALBEMARLE STREET 1870 The right of translation is reserved ox ^-~ 'is / — lONDON : PEINTBIl ur SPOMISWOODK AN.. CO., NKW-STI.1',BI SOTABE AND rAlll.IiUIlNT STliniT PEEFACE. In my former -work I endeavoured to trace, chronologically, the different incidents and changes in the Courts of Westminster that occurred from the reign of William the Conqueror to that of her present Majesty ; and I gave an account under each reign of the judicial personages -who then administered the law. The arrangement then adopted, -with its palpable historical advantages, had, biographically, one inconvenience, that when infor mation was required for any individual judge, the time of whose ex istence was doubtful or uncertain, a search became necessary among several volumes or reigns in order to find the narrative. To remedy this defect, and to facilitate the reference to every name in the judicial record, and a,lso to reduce the bulk to one con venient volume, this publication has been undertaken. It is limited to the biographical portion of the larger work, and comprehends every name therein introduced, with slight abridgments and correc tions, adding to them the judges who have been appointed since 1864 : the whole number exceeding 1,600 lives. I have not thought it necessary in the separate lives to refer specially to Dugdale's ' Chronica Series,' because, from the Conquest tUl the decapitation of Charles I., I have inserted every name that is included in his list. I have even done so when I have ventured to differ from him in regard to the individual filling the particular position, or flourishing at the precise period represented. In all these cases I have been careful to quote the authorities upon which I base the objections I have raised ; and I have invariably, as well in the lives above alluded to as in those of the judges who flourished since Dugdale wrote, given such references as will, I trust, justify every fact I have introduced. In the long period of eight hundred yenrs over which the •a 3 VI PREFACE. history travels, there were many changes in the administration of jus tice and the arrangement of the courts, which when described under the different reigns in which they occurred would naturally account for the terms then used, and the titles then given to the persons com memorated ; but some explanation of them seems necessary, or at all events desirable, when their biographies are collected in an alpha betical form, and names appear together which are sundered by centuries, as one in the reign of Henry II., and the next in that of Henry VIII. or William IV. I therefore add a short account of the various alterations in the respective reigns. In the reign of WiUiam the Conqueror the highest court of judicature was theCurIa Eegis, in which the King himself frequently presided. Its members were the prelates and barons of the reahn, and certain ofiicers of the palace. Of these the principal was the Chief Justiciary, who in the King's absence was the ruling judge. This office continued till the reign of Henry III., a period of two hundred years, when its judicial duties were transferred to the Chief Justice of the King's Bench. Many of the barons, as members of the Curia Regis, soon neglected the legal part of their duties, some firom avocations that otherwise engaged them, some from unwillingness so to employ themselves, and some from incapsicity to unravel the intricacies of the law. This naturally led to the association with those that remained, and eventually to the entire substitution for them, of per sons whose lives had been devoted to judicial studies. These were called justiciaries, and seem to have been first introduced in the reign of Henry I., and their organisation to have been completed in that of Henry II. The justiciaries not only sat at Westminster, but went on circuits or itinera throughout the kingdom. To the com missions by which they were appointed some of the great men of the several counties, whether lay or clerical, were occasionally added, and all were designated as justiciers or justices itinerant ; and from the reign of Edward I. to that of Richard II., justices of trallbaston for the trial of certain particular transgressions were appointed. By the Charter of King John, confirmed and acted upon by Henry III., Common Pleas, being causes between private indi- ¦sdduals, were directed to be held ' in some certain place.' This was to remedy the grievance felt by all litigants in being obliged to follow the Curia Regis to whatever distance the King might choose PREFACE. vii to travel. The Court of Common Pleas was thus originated ; and in it the ancient advocates of the Curia Regis — the Serjeants — had sole audience. When the office of Chief Justiciary was abolished, the King's Pleas were left to be decided In a separate court, presided over by the Chief Justice of the King's Bench, the first of whom was appointed by Henry III. The division of the courts, In nearly their present form, of King's Bench, Common Pleas, and Exchequer, was completed by Edward I., the English Justinian. The Couet of King's Bench at first took cognisance of no other suits than those in which the Crown was concerned ; but from the increase of private suits, which were a source of great profit to the advocates, means were gradually employed to bring them ¦within its jurisdiction, wliich was at last effected, so that now every description of cause may be tried there. The Couet of Common Pleas has now the same jurisdiction, and remains in nearly the same position, as when it was first esta blished, with the exception that the Serjeants, by a recent Innova tion, no longer monopolise the practice, which is now opened to all barristers. The Couet of Exchequee was, before the division of the courts, an integral department of the Curia Regis, under the name of Scaccarlum, In which all cases touching the Revenue were decided, and now continue so to be. But by similar means to those before alluded to, the privileges of the Court of Common Pleas have been encroached upon, and private suits form a great part of Its employment. The judges who sit In the court are called barons, the title being continued from the barons of the realm who origi nally sat in the Curia Regis. They were tlU the reign of James I. of a much lower degree than the other judges, and indeed were not considered men of the law, nor ever employed to go the circuits. The statute of Nisi Prius, 14 Edward III., enacts ' that if it happen that none of the justices of the one bench nor of the other come Into the county, then the Nisi Prius shall be granted before the Chief Baron of the Exchequer, if he be a man of the law.' But the general increase of litigation occasioned by the extension of com merce, with the gradual combination of civil and revenue cases, by the cunning use of the Writ Quo minus, requiring the aid of learned vm PREFACE. lawyers for their decision, it was determined to place the barons on precisely the same footing as the other judges, and consequently those barons who were appointed after the twenty-first year of Queen Elizabeth were selected from the serjeants-at-law, and were distinguished from their predecessors by the term ' Barons of the Coif.' Robert Shute was the first of these. As soon as the court was filled with these legal barons, none of whom had been instructed in the business of the revenue, it became necessary to appoint a new officer, one who was acquainted with and could attend to the fiscal business of the Exchequer. He was called the puisne or cursitor baron, whose duty It was to inform the other barons of the course of the court In any matter that concerned the King's prerogative. The first of these cursitor barons was Nowell Sotherton, who was ap pointed in 1606; but the office, after existing 250 years, was abolished In 1856, its duties having gradually been removed to other departments of the State.' The Court of Exchequer had also an equitable jurisdiction, which in the year 1841 was aboHshed, and its suits were transferred to the Court of Chancery. All the judges of these three courts must be selected from the serjeants-at-law, a practice originating from the advocates in the Curia Regis consisting only of Serjeants, and they from their learn ing being raised to the bench. But as business accumulated, other efficient men, who practised only as barristers, had opportunities of distinguishing themselves, and were gradually advanced to the bench, on which occasions the old custom was still adhered to by investing them with the coif before they received their patent as judges. This change was commenced in the reign of Queen Elizabeth in the person of Robert Monson in the year 1572, and is now the general practice. The judges and Serjeants always address one another as ' Brothers.' The number of these judges from the time of the first division of the courts until the reign of Henry VII. varied considerably, ac cording to the whim of the Monarch, the claims of the Government, or the necessity for additional or reduced assistance. By a reference to a little volume I published, called ' Tabulte Curiales,' In which I have shown the state of each court under the different reigns, and the judges who sat in them In chronological order, it vnW be seen that there was no regular number, but that it varied in each court ' See Judges of England, vi. 16-27, ix. 109. PREFACE. ix sometimes extending to eight and even to nine on one of the benches. In the reign of Henry VIII., however, the number of four in each of the three courts seems to have been established, and by its continuance nearly without change till the reign of William IV., a period of 300 years, the Twelve Judges of England came to be regarded as a sacred institution. This number, however, was in creased in the reign of William IV., by whom another judge was added to each court ; and Queen Victoria has followed the example ; so that instead of twelve there are now eighteen judges of England. It is to be hoped that litigation will not increase so much as to require another extension. The Couet of Chanceet originated from that department of the Curia Regis called the Cancellaria, in which were prepared and issued the various writs and precepts in reference to the Curia Regis. There also were all royal grants and charters, and other instruments requiring the King's seal, supervised. It was presided over by an officer called the King's Chancellor, who held at first a some-vf hat inferior rank in the Curia Regis, but who sat with the rest of the judges, and occasionally even went a circuit. He origi nally was the King's chief chaplain, and little more than his private secretary, being commonly rewarded at the end of his service with a bishopric. His Intimate connection with the sovereign naturally led by degrees to a frequent reference to him upon the affairs of state ; and gaining thus an ascendency in council, he at last became, on the extinction of the office of Chief Justiciary and the transfer of the legal duties of that functionary to a court of law, the recognised Prime Minister of the kingdom. This responsible position, after a lapse of several centuries, gradually devolved first upon favourites and next on party politicians ; the Chancellor of subsequent times, though losing the lead, stlU held and now holds a most Influential place In the Government and Is recognised as the head of the law, but is removable, and always removed, with every change of Ministers. From his first title of the Chancellor of the King, he rose to that of Chancellor of England ; soon after he was called Lord Chancellor, a title which has been since Increased to that of Lord High Chancellor. A keeper of the Great Seal was sometimes appointed instead of a Chancellor, and it was somewhat difficult to distinguish the difference In dignity between the one and the other ; but in the reign of Queen Elizabeth an Act of Parliament was passed declaring their identity X PEEFACE. in rank, power, and privileges. The Great Seal was also occasionally put into the hands of Commissioners, who held it for a temporary, and principally for a political purpose, till a Chancellor or keeper was appointed. The duty of the Chancellor to supervise and issue the necessary writs and charters led of course to the discussion before him as to the propriety and expediency of them, but it was a long time before questions of legal wrong were referred to his decision. It was soon found however that there was much truth in the maxim ' Summum jus, summa injuria ; ' consequently questions invol-ving private wrong were frequently submitted by petition to Parliament, where they were decided. These petitions multiplied to such an extent that it was found necessary to refer them to a separate court — naturally pre sided over by the Chancellor ; and the rules which guided it were gradually moulded into a system of Equity Law. In its administra tion the necessity of additional assistance was soon apparent, and the clerks or masters in Chancery were resorted to. The principal one, who received the title of Master of the Rolls, from these records being specially entrusted to his care, was deputed to exercise the same jurisdiction. The first who was designated by that title was John de Langton, in the reign of Edward I. Commissions also were sometimes issued to some of the judges to ease the Chancellor in hearing causes. The Court of Exchequer also had a similar jurisdiction till 1841, when it was taken away, and its Equity cases were transferred to the Court of Chancery. More permanent assistance had been previously required as liti gation increased, and in the reign of George III. one Vice-Chancellor was appointed. To these three Equity Judges two others were added by our present Queen, on the Court of Exchequer losing its equitable jurisdiction ; and the decisions of the Master of the Rolls and of the three Vice- Chancellors were made appealable to the Lord Chancellor, and two other new judges, called Lord Justices of Appeal. So that the Court of Chancery now consists of seven judges, instead of the two to which it was limited for more than 500 years, from the reign of Edward I. to that of George III. These short particulars will be sufficient to explain the various designations given to the different judges included in this Dictionary. Those readers who are desirous of more ample details must be re ferred to my larger work, where I have given a full account, not PREFACE. xi only of the Di-dsion of the Courts, but also of the origin of the legal Terms and Vacations ; the institution and formalities of Serjeants ; and the perquisites of the Chancellors, and salaries and robes of the Judges. In it I have also traced the appointment of Attorney and Solicitor General, and the first designation eo nomine of King's Counsel; the various uses to which Westminster Hall has been applied ; the origin of the various Inns of Court and Inns of Chancery, and of the different Serjeants' Inns, with other interesting details incidental to the History of the Law. P.S. — In my eighty-third year I cannot expect to witness either the success or failure of the new scheme for the arrangement of the co-arts about to be introduced in pursuance of an Act of Parliament passed in. the last" Session. I o-wn that I cannot predict that much material benefit will result from the intended change ; and I am inclined to think that those who are conversant with the history of the past -will consider the new High Couet of Justice little more than a mere re-vival of the ancient CuEiA Regis, -with all its varied powers and privileges, wliich were dis tributed into the present di-visions so many centm-ies ago. Another remark able restoration will be noted ia the new statute — that by which the legal Terms are reduced from four to three, as they originally stood in the earHer times. But, be the innovation good or bad, I am sure it is well intended, and I sincerely hope that it may prove as beneficial to the administration of justice as its promoters anticipate. Note. — ^Although the Bill referred to (which was brought into the Upper House of Parliament by Lord Chancellor Hatherley) did not pass during the Session of 1870, it has been thought well to preserve the author's remarks on it. The pkintinq of this volume was far advanced when the Author was attacked by illness, which ended fatally on the following day. In these circumstances it seems proper that the many Lives which are contained in the following pages should be accompanied by some notice of the Biographer. Edward, the eldest son of Edward Smith Foss and Anne, daughter of Dr. William Rose, of Ohiswick, and sister of Samuel Rose, the friend of Oowper, was bom in Gough Square, Elect Street, October 16, 1787. By his mother's side he was nearly related to the Rev. Hugh James Rose, one of the ablest and most eloquent among the English clergy of late times, and to his brother, the present learned Archdeacon of Bedford ; and one of his maternal aunts was the -wife of the eminent scholar Dr. Charles Burney. His younger brother, Henry, who died in January 1868, was for many years a partner in the firm of Payne and Foss, which stood at the head of the London trade in rare and valuable books, and was distinguished for his great bibhographical knowledge. Edward Foss was educated under Dr. Burney, at Greenwich, and in 1804 was articled to his father, who was a solicitor in Essex Street, Strand. In 1811 he became a partner, and on his father's death in 1830 he suc ceeded to the whole business, which he carried on -with a high reputation for ability and integrity. In 1827-8, when his friend Mr. Spottiswoode was one of the Sherifi's of London, he filled the office of Under- Sheriff. His professional work brought him into intercourse -with most of the leading barristers of the day, so that, while he was able to turn to account his observation of the Judges who then occupied the Bench, he could speak from nearer personal knowledge of many -n^ho, by later promotion, came to be included among the subjects of his biographical labours. In 1822 he became a member of the Inner Temple, -with the intention of being called to the Bar ; but he afterwards relinquished this plan, and continued to practise in his original branch of the legal profession until 1840, when he retired from business. In 1844 he removed from Streatham, where he had for some time lived, to Street End House, about three miles from Canterbury. The change was one which for most men would have involved no small risk ; for in too many cases it has been found that a withdrawal from a life of busy engagements to one of competence and leisure does not brino- the happiness which had been expected ; and so it might have been with Mr. Foss. He had little taste for country occupations or amusements ; and, although he took an active part in the public business of the neio-h' bourhood— among other things, by acting as chairman of the Canterbury bench of magistrates, where his strong sense and his legal knowledo-e Xlll made his services very valuable — this was not enough to fill up his time. In his own words, he ' found that full employment was necessary to his existence and his happiness ;' ' and he was fortunately able to provide himself with the means of such employment. He had always felt a strong love of literature ; he had already published some volumes, besides many contributions, both in prose and in verse, to periodicals and newspapers ; and he had early formed a project of writing the lives of all the English Judges. Through many years of busy London life he had kept this project steadily in -view, and had gradually accumulated large stores of materials for carrying it into effect. These he now set himself to arrange, to complete, and to employ in composition ; and the first two volumes of ' The Judges of England ' were published in 1848.^ Although these volumes were at once noticed with high praise by some of the most esteemed critics, the general reception of them was not very encouraging. Lord Campbell, in his ' Lives of the Chancellors,' had lately made the public familiar with a very difierent style of legal biography ; and when readers came to take up Mr. Foss's account of the early judges with the expectation of finding it equally amusing -with Lord Campbell's popular narratives, they could not but be disappointed. The Chancellors were commonly men who had played an important part in the history of their times : of the older Judges, the vast majority were utterly forgotten ; as to many of them, it was necessary to enquire whether they ever existed at all, and, if so, whether they were judges or not ; and perhaps nothing more could be ascertained, after all possible enquiry, than that their signa tures were found attached to certain documents, and so prove them to have been in certain places at certain times. It was unfortunate for the author that the portion of his book which was first published should be that in which the names for the most part had nothing of attraction for the generality of readers, and were incapable of being invested with any other interest than that which arises from skilful investigation and scrupulous correctness. The two volumes, therefore, could not be regarded as at first very successful. But Mr. Foss knew that he was doing a good and substantial work ; he felt that in it he had found a source of continual interest, the chief occupation of his life ; and he determined to persevere, even if the publication should involve (as at one time seemed not unlikely) a con siderable pecuniary loss. The third and fourth volumes appeared in I85I ; the fifth and sixth, in 18-57 ; the last three, in 1864. In the meantime the reputation of the book had been rising. The subject became more interesting as it advanced; the author's laborious research, his acuteness in enquiry, his sound and impartial judgment, were discerned, and were warmly acknowledged by the highest critical 1 Introduction to ' Judges of England,' p. xiii. 2 It may be -well to mentioli that Mr. Foss's set (consisting of nearly 100 volurties) of the Record Commission's publications, for which, in the preface to the second instalment of hia work, he acknowledges himself indebted to ' the liberality of Government,' was granted to him at the instance of Lord Langdale, then Master of the Rolls, to whom ' The Lives of the Judges ' arc dedicated, and who early showed his high estimation of them. XIV authorities ; • and long before the concluding volumes were published, the work had taken its place as (what Lord Campbell's ' Lives ' could never become) one of historical authority. How valuable it is in this character may be in some degree understood from the continual references to it in Dr. Pauh's learned ' Geschichte von England ; ' nor was this by any means the only testimony which the author received of the appreciation which his work has found among German men of letters. In America also its reputation is well established ; and, resting as that reputation does on a foundation of sohd merits, it is not Hkely to be disturbed. From the lives of Judges, Mr. Foss was led on to the compilation of his ' Tabulee Curiales ;' and his last years were employed in the re-casting of his old materials -with a view to the present publication. While engaged on these labours, he removed in 1859 from Street End to Churchill House, near Dover; and in 1865 he finally settled at Frensham House, Addiscombe. The infirmities of age fell gently on him, and he retained to the last his powers of sight and hearing, -with the full vigour of his mind. His death took place at Frensham House on 'July 27, 1870, and his remains are interred in the neighbouring church yard of Shirley. By those who knew him he -will be remembered as a man of strong understanding, of thorough uprightness, and of kind and generous heart. He was twice married — first, in 1814, to Catherine, daughter of Peter Martineau, Esq. ; and again, in 1844, to Maria EUzabeth, daughter of William Hutchins, Esq. By his second marriage he has left six sons and three daughters. The eldest son, Edward W. Foss, a barrister of the Inner Temple, assisted in the re-vision of this volume, and has completed the task since his father's death. Mr. Foss was a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, to which he -was elected in 1822 ; a member of several other antiquarian and Hterary societies ; a member of the Incorporated Law Society, which elected him as its president in 1842 and 1843 ; a magistrate for Kent and Surrey; a Deputy-Lieutenant for Kent, &c. His chief publications were — I. ' The Beauties of Massinger,' 1817. II. 'Abridgment of Blackstone's Commentaries,' published (1820) in the name of John Gifibrd, Esq., who had undertaken the work, but died before completing the first sheet. (This volume had a large sale, and was translated into German.) III. ' The Grandeur of the Law ; or. The Legal Peers of England,' 1843. IV. ' The Judges of England,' 9 vols., 1848-64. V. ' Tabulffi Curiales ; or, Tables of the Superior Courts of Westminster Hall, showing the Judges who sat in them from 1066 to 1864.' 1865. VI. ' Biographia Juridica : a Biographical Dictionary of the Judges ' 1870. ^ ' 1 ' Edinburgh Review,' Vol. cvi. ; ' Quarterly Review,' vol. cxix. ; ' Saturday Review ' 'Times,' &c., including several legal periodicals. ' XV VII. Contributions to the ' Archseologia :' — (1) ' On the Lord Chancellors in the Reign of King John.' (2) ' The Lineage of Sh- Thomas More.' (3) ' On the Relationship between Bishop Fitzjames and Lord Chief Justice Fitzjames.' (4) ' On the Origin of the Title and Of&ce of Cursitor Baron of the Exchequer.' (And other communications.) VIII. ' On the CoUar of SS ' (' Archseologia Cantiana,' vol. i. 1858). IX. ' Legal History of Westminster Hall ' (in ' Old London — Papers read at the London Congress of the Archaeological Institute, 1867 '). Mr. Foss also contributed largely to the 'Monthly Review,' Aikin's 'Athenaeum,' the 'London Magazine,' the 'Gentleman's Magazine,' the ' Legal Observer,' ' Notes and Queries,' &c. A small volume of his epigrams and other pieces in verse (most of which had appeared in newspapers) was privately printed in 1863, under the title of ' A Century of Inventions.' J. C. ROBBETSON. PBEcrtfCTS, Cantehbubt : September 1870. BIOGEAPHIA JUEIDICA. 1066—1870. ABBING-WOaiH, Gilbert de, was one ..of the justices itinerant into the counties ¦of Sussex, Surrey, Kent, and Middlesex, in ;3 Henry III., 1218. His name also appears with that designation on fines levied at Westminster in that year ; showing that the justices itinerant were accustomed to sit at Westminster. He was employed in , the same manner in 1225, for Surrey ; and in the next year was at the head of those .appointed to collect the quinzime of that .county. (Rot. dates, i, 76, 146.) ABBOTT, Chaeles, when created Lord Tenterden, far from following the example ¦ of many a new-made peer by endeavouring to trace his pedigree to an ancient race, -gloried in his descent from parents in the lower ranks of life, as exemplifying the beauty of the British constitution, which ¦excludes no one from its honours, and even opens the door of the peerage to the most humble individual, when merit claims an - entrance. When he was at his highest - elevation he attended the festival of the school in his native city, at which he im bibed the rudiments of his education, I acknowledged the benefits he had received from its foundation, and pei-petuated the memory of his connection with it, by founding two prizes for future aspirants. On his epitaph too, written by his own pen, he records himself as sprung 'humilHmis : sortis parentibus.' He was born on October 7, 1762, in the I precincts of Canterbury Cathedral, where his father, John Abbott, carried on a re- .- spectable business as a wigmaker and hairdresser. His mother was Alice, daugh ter of Daniel Bunce of the same city. Having entered the grammar-school there, ¦ called, frOm its foimdation by Henry VIII., the King's school, by his industry and • cleverness he gave such satisfaction to his master, Dr. Osmond Beauvoir, and to the ) revererid trustees of the cathedral, that he ..received one of the school exhibitions on his admission into Corpus Christi College, O.Yford, in Marcli 178l, where he imme diately obtained a scholarship. At Oxford he distinguished himself by gaining the only two honours which -the university then bestowed, the chancellor's medals for Latin and Engfish compositions. The sub ject of the former (in 1784) was ' Globus Aerostaticus,' the novelty of Lunardi's balloon occasioning the thesis; and that of the latter (in 1786) 'The Use and Abuse of Satire,' an essay so much admired for its learning and reasoning that it was afterwards published. Having taken his degrees, he was rewarded with a fellowship in his college, and became sub-tutor under Dr. Burgess, afterwards Bishop of Sahsbury. Soon after he was selected as the private tutor of Mr. Yarde, the son of Mr. Justice BuUer; and that sagacious judge, seeing and appreciating his talents, recommended him to devote his attention to the legal instead of the clerical profession. He accordingly entered himself at the Middle Temple on November 16, 1787; but in May 1793 he removed to the Inner Temple, by which he was ultimately called to the bar. In the meantime, for the purpose of acquiring a practical knowledge of the working of the law, he attended for some months the office of Messrs. Sandys & Co., attorneys in considerable business, and then placed himself under Mr. (afterwards Baron) Wood, tbe leading pleader of that day. Subsequently Mr. Abbott selected the same department for his o-wn commencement; and for several years devoted himself to this branch of the science, with so much success, that in July 1795 he was enabled to take the importf^nt step of marrying. His bride was Mary, daughter of John Lagier Lamotte, Esq., of Basilden in Kent. His call to the bar was in the following February; and he joined the Oxford circuit. Such was his reputation as a special pleader, that no sooner did he assume the B 2 ABBOTT barrister's gown than he was employed as junior counsel for the cro-wn in all the numerous state prosecutions for the next ten years, under the attorney-generalships of Lord Eldon, Lord Redesdale, Lord EUenborough, and the Hon. Spencer Per ceval. In ISOl he was elected recorder of Oxford ; and in 1802 he published a work on ' The Law Relating to Merchant Ships and Seamen,' a treatise which was praised by all jurists, and at once became the standard book and practical guide on the subject. It raised Mr. Abbott's reputation so high, and consequently brought him such an accession of employment in com mercial and maritime cases, that when an income-tax was imposed in 1807 he re turned his professional receipts during the previous year at 8,026/. 5s. With such an income as this it is not surprising that he should have declined in 1808 to accept the offer then made him of a seat on the bench. Neither would he apply for the honour of a silk go-wn, con scious that his temperament and disposition disqualified him as a leader, and that his , services as a junior would be more usefully employed and in greater requisition than if he aimed at the higher grade. But after i eight years more of laborious but profit able application, he felt that his health would not bear the continued strain upon his faculties, and that he could with pru dence accept the comparative relief of a judgeship. On the death therefore of Mr. Justice Heath, Mr. Abbott was raised to j the vacant seat in the Common Pleas on January 24, 1816, receiving the customary honour of knighthood. j He remained in that court little more than three months, removing on May .3, very unwilling^, but at the urgent soli- I citation of Lord EUenborough, to the court of King's Bench as the successor of Sir [ Simon Le Blanc. His excellence in a judi cial character was so prominent that when Lord EUenborough resigned two years and a half after, he was elevated to the chief justiceship on November 4, 1818. After having continued in the office for nine years, and established his fame by the ex- j emplary manner in -which he fulfilled its duties, the royal -wish was intimated to him, that he should be created a peer ; and he was accordingly ennobled, by the title of Baron Tenterden of Hendon in Middlesex, on AprU 30, 1827. j Soon after this elevation his health beo-an ' to decline, and his infirmities were in creased by his anxious exertions to contend ¦with the growing business of his court. He betrayed no diminution of mental en ergy, and so far from .shrinking from judicial duties he died almost in harness; being seized with his last illness while sitting on the third day's trial of the mayor of Bristol, ABBOTT for 'misconduct at the riots in that city. He immediately took to hia bed, from which he never rose, but died on November 4, 1832, exactly fourteen years since he -was constituted chief justice. He was buried in the Foundling Hospital, and on his monument is a modest inscription -written by himself. Various attempts have been made to- analyse Lord Tenterden's mind and cha racter, and a great deal of ingenuity and eloquence have been expended in the en deavour. All allow that both were pecu liarly fitted for the judicial office. In his- practice at the bar and in his opinions in answer to cases he exhibited less of the advocate than of the arbitrator. It was- not till he was raised to the bench that his full powers were brought into play. There he soon proved himself one of the ablest judges that ever presided. He was pecu liarly a common-sense judge. Complete master of every branch of law, stnctly impartial and unprejudiced, and detesting anything that approached to quibbling, he applied himself to discover the justice of the case before him, and by his clear and perspicuous explanations most commonly led the jury to a right conclusion. Severe- against everything that had the semblance of fraud or conspiracy, he was particularly so if an attorney was implicated ; but to the respectable members of the profession. he showed marked respect and urbanity. If he occasionally exhibited impatience at the long speeches and irrelevant arguments of counsel, it should be remembered that it was occasioned by his anxiety to clear away the accumulation of business, the extent of which may be estimated by the fact that while Lord Mansfield had to dispose of only 200 causes at a sitting, the number had in creased in Lord Tenterden's time to above 800 : but as a significant proof of the esti mation and respect in which he was held by his bar, notwithstanding the rebukes sometimes administered, they paid him the unusual compliment of attending in a body- his introduction as a peer into the House of Lords. As a member of that house he carefuUy avoided all party politics, but -with high Tory principles opposed any attempted in novation on the constitution. He spoke against the repeal of the Test and Corpora tion Acts, the P>oman Catholic Relief BiU, and the several biUs for refoim in paiUa- ment, as daugerous speculations and not likely to produce the benefits which their ad vocates prophesied. In his own department he introduced and carried several useful measures, and to his care and diligence the legal profession is mainly indebted for the statutes 9 Geo. IV. c. 14 and 15, for the limitation of actions, and for the prevention of a failure of j ustice by reason of a variance ABEL between records and -writings produced in evidence ; and also for the statutes 2 and 3 WUl. IV. c. 39, for uniformity of process. It is pleasing to find that the relaxations of a mind so overburdened -with the labours of a judicial life should be in botanical researches and in literary pursuits. The union of these in him produced some elegant Latin verses of great classical merit, in the composition of which he amused the little intervals of leisure during the latter portion of his life ; as in his earlier years he had penned some graceful English trifles. His was a ti-uly domestic home. His -wife survived him only six weeks. Of his four children, John Henry, the eldest son, is the present peer. (Townsend's Twelve Judges, ii. 234; Jardine's Life, in Biog. Diet,, Soc. Useful Know!) ABE!, John, was not improbably the son or grandson of a goldsmith named Richard Abel, who, in 27 Henry IH., was appointed maker and cutter of the dies for the king's mint (Madox, ii. 88.), as the whole of John's property was situated in the neighbourhood of London. He was engaged in the king's service in 28 Edward I. (Abh. Hot. Orig. i. 112), and two years afterwards we find him seneschal of the queen and custos of her lands. (Rot. Pari. i. 146-206.) Both he and his wife were summoned to the coronation of Edward II. among those selected from the county of Kent. On March 8, 1312, he was constituted one of the barons of the Exchequer, and in the next year he received the office of king's escheator, the duties of which he performed, principally on the south of Trent, for three years. (Abb. Rot. Orig. i. 195-216.) During that time he was employed to fix the taUage on the city of London and on the king's burghs, &c., in the home counties ; and was also directed to attend the council, with instructions to be in readiness to proceed on the king's service beyond the seas. It would appear that when he entered on the functions of escheator he resigned his seat in the Exchequer, for he was re appointed a baron on May 4, 1315 ; and was probably again removed in 14 Edward IL, as he was not summoned to parUament beyond that year, and because a new baron was then nominated. He died in 16 Edward IL, possessed, among others, of large estates at Footscray and Lewisham in Kent, at Rochford in Essex, and at Camber- well in Surrey, besides the manor of Da- dyngton in Oxfordshire, about which there was afterwards a suit in parliament between his three daughters by his wife Margery, and their husbands, and the Earl of Norfolk, who claimed it by a subsequent grant from Edward III. (Pari Writs, ii. 421 ; C'al Inquis. p. m. i. 303; Rot. Pari. ii. .391.) ABINGEE, LoED. See J. SciELEll. ABNEY 3 [ ABKET, Thomas. The Abneys were ori- i ginally seated, almost from the time of the Conquest, at a village of that name in Derbyshire. They afterwards settled at Willesley in the same county; and the judge was the son of Sir Edward Abney, LL.D., of that place, an eminent civilian and M.P. for Leicester in 1690 and 1695, and the nephew of Sir Thomas Abney the famous lord mayor of London in 1701, -whose virtues are celebrated in an elegy by Dr. Isaac Watts. (Funeral Sermon, by Jer. Smith, 1722.) His mother was Judith, daughter and co-heir of Peter Barr, a London merchant. He entered himself at the Inner Temple in 1697, put on his bar gown in 1713, and was made a bencher iu 1733. Being placed on the commission of the peace for Middlesex, he was chosen for the chairman of the quarter sessions at Hicks's Hall, in February 1731. In 1733 he was one of the commissioners to enquire into the fees, &c., of the officers of the Ex chequer ; and in the same year he was ap pointed attorney-general for the duchy of Lancaster, with the grade of king's counsel. From this he was advanced in December 1735 to be judge of the Palace Court and steward of the Marshalsea, and was then knighted. At the same time he was in full practice, and among the causes in which he distinguished himself was that of Moore v. The Corporation of Hastings, in which he established the right of the eldest son of a freeman to be admitted a freeman of the borough. (Strange, 1070 ; State Trials, x-vii. 845.) His elevation to the bench of Westminster was not long delayed, being made a baron of the Exchequer in November 1740. In little more than two years he was removed, in February 1743, to the Common Pleas. There he sat for the rest of his life, which was terminated by one of those afflicting -visitations, too commonly occasioned by the infamous manner in which the common gaols were then conducted, and the confined construction of the criminal courts. The Black Sessions at the Old Bailey in Ma}- 1750 will be long remembered. An un usually large number of prisoners were arraigned, all most uncleanly, and some suf fering from the gaol distemper; and a great concourse of spectators were crowded in the narrow court to hear the trial of Captain Clarke for kiUing Captain Innes in a duel. These, added to the filthy state of the rooms in connection -with the court, so tainted the air that many of those assembled were struck with fever, of whom no less than forty died. Of the judges in the com mission only the chief justice (Lee) and the recorder (Adams) escaped. Those who fell a sacrifice to the pestilence were Mr. Justice Abney, Jlr. Baron Clarke, Sir 4 ABRINCIS Samuel Pennant, lord mayor, and Alderman Sir Daniel Lambert ; besides several of the counsel and jurymen. ' Sir Michael Foster, who in his report of the Trial of the Rebels (p. 75), after desig nating Sir Thomas Abney as ' a very worthy man, learned in his profession, and of great integrity,' proceeds thus : — ' He was through an openness of temper, or a pride of virtue habitual to him, incapable of recommending himself to that kind of low assiduous craft, by which we ha-ve known some unworthy men make their way to the favour of the great. . . . _ • In his judicial capacity he constantly paid a religious regard to' the merits of the question in the light the case appeared to him; and his judgment very seldom mis led him. In short, when he died the world lost a very valuable man, his majesty an excellent subject, and the public a faithful able servant.' He married Frances, daughter of Joshua Burton, of Brackley in Northamptonshire, and left a son, Thomas, whose only daugh ter married General Sir Charles Hastings, Bart. Their descendants have assumed the name of Abney in addition to their own, and possess Willesley Hall, the judge's seat. Another branch of the Abney family is seated at Measham Hall in the same countv. ABEINCIS, or AVERENCHES, Wil liam DE, is one of the twelve barons inserted in Dugdale's ' Chronica Series ' as justices itinerant in 1170 for the counties of Kent, Surrey, Middlesex, Berks, Oxford, Buckingham, and Bedford. These barons, however, cannot be properly so considered ; they seem, in fact, only commissioners ap pointed to enquire into the abuses of sherifi's, bailiffs, and other officers. He was the grandson of a Norman noble of the same name ; and the son of Roe- landus de Abrincis, a valiant soldier under Henry I., hy his wife Maud, the daughter and heir of Nigel de Monville, or Mundevil, who brought him the lordship of Folke- . stone in Kent, with all the lands and honours she inherited from her mother, Emma, the daughter of William de Arqnes. According to the manner of the time, he devoted part of his propertv to religious purposes. In 1147 he ratified his mother's grant of the lordship of Si-welle in North amptonshire, to the abbej"- of St. Andrew in Northampton : and he gave to the church of Our Lady of Merton two sheaves of his whole lordship, with the tithes of his mill, paunage, cheese, calves, colts, lambs, apples, and nuts, in pure almes. To the monks of Essay, in Normandy, he also gave the fourth part of the church of St. Saviour, with the tithe of the chapelry of his own house, and other benefactions. He died before 2 Richard 1, his son ACLE Simon being then in possession of the es tates. The male branch of the family terminated a littie before the year 1235, by the death of another William de A.brincis without issue. His sister became his heir, and married Hamon Crevequer, lord of Leeds Castie, in Kent. (Dugdale's Ba- ronaqe. i. 467; Mvnast. v. 190.) ABYNDON, RiOHAED de, held the im portant office of chamberlain of North Wales from the 12th to the 18th Edward I., his duty being the collection and disburse ment of the royal revenues in that newly subjugated country. (Archceol. Journ. vii. 239.) He had no doubt been previously connected with the Exchequer in England, where, rising bv degrees, he was, on Octo ber 17, 1299, 27 Edward I., constituted one' of the barons of that court, and kept his place there during the rest of that king's life. In 37 Edward I. he and another were appointed custodes of the vacant bishopric of Ely. Though at the commencement of the next reign he was not immediately re-sworn a baron, his name being omitted in the patent of September, 1307 on Ja nuary 30, 1308, he had a special patent constituting him a baron, ' ita quod in eo- dem Scaccario habuit eundem locum quem habuit tempore Domini Edwardi quondam regis Anglise, patris regis nunc' A salaiy I of forty marks was attached to his office, ; in which he continued to act for the next ten j'ears. (Abbrev. Rot. Ong. i. 120; Madox, ii. 57, 59. 325.) There is a com plaint against WiUiam Randolf in 9 Edw. II. for insulting and imprisoning him and three others, justices who were assigned to hear and determine certain matters in the city of Bristol. (Hot. Pari i. 130.) The next year his powers failed him ; and John de Okham was appointed his successor by a patent of 10 Edw. IL, dated June 18, 1317, in which his infirmity is thus de scribed : ' quia dilectus clericus noster Ricardus de Abyndon, unus barouum nos- troruni de Scaccario, adeo impotens sui existit, quod ea quae ad officium illud perti nent non potest commode exercere.' He certified in 9 Edw. II. as lord of the town ship of Horton in Gloucestershire. (Pari. Writs, ii. div. ii. 114, 361.) ACHABD, William, possessed property in Berkshire, which was granted to his ancestor by King Henry I. Although he acted in 9 "Richard I., 1197-8, as one of the justices itinerant in fixing the taUage for ¦that county, he does not again appear in a judicial character, nor is he mentioned as an officer of the com-t. (Madox, i. 6^- 705.) ' ACLE, Reginald de, having been con stable of Marlborouffh Castle in 38 Henry III., became sheriff of Gloucester in the 50th, and so continued till the 56th year, when he was aUowed to account by at- ADAMS *omey. In 2 Edward I. he was directed to *ake that office into the king's hands, and commit it to a trusty person ; and to ^o to the Exchequer to receive the king's com mands thereon from the barons. (Abbrev. Rot. Orig. i. 12 ; Mado.v, ii. 08, 181.) It was no doubt as sheriff that he was added to the list of justices itinerant in 53 Henry HI., 1268. In the same year he was custos of the bishopric of Hereford. {E.vcerpt. e Rot. Fin. ii. 484.) ASAKS, RiCHAED, was the son and heir of a gentleman of the same name re siding at Shrewsbury. He was born in 1710, and was called to the bar of the Inner Temple in February 1733. He practised as a common pleader of the city of London, imtil elected its recorder on January 17, 1748. He obtained this honourable post after a severe contest, in which he was only successful by the casting vote of the lord mayor. During the time he held it he was knighted ; and on February 3, 1753, he was promoted to the bench of the Exchequer. Miss Hawkins, in the second volume of her Memoirs, relates that he owed his elevation to the king's admiration of him in his cha racter of recorder. The ministers not agree ing on the person who should succeed Mr. Baron Clive, George II. put an end to the discussion by calling out in his usual English, 'I vill have none of dese ; give me de man wid de dying speech,' meaning the recorder, whose duty it was to make the report of the convicts under sentence of death. After a judicial service of twenty years, he died on March 15, 177-3, at Bedford, while on the circuit, of the gaol distemper, caught a fortnight before at the Old Bailey. In Lord Chief Justice Wilmot's Common place Book (Life, 199) his death is thus recorded: — 'He was a very good lawyer and an excellent judge, having every quality necessary to dignify the character. I never saw him out of temper in my life, and I have known him intimately for forty years.' ALAN was made abbot of Tewkesbury on June 16, 1187, having been previously a monk and then prior of the Benedictine Monastery of St. Saviour of Canterbury. In 1 John he fixed the tallage in Berkshire, and in the same year he is named as one of the justiciers before whom fines were levied. (Madox, i. 722.) He was a learned and a pious man, and greatly beloved by Arch bishop Becket, to John of Salisbury's Life of whom he added a supplement. He -wi-ote some other works, and died in 1202. (B. Willis's Mitred Abbeys; Biog. Lit. ii. S65.) ALAND, John Foetescue (Loed Foe- tescue), was the grandson of Hugh For- tescue, the seventh in lineal descent from the iUustrious chief justice of Heiiry '^T. ALAND 5 His second son, Arthur, was the grandfather of the first Lord Fortescue, of Castle Hill, to which the earldom now enjoyed by his successors was added in 1789. Hugh's third son, Edmond, by his marriage -with Sarah, daughter of Henry Aland, Esq., of Water- ford, whose name he added to his o-wn, was the judge's father. He was born on March 7, 1670. Oxford has been supposed to be the place of his education, as he received from that univer sity the honorary degree of doctor of civil law on May 4, 1733. But the language of that diploma leads to a different conclusion, and no trace is to be found of him in the register of matriculations. In 1688 he became a member of the Middle Temple, but afterwards removed to the Inner Tem ple ; and having been called to the bar in 1712, arrived at the post of reader in 1716. In October 1714, immediately after the arrival of George I., he was appointed solicitor-general to the Prince of Wales (afterwards George II.) , from which he was promoted in December of the following year to be solicitor-general to the king. He was chosen member for Midhurst in the first parliament of George I., but only sat during its first session, being raised to the bench of the Exchequer on January 24, 1717, when he was knighted. He occupied that seat for little more than a year ; and one of his last duties as a baron was to give his opinion respecting the education and marriage of the royal family, his argument on which is fully reported by himself, and, though he had been one of the law officers of the Prince of Wale.s, was decidedly in favour of the prerogative of the crown. On May 15, 1713, he was removed to the King's Bench, and sat in that court till the death of George I. in June, 1727 ; but George II. about the middle of September, perhaps on account of the above opinion against his claim, superseded him. (State Trials, XV. 975, xvi. 1206; Strange, 86; Lord Raymond, 1510.) After fifteen months' retirement, he was restored to. favour, and placed in the Com mon Pleas on January 27, 1729. There he continued for above seventeen years, when, warned by his age and infirmities, he re signed in June 1746. So long before as 1741 he had petitioned for leave to retire with a pension, accompanied by the incon sistent request that a seat in the House of Commons might be obtained for him. When at last permitted to resign, after a service in all the three courts extending to twenty-eight years, his senatorial ambition was gratified by the grant of a barony in the Irish peerage in August 1746. His title was Lord Fortescue of Credan in the county of Waterford ; but he enjoyed it for little more than four months, dying on December 19, 174(i. 6 ALBEMARLE In addition to his legal reputation, he had the character of being well versed in Norman and Saxon Uterature. This he fully maintained in the introductory re marks to his edition of the treatise of his illustrious ancestor Sir John Fortescue, en titled ' The Difference between an Absolute and LimitedMonarchy,' which he published in 1714, being then a li'ellow of the Royal Society. His Law Reports of Select Cases were prepared for publication before his death, but not printed tUl 1748. _ Of his manner on the bench the following illus tration in Bentley's case may serve as an example. ' The laws of God and man,' he said, 'both give the party an opportunity to make his defence if he has any. I re member to have heard it observed by a very learned man, that even God Himself did not pass sentence upon Adam, before he was called upon to make his defence. Adam (says God), where art thou ? Hast thou not eaten of the tree whereof I com manded thee that thou shouldest not eat ? And the same question was put to Eve also.' Of his appearance the ' Conveyan cer's Guide ' (p. 107) gives this description : ' The baron had one of the strangest noses ever seen: its shape resembled much the trunk of an elephant. "Brother, brother," said the baron to the counsel, "you are handling the cause in a very lame manner." " Oh ! no, my lord," was the reply ; " have patience with me, and I'll make it as plain as the nose in your lordship's face." ' Lord Fortescue's first wife was Grace, daughter of Chief Justice Pratt, by whom he had two sons, who died unmarried in their father's lifetime. His second -wife was Elizabeth, daughter of Mr. Justice Dormer, by whom he left a son, his suc cessor in his title and estates, one of which was Lamborn Hall in Essex ; on whose death in 1781 without issue the peerage expired. ALBEMARLE, Eael or. See W. DE Mandevil. ALBINI-BEITO, William de. Two persons named William de Albini lived at this time. One, called Pincerna, whose romantic adventures with Adelaide, Queen Dowager of France, are related by Dugdale in his ' Baronage,' married Adeliza, the widow of King Henry I. The other was surnamed Brito, probably in order to dis tinguish him from his celebrated contem porary. He was the son of Robert de Todeui, the standard-bearer of William the Con queror, who participated largely in the rich rewards distributed by his master, and founded Belvoir Castle, in Leicestershire, as his chief seat. He died iu 1088, and by his wife Adela left four sons ; the eldest of whom, this William, assumed the name of Albini, in consequence, it is believed, of ALBINI his having been bom in the parish of that name in Normandy. . Iu the town of Sawbridgeworth in Hert fordshire, which belonged to_ him, he exercised almost royal power, if we may judge from his charter or writ commanding his vassals there, that if any plaint or quarrel arose among the monks of that church, it should be stayed tiU it could be brought before him. (Madox, \. 120.) He greatly distinguished himself, in 1106, at the battle of Tenchebrai, and afterwards appears to have been high in Eang Henry's favour. The county of Rutland was placed under his care as sheriff, or fermour ; and the custody of the extensive lands of Otuer Fitz-Count was entrusted to him. He was also one of the councU of the king, attended him in his movements, and was a witness, immediately after Hugh Bigot, and before Richard Basset, to the charter by which Henry, in 11.34, granted the office of Great Chamber lain to Alberic de Vere and his heirs. (Madox, i. 56, 297, 327.) When circuits were established by King Henry for the dispensation of justice throughout the kingdom, he was naturally selected to act in the county where his largest possessions were situate. The great roll of 31 Henry I. gives evidence of his holding pleas in Lincolnshire, and also as justice of the forest in Essex. From this roll it appears that he was excused from the payment of Danegeld in seven counties in wliich he had property; an exemption he enjoyed in common -with aU those who were employed in the ad ministration of justice. Adhering, under the reign of Stephen, to the fortunes of the Empress Maude, he was for a time deprived of his extensive estates ; but they were afterwards restored to him. His name appears as a -witness to this king's charter granting the burgh of Hereford to Robert, Earl of Leicester. (Madox, ii. 139.) He died about 1185, 2 Henry IL, leaving by his -wife Maud, daughter of Simon de Liz, Earl of Huntingdon, and widow of Robert, son of Richard de Tonbridge, two sons, William and Ralph. 1. William, who was surnamed Mes- chines, had a sou, also William, subse quently mentioned as a justice itinerant. 2. Ralph, whose descendants called themselves Daubeney, by which name they were summoned to parliament. In 1538, Baron Daubeney was created Earl of Bridgewater, but both titles became ex tinct on his death, -without issue, in 1648. (Mag. Rot. 31 Henry I. ; Dugdale's Baron. i. Ill; Collins's Peerage, i. 462, vi. 484 ix. 451.) ' ALBINI, William de, was the third Earl of Arundel, being grandson of William ALBINI de Albini, surnamed ' with the strong hand,' who obtained the earldom by his marriage with Queen AdeUza, the widow of Henry I., to whom the castle of Arundel had been assigned in dower. His father died in 1196, when he paid 100?. for the relief of his lands in Norfolk. With King John he was in high favour, receiving many grants from him ; and his almost constant attendance at the court is shown by the fact, that iu every year of the reign, except the last, he was a witness to charters or other royal documents. In the earlier contests with the barons, he adhered to the king, and was present, as one of his friends, at Runnymede. Dis gusted at last with the tyranny and bad faith of his sovereign, he joined Prince Louis of France on his arrival in England. His lands were immediately ravaged by the royal army, and his whole possessions seized fey the crown ; but they were restored to him after the death of King John, on his returning to his allegiance in the following July. (Rot. Claus. i. 314.) His entire restoration to the goodwiU of the king, or rather of the protector of the kingdom, is shown by several entries on the rolls, and particularly by his acting as a justicier in 2 Henry III., in which year a fine was levied before him at Westminster. Roger de Wendover relates that in the same year, 1218, he proceeded to the Holy Land, and was at the siege of Damietta ; and Matthew Paris adds that, in 1221, he died abroad, as he was returning from the prisoned in the Tower, he says to the duke, 'I have been .... the justest chancellor that hath been in the five changes since my father's time.' When writing also to Buckingham of his poverty, he says, 'I never took penny for any benefice or eccle siastical living; I never took penny for realising anything stopped at the Seal; I never took penny for any commission, or things of that nature.' (xii. 466, 490.) The conviction of Wraynham, prosecuted in the Star Chamber for slandering Bacon, who had pronounced a decree against him in favour of his opponent Sir Edward Fisher, woidd, on the statement of the case, appear to be just, but for the subsequent discovery that the chancellor had shortly afterwards received from Fisher a suit of hangings worth about 160/. (State Trials, U. 1059, 1107.) The biographers of Bacon have been puzzled how to give to his personal cha racter the praise that he merited for his literary attainments and productions. By the former he must be judged of as the man, by the latter as the phUosopher ; and who but must regret that there is so much of contrast between them ? who but must feel that the system of the one was iu direct contradiction to the acts of the other? Bacon as a lawyer, a politician, and a man seems to be of a totaUy distinct nature fi-om Bacon as a writer and propounder of everlasting truths. Considering him solely in the former -view, taking by themselves the incidents of his Ufe and the evidences of his character, as interpreted by his own letters, it seems impossible that .nny bio grapher can venture to pronounce a eulogy upon him. Are there grounds for it in his ardent desUe for place, betrayed through every phase of his career ? in his perti nacious and degrading applications for patronage ? in his depreciation of his rivals ? in his adulation of his sovereign ? in his flattery of the favourite? in his double ingratitude to Essex, in pleading against his life and in blackening his memory p in his envy of Coke, and his underhand proceedings against him ? in his attacks on the independence of the judges ? in his encouragement of the de spotic principles of James ? in his accept ance, however extenuated, of the bribes which he acknowledged? in the indiffer ence to shame which he exhibited in his disgrace p or in the unblushing attempts which he made to regain his ascendency ? Would not these, if he had been a common man and vmdistinguished as a -wiiter, have been visited -with the contempt and indig nation they merited ? And how does his BACON' position as an author alter the feeling thus forcibly impressed ? Must it not be more deeply imprinted by the conviction that he was acting contrary to his principles, that he had not the moral courage to withstand any temptation, and that- in every act of his life he was pursuing a course which his conscience condemned P There is scarcely a fault of which he has been guilty against which he has not written strongly and truly ; and he stigmatises the vices to which he is subject at the very time he is committing them. To himself may be applied the close of his twenty-third essay, ' On the Wisdom for a Man's self : '— ' Wis dom for a man's self is, in many branches thereof, a depraved thing. It is the wis dom of rats, that wiU be sure to leave a house somewhat before it falls. It is the wisdom of the fox, that thrusts out the badger who digged and made room for him-. It is the wisdom of crocodiles, that shed tears when they would devour. But that which is specially to be noted is, that those which (as Cicero says of Pompey) are "sui amantes, sine rivali," are many times unfortunate ; and whereas they have all their times sacrificed to themselves, they become in the end themselves sacrifices to the inconstancy of fortune, whose wings they thought, by their self-wisdom, to have pinioned.' BACON, Feancis, owed his origin to the same root from which the four preced ing judges sprang, being of that branch of the family which settled at Hesset in Suffolk. His great grandparents are stated to be Thomas Bacon, of that place, and Anne Rowse, and his father was John Bacon, of King's Lynn in Norfolk, gentle man. He was born about 1687, and commenc ing his legal studies at Barnard's Inn, he pursued them at Gray's Inn, where he was admitted a member in February 1607, called to the bar in 1616, and became reader in autumn 1634. His name does not appear in any of the contemporary reports ; his practice probably being in Chancery or the provinces. In 1636 he had a grant in reversion of the office of drawing licences and pardons of alienations to the Great Seal. (Rymer, XX. 123.) In May 1640 he was included in the batch of Serjeants then called ; and on October 14, 1642, he received the then dangerous promotion to a seat in the King's Bench, his patent being dated at Bridge- north (Ibid. 641), on the king's march towards London, when he -was knighted. That the new judge was not obnoxious to the parliament may be inferred from their request in the propositions made to the king, in February 1643, that he might be continued in his place. He does not appear to have joined the king at Oxford, BAINBRICGE 49 but he attended his duty iu his court at Westminster Hall, where, in Michaelmas Term 1643, he was the only judge sitting (Clarendon, in. 407, iv. 342) ; and on the trial of Lord Macguire for high treason, as the fomenter of the great rebeUion and horrible massacre in Ireland in 1641, before that court in Hilary Term 1646, he alone appears to have been present. (State Trials, iv, 666.) He is next mentioned in Sep tember 1647 as having, with Serieant CresweU or Cresheld, committed James Symbal and others for speaking words against the king, with whom negotiations were proceeding. He continued to act till the king was beheaded, when he had the courage to refuse the new commission offered him by the Commons. ( Whiteloeke, 269, 378.) He spent the remainder of his days in privacy, and died on August 22, 16.57. By his wife Elizabeth, daughter of "William Robinson, he had several children. His eldest son, Francis (who was a reader in Gray's Inn in autumn 1662), raised a hand some monument over his grave in St. Gregory's Church, Norwich. BAINBEIDGE, Cheistophee (Arch bishop OF Yoek), sprang from an ancient family seated at Hilton, near Appleby, in Westmoreland, where he was born. Edu cated at Queen's College, Oxford, he took his degree in laws, and having been admitted at the same time into holy orders, he ob tained early preferment in the Church. This he probably owed to the patronage of Arch bishop Morton, his intimate friend, -with whom he had suffered under Richard IIL He became almoner of Henry VII., and was rector of Aller, in the diocese of Bath and Wells. In 1485 he received a canonry, first in Salisbury and afterwards in York. In 1495 he was elected provost of his college, to which he was a liberal benefactor. In 1497 he was presented to the treasurership of St. Paul's ; in 1600 to the archdeaconry of Surrey; and on December 9, 1603, to the deanery of York. He held the latter dignity when he succeeded William Barons as master of the Rolls, on November 13, 1504 ; and on February 18 in the foUo-wing year he was made Dean of Windsor. (Le Neve.) He resigned his judicial office on his being preferred to the bishopric of Durham, the temporalities of which were granted to him on November 17, 1607. Scarcely thirteen months had elapsed ere he was translated to the archbishopric of York, receiving the temporalities of that province, which had been in the king's hands for above a year, on December 12, 1508. It was probably in preparation for this removal that he obtained on November 11 a char ter of general pardon (Rymer, xiu. 171, 233, 2-36) ; a caution rendered pecidiarly E 50 BALDOCK expedient in times when the extortions of informers were almost openly encouraged. King Henry VIII., soon after his acces sion, deeming it politic to have a represen tative at the Roman court, Archbishop Bainbridge was selected for this honourable post ; and his patent, with full powers as procurator of the king, was dated on Sep tember 24, 1509. (lUd. 264.) How much of his future life he spent at Rome does not precisely appear; but while there he so negotiated in the war against the King of France as to please both his sovereign and the pope, from the latter of whom he re ceived the reward of a cardinal's hat in March 1611, with the titie of St. Praxedis. But, not exercising in his own family the prudence which he exhibited in diplomacy, he is said to have fallen a sacrifice to the violence of his temper. Having, in a fit of passion, given a blow to Rinaldo de Modena, a priest in his household, the malicious Italian, according to this account, avenged the insult by poisoning his master. The letters, however, of William Burbank and Richard Pace, the cardinal's secretaries, give a very different complexion to the transaction. They mention nothing about the blow, but state that the priest, in his first confession, acknowledged he was in stigated by the Bishop of Worcester, Sil vester de Giglis, the cardinal's known enemy, who gave him fifteen ducats of gold, and that, though he was afterwards induced to deny the bishop's compUcityin the murder, the doctors and learned men to whom the case was referred would not admit the con tradiction. Richard Pace (afterwards prin cipal secretary of state) seems to have had some difficulty in saving the bishop, ' having respect unto him as your grace's orator,' from the execution of the judge's determi nation that he ' should not only be put in prison, but also suffer torments and be com pelled to show the truth.' The poison was administered at Spoleto ; and the cardinal's death took place on July 14, 1614. It was announced to the king in a letter, dated the same day, from the Cardinal de' Medici, afterwards Pope Clement VII.; and it is added in another letter that the priest ' smote himself with a small knyff,' and died twelve days afterwards. (Rymer, xiii. 404 ; Ellis's Letters, First Series, i. 100-108.) The archbishop was buried in the cloister of the church of S. Tommaso degli Inglesi at Rome, under a tine monument, stUl to be seen, with a full-length recumbent figure of his handsome person. He bequeathed 20,000 golden ducats towards the buildinn- of St. Peter's. ' (Four Years at the Court of Henry VIII. li. 146 ; Surtees'. Durham i. Ixiv; Gwinod,6m, 753, 796; Ath. 0.ton' ii. 702.) BAIDOCK, Ralph de (Bishop oe London),, was collated Archdeacon of Mid- BALDOCK dlesex in 1276, 4 Edward I., from which he was raised, on October 18, 1294, to the deanery of St. Paul's, and was elected Bishop of London, February 24, 1304 ; but; owing to some dispute, his consecration was delayed tiU January 30, 1306. (Le Neve.) He received the Great Seal as chanceUor on April 21, 1307, from Edward I., who died on the 7th of the following July, at Burgh-on-the-Sands ; and there is a curious entry on the Fine Roll, showing that Ralph de Baldock, being then in London, and igno rant of that event having occurred, con tinued to seal writs of course till July 25th. On the following Saturday he received the new king's commands to send him the Great Seal, which was accordingly delivered to the king at Carlisle on August 2. (Rot. Fin. 35 Edw. I. m. 1.) In 3 Edward II. he was appointed one of the ordainers for the management of the affairs of government and the king's house hold. He commenced the erection of the chapel of St. Mary in his cathedral, and bequeathed a sum sufficient for its completion. He died at Stepney, on July 24, 1813, and was buried in that chapel. He left some works which proved his devotion to literature ; among which was one entitled ' Historia Angha, or a History of British Affairs down to his own Time.' He also made ' A CoUection of the Statutes and Constitutions of the Church of St. Paul's.' BALDOCK, Robert de, was probably in some way related to the last named, Ralph de Baldock. The earUest notice found of his history is a grant to him, in 15 Ed ward I., of all the king's right in the knights' fees, which Roger de Clifford held con jointly with .Tohn de Crombwell and Idonea his wife, and also of the manor of Shalford in Surrey, lately belonging to Roger, who was attainted. (Cal Rot. Pat. 91.) The next entry, however, is of a different cha racter, being a fine of twenty marks im posed upon him in Durham, in 1306, for some unadvised obedience to a papal precept ¦without notice given to the king and his council, the Archdeacon of Cleveland being at the same time fined 100/. for the same offence. (Abb. Placit. 258.) It may be presumed, therefore, that Master Robert de Baldock (as he is always called) then held some ecclesiastical benefice in the north. In 1314, 8 Edward II., he became Arch deacon of Middlesex (Le Nei'e), a dig-nity which Ralph de Baldock had held twenty years before. Probably at that time, and certainly two years afterwards, he fiUed some office about the court, as from Fe bruary 1317 he was regularly summoned to the council and parliaments among the judges and other legal personages. In June 1320 he was keeper of the king's Privy Seal, and in the foUowing yeai- was sent by BALDOCK the king and council, with other solemn envoys, to treat for a peace with the Scots at Bamborough ; for his expenses in which mission he was aUowed the sum of 60/. in the wardrobe accounts. (Archeeologia, xxvi. 334.) The Despencers, father and son, were then in the height of their ascendency ; and, by his connection with their councils, he shared in the aversion with which they were regarded by the nobles and the people. He was at last raised to the chancellor ship on August 20, 1323, 17 Edward IL, but had little cause to rejoice in his advance ment. Though the defeat and executi6n of the Duke of Lancaster had produced a tem porary quiet, within a few months after he had received the Seal a conspiracy by Roger Mortimer and others was discovered, or in vented, the object of which was the murder of Baldock and the royal favourite. Though he escaped from this danger, he could not but experience many misgivings as to the results that were likely to follow from the arrogant indiscretions of Despencer. He was elected to the bishopric of Nor wich on July 28, 1325 ; but a rumour having reached him that the pope had reserved the presentation for himself, he renounced the election on September 8, an act which speaks well for his moderation, and his anxiety to prevent a colUsion be tween his sovereign and the papal court. Baldock's concurrence in the advice which prompted Edward to faU into the trap laid by the French king, by which Queen IsabeUa was permitted to proceed to France, and the weak king was induced to give up Guienne and Ponthieu to his son, and to send the latter to do homage for them, is conclusive evidence that he cannot be considered a wise counsellor ; for though perhaps the plan had not yet been formed that led to results so fatal to his sovereign and himself, there were sufficient indications of danger at home, and of treachery in the conduct of Charles ie Bel, to have induced more cautious proceedings. The invasion of Queen Isabella quickly followed. She landed on September 24, 1326 ; and the king, deserted by almost all parties, fled to Wales with the chancellor and the two Despencers. The elder of these was taken and executed at Bristol, and on November 10 the' king and his two remaining companions fell into the hands of the queen's friends. The fate of the fa vourite was soon sealed, and that of the king was delayed till a resignation of his crown had been forced from him. Baldock had been specially denounced in the queen's first proclamation (State Trials, i. 85) ; but, being an ecclesiastic, was committed to the custody of Adam de Orleton, Bishop of Hereford, He remained at Hereford till February foUowing, when he was removed to the bishop's house in London. His BALDOCK 51 prison there was soon invaded by an out rageous mob, who treated him with vio lence, and thrust him into Newgate, where after languishing about three months, he died, on May 28, 1327. All his possessions had been previously seized, and among them were the manors of Heibrigge g,nd Tylingham in Essex. (Abb. Rot. Oria, i. 304.) ^ As he was never brought to trial, the precise charges against him do not appear ; but in the mandates from the queen and prince, both before and after his capture and death, his name is always united with those of the Despencers, ascribing to them the guilt of estranging the king from his wife and real friends by false suggestions and evil procurement, and designating theni as ' enemies of God, of the Church, and the whole kingdom.' Remembering, however, how great was the inveteracy between the contending parties, and how Uttle there is to approve iu the conduct of that which was successful, we must hesitate before we join in the popular cry against the chan cellor without more substantial proof of his demerits. (ParL Writs, ii. p. u. 472 ; Abb. Rot. Orig. i. 303.) BALDOCK, Robert, son and heir of Samuel Baldock, of Stanway iu Essex, bore the same arms as those of the last- named, Robert de Baldock, Bishop of Nor wich. He became a student at Gray's Inn on July 7, 1644, was called to the bar on February 11, 1651, and arrived at the de gree of ancient in May 1667. By his first marriage, with Mary the daughter of Bacqueville Bacon (of the family of Red grave), he became settled at Great Hooham in Norfolk. This lady died in 1662, after which he took a second wife, whose name has not been handed down. Of his early legal career there is no other record than that of Roger North (233), who says of him that he ' had wit and will enough ' to contrive a fraudulent conveyance. In 1671 he was recorder of Great Yarmouth when Charles II. visited that place, on which occasion he was knighted. He took the degree of serjeant in Michaelmas Term 1677, and was included in the list of king's Serjeants on the accession of James II. He was one of the counsel employed by the crown in the prosecution of the seven bishops ; and showed himself so thorough paced a stickler for prerogative that within a week after the trial he was appointed, on July 6, 1688, a justice of the King's Bench, in the place of Sir John Powell, who had , declared his opinion in favour of the pre lates (Brampton's Autobiog. 311) ; but he had very little opportunity of showing his judicial qualifications, for before the next term the Prince of Orange had embarked for England, and the king was on the point of dying from it. e2 52 BALD'WIN In the new appointments he of course was not thought of. He died three years afterwards, on October 4, 1691, and his monument still remains in the church of Great Hocham. BALD'WIN, John, was the son of William Baldwin, and Agnes the daughter of "WUUam Dormer, Esq., of Wycombe in Buckinghamshire, the ancestor of Lord Dormer. At the Inner Temple, where he studied the law, he attained so high a reputation that he received the uncommon distinction of being thrice appointed reader — in autumn 1616, in Lent 1524, and in autumn 1531. The last occasion was on account of his having been called upon to take the degree of the coif, which he accordingly assumed in the following November, when he was immediately con stituted one of the king's Serjeants. In 1530 he held the office of treasurer of his inn. He probably practised in the Court of Chancery, as he was one of the persons assigned in June 1529 to aid Cardinal Wolsey in hearing causes there. He and Serjeant Willoughby were knighted in 1584, being the first Serjeants, as is noticed in Spelman's MS. Reports, who ever sub mitted to receive that honour. In 1536 he was elevated to the chief justiceship of the Common Pleas. Within a few weeks he was called upon to act as a commissioner on the trials of Sir Thomas More and Bishop Fisher, in which, however, he does not appear to have taken any active part. He continued chief justice for ten years, resigning between Trinity Term 1545, the date of the last fine levied before him, and November 6. He died on December 22 following. Notwithstanding his early promise, he does not seem to have been much esteemed as a judge. He differed frequently from his brethren, and was certainly thought little of by Chief Justice Dyer, who on one occasion says in his Reports, ' But Bald-win was of a contrary opinion, though neither I, nor any one else, I beUeve, un derstood his refutation.' He possessed the manor of Aylesbury iu Bucks, and in the last year of his Ufe he obtained some valuable gTants from the king. All his property, for want of male heirs, was divided among his daughters, one of whom, Catherine, was married to Robert Pakington, M.P. for London (as sassinated in the streets in 1536), who was ancestor of the baronets of that name, of Aylesbury, whose title became extinct in 1830. BANASTER, Thomas, described as a ' clericus,' was constituted a baron of the Exchequer on November 4, 1423, 2 Henry VI. (Acts Privy Council, iii. 121); but his name nowhere else appears. BANKS BANASTRE, Alaed, was sheriff of Ox fordshire in 20 & 21 Henry IL, 1174-5 ; and in the former of those years his name is found as one of the justices itinerant fixino- the assize for that county. But, in reference to the ordinary proceedings of the court, he is never mentioned ; nor in deed is any other information given con cerning him. In the four previous years that sheriffalty was held by Adam Banastre, probably his father. (Fuller's Worthies; Madox, i. 124.) BANISTEE, William, was of a family which resided at Turk Dean in the county of Gloucester, in possession of a very con siderable estate. He received his legal education at the Middle Temple, and being honoured with the degree of the coif in 1706, was then appointed one of the judges of South Wales ; from which positicm he was advanced, on the recommendation of Lord Harcourt, to be a baron of the Ex chequer, on June 8, 1713, when he was knighted. He occupied this seat for little more than a year, being superseded on October 14, 1714, not three months after the accession of George I., having been re ported by Lord Cowper as ' a man not at all qualified for the place.' (Atkyns's Glm- cestersh. 413 ; Lord Raymond, 1261, 1318.) BANES, Richaed. The barons of the Exchequer in the early reigns were of so little comparative importfince, generally rising to the bench from being clerks in that department, and not engaged in the general judicial business of the country, that Uttle information can be obtamed regarding them either from records or tradition. Of the legal career of Richard Baoke nothing is known, except that he was made a baron of the Exchequer on June 11, 1410, 11 Henry IV., and, con tinuing in his place to the end of that reign, was re-appointed in the next He and his wife Margaret, the daughter of William de la Rivere, were buried in the Priory of St. Bartholomew, London. (Stow, 419.) BANKE, Thomas, who was perhaps the son of the preceding, is another instance of the paucity of materials respecting the barons of the Exchequer of this age. The sole mention of Thomas Bauke is that he received that appointment on May 18, 1424, 2 Henry VI. (Acts of Privy Council, iii. 147.) BANKS, .Tohn, was of Keswick in Cum berland, where his father of the same name was a merchant, and his mother was Eliza beth, daughter of — Hassell. He was horn iu 1589, and in 1604 he entered Queen's College, Oxford. Without taking any de- gi-ee there, he became a student at Gray's Inn in May 1607, and, after being caUed to the bar on November 30, 1614, and to the bench of the society m 1629, he was elected BANKS reader in Lent 1631, and treasurer in the following year. He had previous to arriving at these posts acquired a high reputation in his profession. Returned to the parliament of 1628, he confined himself to legal questions (Pari. Hist. ii. 480), and was selected in July 1630 to be attorney-general to the newly born Prince Charles, Duke of Cornwall (Rymer, xix. 264), afterwards Charles IL, whereupon he was knighted. On the death of William Noy, he was appointed attorney- general to the king, on September 27, 1634, and it is some proof of the estimation in which he was held, that a contemporary letter-writer says, with somewhat of ex aggeration, that he was commended to his majesty as exceeding Bacon in eloquence, EUesmere in judgment, and Noy in law. (Corfe Castle, 54.) He had then a residence at Hanwell, near Staines, but soon after his advance he purchased the manor of Corfe Castle in Dorsetshire, of Sir Edward Coke's widow. Lady Hatton. Under his official direction the question able proceedings in the Star Chamber were taken againstBastwick, Burton, and Prynne, against Bishop Williams, and against John Lilbum ; and though he did not originate the plan for the imposition of ship money, he was employed in preparing and advising on the writs and to support them as the prosecutor against John Hampden. (State Trials, iii.) These duties he performed so satisfactorily to the court that upon the elevation of Sir Edward Lyttelton to the post of lord keeper, he received that of chief justice of the Common Pleas on January 29, 1641. (Rymer, xx. 447.) Very soon after his appointment a com mission was granted to him to sit as speaker in the House of Lords, in consequence of the illness of the lord keeper ; and in that cha racter he had the melancholy duty of pre siding when the Earl of Strafford, who had been his client, and -with whom he was in habits of friendly intimacy, was brought to the bar on his impeachment by the Com mons. (Corfe Castle, 83,) Early in the next year, on the king retiring to York, Banks was among the first to join him, when he was admitted into the privy council, and subscribed the profession made by the lords of their belief that the king had no intention to make war upon the parUament, but that his anxious desire was to preserve the peace of the kingdom. (Clarendon, iii. 72.) Notwithstanding the part which Sir John had formerly taken in the prosecution and in the case of ship money, and his present assistance to the royal counsels, he does not seem to have been an object of enmity to the parliament ; for in the propositions they made to the king for peace in February 1643 they desired that he should keep his BANKES- 53' place in the Common Pleas. (ParL Hist. iii. 70.) This recommendation he owed to his having friends in both houses, the Earls of Northumberland and Essex, the Lord Wharton, Denzil Holies, and Green, who were aware that Banks by his moderate counsels had hazarded the king's indigna tion. (Corfe Castle, 122-124.) Sir John's real devotion to the royal cause was proved by his liberal subscription to the king's necessities, and by his -wife's noble defence of Corfe Castle in 1648, and after his death again in 1646. The former good feeling of the parlia ment towards the chief justice was totaUy changed by his steady adherence to his royal master ; and their inveteracy against him was excited by his charge to the grand jury at SaUsbury in the summer assizes of 1643, denouncing the Earls of Northumberland, Pembroke, and SaUsbury, and several mem bers of the House of Commons, as guilty of high treason in taking up arms against the king. Though the bills were not found, he- was ordered to be impeached for his charge, an order which was repeated in the following year on the occasion of his condemning Captain Turpin to be hanged at Exeter. ( Whiteloeke, 78, 96.) Though by his ab sence he escaped the consequences of these votes, he paid the price of his loyalty by the forfeiture of all his property. Even hia books were seized and given by the par Uament to Mr. Maynard. Sir John did not live to see the destruc tion of his castle. He died at Oxford on December 28, 1644, and was buried in Christ Church Cathedral. Lord Clarendon describes him as ' a man of great abilities and unblemished integrity,' but at the same time intimates that he wanted courage to meet the exigencies of the time. AU agree that he was thoroughly versed in the learn ing of his profession, and his whole conduct shows that, though cautious and moderate, he was steady in his attachment to the crown. He made a settlement of 30/. a year, and other emoluments, on the poor of Kes-wick, and chiefly to set up a manufacture there of coarse cottons. (Ftdler, i. 237.) His wife, who was Mary, the daughter of Ralph Hawtrey, Esq., of RuisUp, Middle- sex,_by compounding got rid of the seques tration. By her he had a numerous family, whose descendants represented Corfe Castle as long as that borough returned members to parliament. BANKES, Geoegb, was the Uneal de scendant of the great chief justice, whose family introduced into the name the penul timate letter e. He was the third son of Henry Bankes, Esq., of Kingston Hall, Dorsetshire, who represented Corfe Castle from 1780 to 1826, and then was elected member for the county till 1831. His mother was Frances, daughter of WiUiam Woodley, 54 BANK-WELL Esq., governor of the Leeward Islands. He was a member of Trinity Hall, in the Uni versity of Cambridge, and studied the law at first at Lincoln's Inn, and then at the Inner Temple, by which society he was called to the bar in April 1815, but had little opportunity to acquire any eminence in the profession. He succeeded Francis Maseres in the offite of cursitor baron in July 1824, and continued to perform the duties of his office (which at last consisted of Uttle more than joining in the Michael mas solemnities of the sheriffalty of London) tiU his death, in 1866, having 'held the po sition of judge advocate general during the short administration of Lord Derby in 1852. No one was appointed to succeed him as cursitor baron, and the office was imme diately abolished. Succeeding eventually by the death of his brother to the family estates, he was chosen member for the county of Dorset, which he represented till his death; and Was further honoured by being placed on the privy council. He died on July 6, 1856, leaving issue by his wife Georgina Charlotte, daughter and heir of Admiral Edmnnd Charles Nugent. BANK-WELL, or BAUKWELL, John DE, whose name is variously spelled Bak- ¦well, Bacwell, Bauquel, Bankwell, or Ban- quelle, was so called from a place formerly written BankweU, but now Bankers, at Lee in Kent. Besides this, he had other property in the county, and in 31 Edward I. ob tained for himself and his wife Cicily a grant of free warren over aU their lands in Lee, Lewisham, Bromley, and Brokisham. (Hasted, i. 460, 493.) In 1297 he was appointed to perambu late the forests of five counties, and was paid at the rate of six shillings a day ; and in the next year he acted as one of the justices itinerant into Kent. (Pari. Writs, i. 396, 397.) shortly after the accession of Edward IL, on November 10, 1307, he was nominated a baron of the Exchequer, but must have died within a few months, as his wife Cicily was assessed at four marks in the city of London for the quinzime imposed in 1308. He left two sons, named Thomas and WilUam, and perhaps others, to whom the property descended in gavelkind. (Abb. Rot. Orig. ii. 265.) BANKWELL, or BATJK-WELL, Roger DE, was most probably of the family, and perhaps a younger son, of the above John. Roger is noticed as an advocate in the early part of the reign of Edward III. In the sixth year he was employed to tallage the counties of Nottingham and Derby (Rot. Pari. ii. 147) ; and from his being assigned in 14 Edward III. to enquire into a confla gration at Spondon, in the latter county {N, Fcsdera, ii. 1138), it would seem pro- BARDOLF bable that he was settied there ; the more especially as Sir Godfrey Foljambe, one of his as.sociates in that enquiry, many years afterwards gave a messuage and land to a clergyman named Roger de BankweU (Abb. Rot. Orig. ii. 286), who, it may be presumed, was this Roger's son. He was constituted a judge of the King's Bench before Easter in 1341, and is men tioned in the Year Books as late as 23 Edward III. BABDELBY, Robeet db, is designated in various records, from 30 Edward I, 1302, to 15 Edward IL, 1321, as a clerk of the Chancery, and acting under no less than eight chancellors. During that period he was one of those who were entrusted with the keeping of the Great Seal in the chancellor's absence, or in a temporary va cancy of the office. He is often styled one of the ' gardiens du Seal.' He is afterwards mentioned as a clerk of the Chancery as late as July 5, 1325. In 9 Edward H. he was selected as an assessor of the fifteenth in the city of Lon don ; and in the previous year he was ap pointed keeper of the hospital of St. Thomas the Martyr of Aeon in London, until his brother, Richard of Southampton, returned to England ; and he held the ecclesiastical rank of canon of Chichester. (Rot. Pari i. 287, 367 ; Abb. Rot. Orig. i. 227.) BABDOLF, Hugh, was a younger son of Baron William Bardolf, of Stoke IJaidolf, who was sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk from 16 to 21 Henry II. The inclinations of his youth may be coUected from the fact that in 22 Henry II. he was amerced for trespassing in the king's forests. In a very few years, however, his talents were dis covered. In .80 Henry IL, 1184, he was dapifer regis in conjvmction with Hugh de Morewick, and afterwards -with WiUiam Rufus. It is sometimes considered the same as seneschal or steward, and, indeed, he is occasionally designated by the latter title ; and probably his appointment had reference to the Duchy of Normandy only, as in the Norman roll of that yeai- he and Hugh de Morewick ai-e allowed 100/. for money disbursed for the king's expenses while at Gisors. In the same year he received a gift of one hundred marks fi-om the king. (Mado.v, i. 61, 168.) From this time till the end of the reign he acted as a justicier, being present in the Curia Regis when fines were levied there, and assisting as a justice itinerant in as sessing the tallage of Wiltshire, of which he was sheriff. (Ibid. 684.) He also held the sheriffalty of Cornwall, and was fermer of the honor of Gloucester (Madox' s Barm, 68, 67), and was nominated one of the lieutenants of the kingdom durino- Henry's absence in Normandy. ° Richard I., after his accession, although BARDOLF he forced him as weU as others to contri bute to the expenses of the crusade under the name of a fine for not joining in it, treated him with equal distinction. He was appointed of the- council to assist the two chief justiciaries in the rule of the kingdom and the administration of the laws ; and his pleas on the itinera in seve ral counties are recorded on the great rolls of 1 & 2 Richard I. When also the com plaints against WiUiam de Longchamp became too loud to be disregarded, he was one of the persons whom the king nomi nated in the bishop's place. Although some historians question the authenticity of the letter containing this order, the in sertion of the names in the forged document (if forged it were) shows the high position of the parties, and the estimation in which they were held at the period. There is no doubt that he joined Prince John and the barons in the removal of the unpopular bishop, and that the king (who never with drew his confidence from the chancellor) punished him on his return by discharging him from the sheriffalty of York and West moreland. That he did not, however, remain long in disgrace is proved by his subsequent employments. His name fre quently appears as a justicier in the Curia Regis on fines levied from the 5th to the 9th Richard I., and in the last four years of that reign he acted as a justice itinerant in various counties. (Mado.v's Exch. i. 35, 699, 704, 783.) He was one of those sent to York to determine the controversy between the archbishop and the monks there, and was also entrusted with the sheriffalty of the counties of Northumber land, Dorset and Somerset, Stafford, Wilts, and Leicester. In some of them he con tinued under King John, with the addition of Derby, Nottingham, Devon, and Corn wall. In the first year of King John's reign he was constituted custos of the castle of Tickhill, and had a grant of the manor of Brumegrave-cum-Norton, for which he procured the privilege of a market, together with a fair for it, and also for Carleton and Grimeston. (Rot. Chart. John, 66, 61, 91.) In all the three reigns his scutage in the several counties of Warwick, Leicester, Kent, Oxford, Norfolk, and Suffolk, where his property lay, was excused' pro libertate sedendi ad Scaccarium ; ' and in the reig-n of John the records show that he continued to act on the circuits as a justice itinerant, and in the Curia Regis as a justicier before whom fines were levied till the fifth year. About that time he died, as in the next year Amabilis de Limesey, who was his wife, fined in two thousand marks and five palfreys that she should not be compelled to marry again ; and that she should be quit of all aids to the sheriff', &c., as long BARONS 55 as she should be a widow after the death of John de , Braiosa, her late husband. (Rot. de Fin. 82.) This seems to show that soon after the death of Hugh Bardolf she had married a second husband, who had since died ; and it appears that in the previous year William de Braiosa had given a fine to have her for the wife of one of his sons. (Dugdale's Baron, i. 416.) BARKER, Edward, was born at Wandsworth in 1678, and was called to the bar at the Inner Temple, of which he was not admitted a member till 1724 ; but was one of the benchers of that society when he was appointed cursitor baron of the Exchequer on May 9, 1743. He re signed the place on April 19, 1765, and died in 1769. (Lysons, i. 507, 670.) BARKING, Richard de, was raised from the office of prior to that of abbot of Westminster in September 1223. (Monast. ii. 282.) He is first mentioned by Madox (ii. 318) among the barons of the Exchequer in 27 Hemy III., 1242; and as he stands immediately after William de Haverhull, the treasurer, he no doubt occupied a high position there. In this, however, his ecclesiastical dignity would necessarily place him ; and it by no means follows that he was, as Dugdale and Weever describe him, chief baron, accord ing to the signification by which they evidently interpret the term. There is nothing to show that at that time there was an officer bearing that title ; and if it had then existed, the rolls would not have been silent on the subject, nor would Madox have failed to notice it. In the same year he alone tested the mandates issued to the sheriffs of the different counties, directing them to get in the scutage-money granted for the king's voyage into Gascony. This shows that he stood high in the royal confidence, and was in immediate attendance on the king ; and about 1245 he was at the royal intercession excused from his attendance on a general council called by the pope, because he and the Bishop of Carlisle were the king's deputies or regents of England .when he went abroad. (Dart's Westm. ii. xx.) He died on November 23, 1246 ( Weever, 486), having, during his long presidency, greatly increased the revenues of his house. His character was that of a prudent, learned, and religious man. BARNE'WELL, Thomas, was appointed second baron of the Exchequer on October 1, 1494, 10 Henry VII., and a successor was put in his place on May 2, 1496. Beyond this fact history is silent. BARONS, William, or, as he is some times called, William Barnes (Bishop of London), took the degree of Doctor of Laws at Oxford ; but in which of the colleges or halls he studied has not been 56 BAEO"WE discovered. He became commissary of the | Prerogative Court of Canterbury ; and hav ing entered into orders, he received in 1500 the livings of East Peckham in Kent, and of Beaconsfield in Buckinghamshire; in 1501, that of Gedney in Lincolnshire ; in 1602, that of Bosworth in Leicestershire, and in 1503, that of Tharfield in the arch deaconry of Huntingdon. He was appointed master of the Rolls on February 1, 1602. In June he was one of the negotiators of the treaty of marriage between Prince Henry and Catherine of Arragon ; and on the 24th of the foUowing January he assisted in laying the first stone of Henry VII.'s chapel at Westminster Abbey. He succeeded Bishop Warham as Bishop of London on August 2, 1504, but did not obtain the restitution of the tem poralities till November 13. On the latter day he resigned his judicial office, and died in less than a year afterwards, on October 9 or 10, 1505. He was buried in St. Paul's. (Godwin, 190; Athen. Ox. ii. 694; Rymer, xiii. 78, 111.) BARO'WE, Thomas, was appointed master of the Rolls on September 22, 1483, 1 Richard III. He was rector of Olney in Buckinghamshire ; and three weeks after the accession of Richard had the grant of a prebend in St. Stephen's Chapel in the palace of Westminster. How he had ingratiated himself with that monarch does not appear ; but perhaps by some services he had rendered in the Exchequer, of which he probably was a clerk. He was the first master of the Rolls who had a grant of the tun or two pipes of wine, which has been continued ever since, and nomi nally exists at present. His patent for it is dated December 6, 1483. (Rot. Pat. 1 Rich. HI.) On August 1, 1485, he was appointed keeper of the Great Seal (Rot. Claus. ii. 5), and it was in his custody at the time of Richard's death on the field of Bosworth, on the 22nd of that month, when it was of course given up to the conqueror. His possession of the mastership of the RoUs seems to have been considered an intrusion ; for his predecessor, Robert Morton, resumed his place without a new patent. Barowe's punishment for his ad herence to tbe fallen party, however, ex tended no further ; but on the contrary he appears very soon to have conoUiated the goodwill of the new king; for on Sep tember 21 he obtained not only a general pardon, but a confirmation of his prebend in St. Stephen's Chapel, and his appoint ment as one of the masters in Chancery. (Rot. Pat. 1 Henry VII. p. i. m. ii.) In the latter character he attended parliament in the accustomed duty of receiving the petitions as late as 12 Henry VIL, 1497, after which his name no more occurs. BARTON BARRE, Richaed, was a diUgent and zealous servant of Henry IL After the peace concluded between that monarch and Louis of France in January 1169, he was sent with the Archdeacon of SaUsbury to Beneventum to negotiate -with Pope Alex ander in relation to Archbishop Becket; and while there he succeeded in obtaining from the pontiff a new letter to the Arch bishop of York, commanding him to crown Prince Henry at any time the king re quired him. After the murder of the archbishop, he was again appointed one of the ambas-'adors to the papal city; and when their passage through the mountains was impeded by the severity of the weather, he was selected to proceed with out his companions and urge the king's innocence of the murder. Though on his arrival the pope refused to admit him to his presence, he at last contrived to mollify the indignant feeUngs of the pon tiff, and by his representations, backed by the proofs he produced, his royal master escaped excommunication. In recompense for these and other faith ful services, the king appointed him chan cellor to his son Henry when he crowned him ; but on that prince rebelling against his father in 1173, Richard Barre proved his loyalty by restoring the Seal to the king. In 1184 he was raised to the dignity of Archdeacon of Ely. In 7 Richard I., 1195-6, he was one of the justices itinerant holding pleas in Devonshire ; and from that year tiU 1 John inclusive his name appears among the justices taking fines in the Curia Regis at Westminster. (Madox, i. 502.) BARTON, John de, is the second of the two justices (Ralph Fitzwilliam being the first) to whom the commission of Trail- baston, confined to Yorkshire, and copied in Spelman (Glossary) is directed. The date is there omitted ; but in Hemingford (p. 208) it is placed under the year 1304. Among the parUamentary -writs (i. 407) is one dated November 23, 1304, addi'essed not only to these two, but to two others ; so that it is probable there were two com missions, and that the first was issued before the great extent of the offence was known ; especially as in April 1305 a stiU more formal appointment of judges for almost every county in England took place. (N. Fadera, i. 970.) In the above commission he is erroneously called ' de Ryton,' as he is afterwards de signated ' de Fi-yton,' not only in the parliamentary writ, but also in subsequent commissions. He was summoned to per form military service against the Scots in 24 Edward L, and in the 28th and 31st years of that reign was named in com missions of array in Yorkshire (Pari. Writs, L 277, 346, 370) ; and in 8 Edw. 111. BASSET he was assigned to collect and levy the scutage of the county of York, (Abb. Rot. Orig. i. 214.) BASSET, Ralph, was baron of Welden in Northamptonshire, and had large pos sessions in several of the midland counties. He was a Norman by birth, but is stated to have been raised from an ignoble family by King Henry at the beginning of his reign. Spelman places him as chief justiciary in the reign of WiUiam IL, and states that he succeeded Ranulph Flambard, Bishop of Durham, in that office. But this is contra dicted by the fact that the bishop had certainly all the power usually attributed to the chief justiciary at the time of William's death. Dugdale does not intro duce him as chief justiciary till the reign of Henry I. ; but it may be doubtful whether he was even then distinguished by that precise designation, notwithstanding the assertion of Henry of Huntingdon in his epistle ' De Mundi Contemptu, as it is un questionable that the principal power was exercised by Roger, Bishop of SaUsbury, for the greater part of the reign, and espe cially during the king's frequent absences from England. The place he takes as last of fifteen subscribing witnesses to King Henry's charter to Westminster Abbey (Monast. i. 308), granted either in 1121 or 1122, demonstrates that he could not then have held the office. He, however, certainly filled a very high position in the administration of justice, and seems to have been selected to carry into execution the just and severe laws enacted by Henry for the suppression of the system of rapine and robbery which the last reign had introduced. He is mentioned in 112-i as presiding over a court of the barons held at Huncote in Leicestershire for the trial of offenders, where he caused no less than forty-four men convicted of robbery to be hanged. By the roll of 31 Henry I. it appears, not that he was chief justiciary, for that title never occurs in it, but that he had been justice of the forests in the counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, and Surrey; and that in the itinera which were appointed by King Henry for the purpose of relieving the Curia Regis, and of administering justice to the people almost at their own doors, no lesa than six counties, and probably more, were placed under his direction. He was manifestly dead before the date of that roll ; and the entries in it, in which his name occurs, have reference to debts due to the crown from his pleas in previous years. The precise date of his death is un certain ; but it took place at Northampton, where, falling sick, he called for a monk's habit of the order of those of Abingdon ; and after disposing of his estate and send- BASSET 57 ing no small sum to that abbey, with a grant of four hides of land in Chedeles- worth, he died, and was honourably buried ' in the chapter-house there. He left several sons, some of which were justiciers; and fi'om their issue various baronies sprang, the last of which lately became extinct, (Dugdale's Baron, i. 878; Madox, i. 12, 146, 641, u. 224; Thoroton's Notts, i. 161 : Mag. Rot. 31 Henry I., Hunter's ed., 31, 101, 124, 145.) BASSET, Richard, was one of the sons of the above Ralph Basset, and succeeded him in the barony of Welden in North amptonshire. From an early period of his life he was attached to the court, and assisted in the administration of justice in the Aula Regis. It is probable that during the life of his father he had ad vanced to a considerable position ; for in the great roll of 31 Henry I. the same number of counties are mentioned as under the judicial superintendence of both ; and the father could only have been recently deceased. He is introduced as chief justiciary to Henry I. in Dugdale's list, on the authority of Henry of Huntingdon and Ordericus Vitajis ; but some doubt may be entertained whether he can be correctly so described. If he had held the office in 31 Henry I., the roll of that year would have afforded some evidence of it; but it makes no distinction between him and the other justiciaries, whose pleas it records. In the grant, also, of the office of great chamberlain of England to Alberic de Vere, his name stands so low on a list of twelve witnesses as to preclude the possi bility of his being invested with the title. That grant is dated ' apud Femcham in Transfretatione Regis.' This must have been on occasion of the king's last visit to his Norman dominions in 1134; as is apparent from the fact that Geofi'rey, Bishop of Durham, the chancellor, whose name stands as the second witness, was not elected to that see tiU 1133. The first witness is Roger, Bishop of Salisbury, which is strong presumptive evidence that he was then first minister or chief justiciary of the kingdom. The expression of Ordericus Vitalis goes no further than that he had great power in this reign, 'utpote capitalis justitia.' Dugdale's opinion, also, that he held it jointly -with Alberic de Vere is probably founded on the fact that they were joint sheriffs of no less than eleven counties. Al though the latter author says in his ' Baron age' that he also held the office during the whole of King Stephen's reign, he does not so insert his name in his 'Chronica Series.' He married MatUda, the daughter and heir of Geofirey Ridel, the justiciary 58 BASSET (whose land appears to have been in his custody), and increased his already large property by her possessions. Of these he devoted a great portion to pious uses. The priory of Laund in Leicestershire, de dicated to St. John the Baptist, was founded by him and his wife, and muni ficently endowed by them with the town and manor of Lodington, in which it stands ; with Friseby also ; besides no less than fifteen churches in the neighbour hood, and one in Rutland. He died about 1164. His eldest son, Geofi'rey, assumed his mother's name of Ridel. Another son, Ralph, who continued the surname of Bas set, was lord of Drayton in Staffordshire ; and a third son, William, subsequently men tioned, was lord of Sapcote in Leicester shire. (Angl Sac. u. 701 ; Thoroton's Notts, i. 161; Monast. vi. 189; Mag. Rot. 31 Hen. I. ; Madox.) BASSET, Thomas, was the son and heir of Gilbert, a grandson, or, as Dugdale believes, a younger son of the above Ralph Basset. His military services in divers wars were rewarded by King Henry II. at an early period of his reign with the lord ship of Hedendon in Oxfordshire, together with the hundred of Botendon, and that lying without the north gate of the city of Oxford. He was sheriff' of that county in 10 Henry II., and in the 14th year of that reign, 1168, he was one of the justices itinerant for the oounties of Essex and Hertford. (Madox, i. 587.) From the year 1175 his name frequently appears among the barons acting j udicially in the Curia Regis ; and the superior character of his abilities is evident from his being employed as a justice itinerant for the six following years in no less than fifteen other counties ; and in his having been one of those selected by the great council held at Windsor in 1179, when the kingdom was divided into four parts for the better administration of justice. He married Alice, the daughter of — de Dunstanville, and died before 1183, in which year his elder son, Gilbert, had come into his possessions, and founded the priory of Burcester, or Bicester, in Oxfordshire. Besides Gilbert he had two other sons, Thomas and Alan, the latter of whom is hereafter mentioned. (Dugdale's Baron. i. 383; Madox, i. 94, &c.; Pipe Rolls, Hen. IL) BASSET, William, lord of Sapcote in Leicestershire, was a younger son of the above Richard Basset and Matilda Ridel, his -wife. From 9 to 16 Henry IL, 1163-1170, he executed the office of sheriff of the united counties of Warwick and Leicester, and was afterwards fined by the commissioners appointed in the latter year in the sum of one hundred marks for some transgressions BASSET he had committed in performance of his duties. He, however, afterwards held the sheriffalty of Lincolnshire in 24 Henry H., and the six following years. His pleas as a justice itinerant commence in 14 Henry IL, 1168, and extend tiU 26 Henry IL, 1180, during which time he acted in twenty-four different counties. From 1175 he is frequently mentioned as assisting in the judicial business of the Curia Regis, in which he continued to sit tiU 1184. (Madox, i. 94, 103, 143, &c.) He died about the latter date, and was succeeded in the barony by his son Simon, next mentioned. BASSET, Simon, is named among the justices itinerant who fixed the tallage for the counties of Nottingham and Derby in 9 Richard I., 1 197-8. (Madox, i. 733.) He was the son of the last-named WUliam Basset, lord of Sapcote. His connection with Derbyshire arose from his marriage with EUzabeth, one of the daughters and coheirs of William Avenel, of Haddonin the Peak in that county. In 7 John she fined eighty marks to the king to have her inheritance, which the king had seized on her husband's death, and that she should not be compelled to marry. (Rot. de Fin. 307.) His male descendants failed in 1378, by the death of Ralph, the then baron, leaving two daughters only. (Baronage, i. 382.) BASSET, Alan, was the third son of the before-named Thomas Basset, of Heden don. Under Richard I. and John he appears to have been a frequent partaker of the royal bounty. In the former reign he had a grant of the manors of Woking and Mapeldure- weU (Rot. Chart. 37) ; and in the latter, of those of Wycumb and Berewick. Besides these, King John granted him the custody of the lands and heir of Hugo de Druvall, and excused him his scutage in Surrey, Oxfordshire, and Berkshire. An order to Stephen de Turnham and him, in 9 John, to deliver a sum of 2,250 marks from the treasury, shows that he was connected with the Exchequer; and in 15 John he wasthe bearer of 100/. from the treasm-y to the king at Oxford. That he was a personal favourite of the king may be inferred from a present he received from him of a doUum of the best wine. (Rot. Claus. 59, 99, 139.) _ He accompanied his sovereign in his visit to Ireland in 12 John (Rot. de Prast. 184, &c.), attended him at Runnymede, and was a faithful adherent to his fortunes tiU his death. On the accession of Henry HI, he was equally favoured tmd equally employed. In 2 Henry III. he acted as a justicier at West minster, a fine being levied before him (Dugdale's Orig. 42) ; in 4 Henry III. he was sent on a mission to France, and in 7 Henry III. he and Emericus de Sacy were BASSET appointed to meet the King of Jerusalem on his landing in Kent. He was sheriff of Rutiand from 2 to 12 Henry IIL, had the custody of the land and heir of William de Montacute given to him, obtained a grant of a market at Wutton in Wiltshire, and was allowed two bucks out of Windsor Forest. (Rot. Claus. i. 313, 385, 410, 460, 659.) He died about October 1232, leaving several children by his wife Alice, the daughter and heir of Stephen de Gray. To judge from an entiy on the Close Roll (i. 104), she was one of the ladies attached to the person of the queen. Three of his sons were successively in possession of his honours and estate — viz., Gilbert, whose son died soon after him; Fulk, who was raised to the deanery of York and the bishopric of London ; and Philip, who is the subject of the next notice. ( Chauncey's Herts, 348 ; Atkyns's Glou cestersh. 420 ; Bry dyes' Collins' s Peerage, iii, 2, vU. 335.) BASSET, Philip, was the third son of the above Alan, and eventually succeeded to the barony of Wycombe. In 123.3, the year after his father's death, he joined the insui-rection of Richard, Earl of iPembroke, but returned to his allegiance in the following year (Baronage, i. 384), and from that time seems to have been high in his sovereign's favour. In 1242 he was appointed one of the commanders of the knights who were sent to the king in Poitou (Cal Rot. Pat. 20), and in 1243 he had a grant of the custody of the lands and heir of Matilda de Luci ; in 1252, that of the lands and heir of Richard de Ripariis ; and in 1267 the manor of Dimmock was granted to him and his wife, Ela, Countess of Warwick. (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. i. 407, ii. 148, 248, 249.) Besides being called upon to attend the king in his wars in France and in Wales, he was, in 29 Henry III., one of the ambas sadors sent to the Council of Lyons to com plain of the papal exactions in England ; and in 44 & 46 Henry III. he was consti tuted governor of the castles of Oxford, Bristol, Corft', and Shireburn, with the sheriffalties of the counties in which they are situate, and of Berkshire. He is called bailiff' of the King of the Romans in an entry of 43 Hemy IIL (Abb. Placit. 146.) When the king, in July 1261, openly re sisted the control under which the barons had placed him since the parliament of Oxford of 1268, he appointed Philip Basset chief justiciary of England. The barons' chief justiciary was his son-in-law, Hugh le Despenser; and they both seem to have acted at the same time till the short accom modation that took place between the con tending parties in the foUowing April, when Philip Basset's appointment was fully esta- BASSET 59 blished. Between July 15 and October 18, 1262, while the king was absent in France, all the mandates on the fine roll were signed by him, and he presided at a council, when the Earl of Leicester, taking advantage of the king's absence, is said to have produced a brief from the pope confirming the pro visions of Oxford, and recalling the king's absolution. (Rapin, iii. 146.) His name appears on the plea roll of the Exchequer as justiciary of England at the end of June 1263. (Madox, i. 100.) Another temporary reconciliation took place iu the following year between the king and the earl, the effect of which was the reinstatement of Hugh le Despenser, whose name appears as justiciary of Eng land to a mandate dated October 1, 1263 ; while Philip Basset is named without that addition in the reference of the Oxford pro visions to the King of France, dated in De cember following. (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin, u, 405 ; Brady, i. App. 233.) Philip Basset, however, adhered firmly to the king, and in the outbreak of the London citizens, led by Hugh le Despenser, at the beginning of 1264, his house and pos sessions in London fell a sacrifice to their fury. (Chron. Rishanger, 22.) In the fol lowing March he greatly assisted the king in taking Northampton ; and at the battle of Lewes, on May 14, valiantly fighting near the royal person, he continued the contest until he fell through loss of blood, when he shared the fate of his sovereign, and was taken prisoner. (Lingard, iii. 138.) He was placed in Dover Castle, under the custody of Simon de Montfort, younger son of the Earl of Leicester ; but how long he remained in durance does not appear. After the triumph of the royalists at the battle of Evesham, on August 4, 1265, there is nothing to show that Philip Basset was replaced in his office of chief justiciary, although there is ample evidence to prove that he continued to enjoy the king's favour and to hold a high place in his counsels. He was one of those who were appointed to carry into execution the Dictum of Kenil- worth, in October 1266 (Rapin, iii. 171) ; and his name appears as one of the king's council in February 1270. (Madox, ii. 170.) He died about the end of October 1271, 66 Henry III, He married two wives : the first was Hawise, or Helewise, daughter of John Gray, of Eaton ; and the second (who sur vived him) was Ela, daughter of William Longspee, Earl of Salisbury, and widow of Thomas, Earl of Warwick, By the former he left an only daughter, Alyna, or Aliva, who had first married Hugh le Despenser, the chief justiciary, but was then the -wife of Roger Bigot, Earl of Norfolk, the son of Hugh Bigot (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. ii. 551), being thus connected with three chief 60 BASSET justiciaries, as the daughter of one, the wife of a second, and the daughter-in-law of a third. BASSET, Thomas, was probably the grandson of the before-mentioned Thomas Basset, lord of Hedendon, by his second son, Thomas; and the nephew of Alan Basset, above mentioned. Dugdale intro duces him as a justice of the King's Bench, on the authority of a charter of 46 Henry IL, 1262 ; but none of the customary proofs appear of his so acting, either by his going any iter, or having any writs of assize directed to him. He died, however, shortly after that date, as his -widow Johanna is mentioned on the fine roU of 52 Henry IH. (ii. 470.) BASSET, William, was the son of the above Simon Basset, lord of Sapcote, by his wife Elizabeth, daughter of WilUam Avenel, of Haddon in the Peak in Derby shire. In 10 Henry III. this lady died, and all the land which she held of the honour of Peverel, in the county of Buck ingham, was ordered to be put into the possession of her son William, to whom she had given it ' as her heir.' (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. i. 140.) From the terms of this entry, however, it may be inferred that he was not her eldest son. Long previous to this event he was possessed of property in the counties of Leicester, Derby, Lincoln, and Stafford ; all which was forfeited for his adherence to the barons in 18 John, and restored in the following year, when he acknowledged his fealty to Henry III. In the tenth year of that reign, 1226, he was appointed one of the justices itinerant for Nottingham and Derby, and for various other counties up to 1232. (Rot. Claus. i., ii.) In July 1249 Robert Basset,his nephew and heir, did homage for his land in Buck inghamshire. (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. ii. 57.) BASSET, William, was a native of Stafibrdshire, but of what branch of the family has not been traced. He was an advocate in the reign of Edward IL, and in the first ten years of that of Edward III. In the latter of these, 1837, he was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas. When the king, in December 1340, dismissed some of his brethren for malpractices, he escaped, and was comprehended in the new patent issued on January 8, 1341. On October 28 he changed his court for that of the King's Bench, where he remained till 24 Edward IIL, his name occurring up to that date in the ' Year Book ' and ' Book of Assizes ' of that reign. (Dugdale's Orig. 46 ; Rot. Pari ii. 164.) BASSINGBOBNE, Htjmpheet de. Seve ral fines were acknowledged at St. Edmunds, Cambridge, and Bedford in 8 John, 1206, before Humphrey, Archdeacon of Sarum, and Richard de Seing. The Archdeacon of Sarum at that time BATSONIA was Humphrey de Bassingborne. (LeNeve, 276.) He suffered with the rest of the clergy on account of the interdict, his rents being seized into the king's hands; but they were restored to him in April 1208. At the end of the reign he again got into dis grace, and was obliged to pay a fine of one hundred marks and a palfrey for his re-- storation to the king's favour, and he then had a royal letter of protection. (Rot. Claus. i. 11.3, 261 ; Rot. de Fin. 682.) BASTARD, William, was the third of five justices itinerant, appointed in 20 Henry IL, 1174, by writ of Richard de Luci, to set the assize of Hampshire (Madox, i. 125), but who he was cannot be ta'aced -with sufficient certainty. BATESFORD, .loHN DE, was one of the eight justices appointed by Edward I., in 1293, to take assizes, jurats, and certifi cates throughout the kingdom in aid of the judges of each bench and the itinerant judges, who were often prevented from at tending at the regular times and places. On February 18, 1807, he was the fourth of the justices of Trallbaston then nomi nated for ten of the midland counties (Rot, ParL i. 99, 218) ; and as in 4 Edward H, 1310, he was sent as a justice of assize into Hampshire, Wiltshire, Somersetshire, Dor setshire, CornwaU, and Devonshire, he may be presumed to have continued to act in the interim, the more especially as he was regularly summoned among the judges to parliament fi-om the beginning to the eleventh year of that reign. He died soon after, his executors being commanded, in 13 Edward IL, to bring all proceedings before him into the Exchequer. (Pari, Writs, U. 499,) BATHONIA, Henry de, according to Prince (55), was a native of Devon, and a younger brother of Walter de Bathonia, of Bathe House, in North Ta-wton, and of Colebrook, near Crediton. There does not appear any proof, nor indeed much proba bility, that this statement is weU founded. The roll of fines shows that in 20 Henry IIL, 1236, the king directed the sheriff of Dorsetshire to appraise all the chattels which had belonged to Hugh de Bathonia, and to deliver them to Henry, taking se curity that he would answer for their value in discharge of the debts due from Hugh to the crown. (Excetpt. e Rot, Fin. i. 810.) In this record, as Hugh is frequently men tioned as ' clericus,' it must be charitably supposed that he was Henry's uncle, unless indeed the designation ' clericus' was at tached to his name merely with an official instead of an ecclesiastical signification. Hugh de Bathonia was an officer of the king's wardrobe in the reign of John (Rot. Pat. 173, 174), sheriff of Buckingham in 7 Henry III., and of Berkshire in 11 Henry III. ; and was afterwards one of the justices, BATHONIA of the Jews. (Rot. Claus. i. 669, ii. 196 ; Madox, i. 134.) This official position which Hugh held in the court will account for Henry de Bathonia being brought up to the legal profession ; and accordingly, so early as 10 Henry IIL, his name appears as the representative or attorney for Warin le Despenser in a suit against Nicholas de St. Bridget, for a debt of four marks and a half. (Rot. Claus. ii. 156.) It was not till after Hugh's death that Henry de Bathonia was advanced to the bench. In 1238, 22 Henry IIL, his name first appears to the acknowledgment of a fine. Two years afterwards he was one of the justiciers on the circuit then sent through the southern counties. In that commission he stood second on the list ; and from that time the fine roll teems with payments made for writs of assize to be taken before him. In November 1247 he stands in a higher place, an amerciament being mentioned as being made before him and his companion justices of the bench (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin, ii. 23 ; Abb, Placit. 125, 126) ; and in the circuits of that and the two following years his name is inserted at the head in every county which he is appointed to visit. In 1250 he had a grant of 100/, a year for his support ' in officio justiciarii,' an expression which would seem to show that the term ' capitalis,' or chief justice, as subsequently used, was not yet adopted, as it is quite manifest that he then sat as the senior of his fellows. Not long after this grant he was accused by Philip Darcy of bribery and extortion, whereby he had raised a great estate on the ruin of others. Four-and-twenty knights became security for his appearance to answer the charge before the parliament summoned for February 17, 1251. On the day of hearing he was charged with in censing the barons against the king, and promoting a general rebellion ; and among various complaints urged against him was one that he had received a bribe to allow a convicted criminal to escape. The vehe mence of the king's anger may be estimated by his brutal exclamation, 'If any man will slay Henry de Bathonia, he shall not be impeached of his death ; and I now pro nounce his pardon.' This violence, however, was prevented by John Mansel's timely interference, and the threats of the Bishop of London, and the justicier's other friends, of ecclesiastical and temporal revenge. The intercession of Richard, Earl of Cornwall, the king's brother, at last pro cured him a pardon, on a fine of two thou sand marks, the whole of which was not paid at the time of his death. His disgrace continued more than two years — viz., from November 1260 till August 1253, after which date applications to him for writs of assize are frequent for the rest of his life. BATHURST 61 A grant of land, also, in the latter year, addressed 'Henrico de Bathon. et sociis suis, justiciariis assignatis ad tenendum placita coram rege ' (Manning, 298), proves that he had been restored to his former high position. Comparing the title here used with that in the amerciament in 32 Henry III. already referred to, 'coram Henrico de Bathon. et sociis suis, justiciariis de banco,' it would appear, according to the modern interpretation of the terms, that he had changed his court; but this seems to be contradicted by an entry in 20 Edward I., which refers to a proceeding in 41 Henry IIL, ' coram H. Bathon. et sociis suis, justiciariis regis de banco.' (Abb, Placit. 228.) In the preceding year he and his companions are mentioned without any designation to ' distinguish the court, the words used being ' et sociis suis, justiciariis regis.' These changes suggest the caution with which such appellations should be used in support of an hypothesis. So late as 1260 he went the circuit through eight counties. He died before the 22nd of the fol lowing February, as on that day the king, 'intuitu laudabilis obsequii quod Henricus de Bathon. R. inipendit in vita sua,' grants to John de Bathon, his son and heir, that the arrears which remained due of the fine of two thousand marks which he made for having the king's favour, and of all other debts which he owed the king at his death, might be paid by instalments of twenty-five marks at each of the yearly Exchequer terms, Michaelmas and Easter. (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. ii. 345.) His widow, Aliva, afterwards married Nicholas de Yatingdon, and died in 1273. The above-mentioned John de Bathonia had a son, also named John, whose only child Joan was married to John de Bohun, and died in 1316. (Blomefielcts Norfolk, i. 185.) BATHURST, Henet (Loed Apslet, Eael Bathuest). The Bathursts were originally seated at Bathurst, near Battel, in Sussex, but afterwards removed into Kent. One member received a baronetcy (of Leaohdale in Gloucestershire) in 1643, which is now supposed to be extinct ; and several others were merchants and alder men of London. The immediate ancestor of the chancellor resided at Staplehurst in the reign of Henry VHL, and one of his grandsons was the father of the celebrated Dr. Ralph Bathurst, president of Trinity CoUege, Oxford, and dean of Wells. The dean's brother. Sir Benjamin, was the father of Allen, who, after serving in two parlia ments for the borough of Cirencester, was one of the twelve peers created by Queen Anne in I7I1, for the purpose of obtaining a majority in the House of Lords. To his titie, Baron Bathurst of Battlesden in 62 BATHURST Sussex, he received sixty-one years after wards the additional rank of an earl, as an acknowledgment and reward for his ser vices to the state, and his eminence in the social and literary world. He died, at the age of ninety-one, in 1775, having lived to see his son elevated to the peerage and to the dignity of lord high chancellor of Great Britain. That son was one of the nine children he had by his wife Catherine, daughter and heir of Sir Peter Apsley, of Apsley in Sussex. Henry Bathurst, the second but eldest surviving son of the earl, was born on May 20, 1714. He took the degree of B.A. at Christ Church, Oxford, in 1733, and -was called to the bar bv the Society of Lin coln's Inn in Hilary'Term 1736. He had already been returned to parliament in the previous year as member for Cirencester, which he continued to represent till 1754. Though his business in the courts was by no means commanding, he was in 1746 chosen solicitor-general, and shortly after attorney-general, to Frederick, Prince of Wales, after whose death, in 1751, he filled the same office to the princess till his elevation to the bench. He had on enter ing the prince's service been honoured with a patent of precedency ; and in 1762 he was the leading counsel for the crown in the trial at the Oxford Assizes of Eliza beth Blandy for the murder of her father, his speech in which has been praised for its eloquence, but is too exaggerated an appeal to the feelings of the jury to be approved by modern ears. Soon after he was raised to the bench as a judge of the Common Pleas, on May 2, 1754, at the age of forty ; and in the case of the sham patriot John Wilkes in 1763 he concurred in the constitutional decisions of his chief. Lord Camden. After occupying his seat for sixteen years, on the sudden death of the Hon. Charles Yorke, the Great Seal was, on January 21, 1770, placed in the hands of three commissioners, the second of whom was Mr. Justice Bathurst. They held it for a year, but their rule met with so little approbation that the minister found it necessary to appoint a lord chancellor. Though very limited iu his choice, the pro fession was greatly surprised on finding Judge Bathurst, who was considered ' the most incapable of the three ' commissioners, selected to fill that high and responsible post. The Seal was delivered to him on January 23, 1771, and he was on the same day created Lord Apsley. He natm-ally found himselfina wrongposition, anditwas said that he never entered his court with a firm and dauntless step. Overawed by Thurlow, Wedderburn, and other coun sel practising at his bar, he was so little conversant with either the principles or practice of equity that his decisions haye BAUMBUBGH no value in the profession. But, being a staunch supporter of Lord North's mea sures, he was retained in his place for inore than seven years ; at the end of which, from a failure in his health, or perhaps a consciousness of his inefficiency, he resigned the Seal, on June 3, 1778, one of his last and most praiseworthy acts being the ap pointment of his nephew, Francis BuUer, to a vacant judgeship. He declined any retiring pension, and was in the following year continued in the cabinet with the office of lord president of the council, which he held till Lord North's ministry terminated, in 1782. In the twelve years he survived he gr.adually retired from political life, and died from natural decay at his seat, Oakley Grove, near Cirencester, on August 6, 1794, in his eighty-first year. In his public life he was honourable and sincere ; as a j udge, he was esteemed by the bar for his kindness of manner ; and in private Ufe he was thoroughly amiable. Though of a cheerful and good-hnmoured disposition, he was not quite so jovial as his father, who took his -wine freely to the last day. of his long life. On one occasion at a party at Oakley, the chancellor having retired somewhat early from the convi- -yiality, the old earl chuckled and said to the rest of the company, ' Xow, my good friends, since the old gentleman is off, I think we may venture to crack another bottle.' Neither was he so liberal a patron to literature as his father ; but it should be remembered to his credit that he -was the first to encourage Sir William Jones by substantial tokens of regard. In 1775, while he was yet chancellor, he succeeded to his father's earldom. He married twice. By his first wife, Anne, daughter of — James, Esq., and -widow of Charles PhUlips, Esq., he had no issue; but by his second wife, Tryphena, daughter of Thomas Scawen, Esq., of Maidwell in Northamptonshire, he left six children. His successor held a distinguished place in the government, and the House of Lords is still graced by his descendants. B AUK-WELL. See J. and R. DE B.ANK- WKLL. BATJMBTJRGH, Thomas de, is among the clerks or masters in Chancery mentioned from 1 to 14 Edward HI., and was so named from the place now called Bam borough in Northumberland, where he had property. He seems to have been an especial favourite -with the king, who pre sented him with the church of Eniildon, and made him various beneficial o-rants of lands in that county. He acted as keeper of the Great Seal on several occasions, in 13.32, 1334, 1336, and 1339. In the latter year, 14 Edward IIL, he was one of the receivers of the petitions to parUament, and probably died soon after, as he is not BA"YEUX subsequently named. (Rot. Pari ii. 22, 68, 112; Cal Inq. p.m. ii. 63; Cal Rot. Pat. 118; Abb. Rot. Orig. ii. 27, 75, 79.) BAYEUX, John de (Baiocis), was the son of Hugh de Baiocis, a baron in Lincoln shire, by Alienora his wife. Before his father's decease he was outlawed for the death of a man, and his property in Bristol and in Dorsetshire, being forfeited, was given away in 16 and 17 John. _ He con trived, nevertheless, to make his peace ; for in 3 Henry III, he was admitted to take possession of his paternal estates in Lincolnshire on payment of 100/. for his relief ; and in the same year he was added to the list of justices itinerant for the counties of CornwaU, Devon, Somerset, and Dorset. (Rot. Claus. i. 237, 404; Rot. Chart, 201 ; Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. i. 32.) It would appear, however, that he was not even then entirely cleared of the charge, unless indeed he had subjected himself to a new accusation ; for in 4 Henry III. he and his mother Alienora, his brother, and three others, fined for having an inquisition before the chief justiciary, whether _ the appeal against them by Robert de Tille- broc for the death of his father was malicious, or they were guilty. That the result of the enquiry was favourable may be presumed from his being again selected as a justice itinerant in Devonshire in 1225, and from his holding several re sponsible appointments about the same time, as justice of the forests, and constable of the castle of PUmpton. (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. i. 45 ; Rot, Claus. i. 622, &c., ii. 76, &c.) In 18 Henry III. another charge of homicide was raised against him ; and he paid a fine of no less than four hundred marks for permission to accommodate with the widow of Roger de Mubray for the death of her husband, in which he was someway concerned. On his death, in 1249, his brother Stephen did homage for his lands as male heir. (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. i. 264, u. 61.) BAYLEY, John. No judge since the act was passed in 1799 granting a pension on retirement after fifteen years' service has declined to avail himself of the privilege for so long a period as Sir John Bayley. He occupied the bench for no less than twenty-six years, with the highest reputa tion as a lawyer, and undiminished respect and esteem from every one who acted either with or under him. He was born on August 3, 1763, at Elton in Huntingdonshire, the residence of his father, John Bayley, Esq. His mother was Sarah, the daughter and heir of the Rev, White Kennett, prebendary of Peter borough, and granddaughter of Bishop Kennett, of that see. He was educated at Eton under the superintendence of his father's elder brother, Dr. Edward Bayley, BAYLEY 63 fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge,- and rector of Quinton and Courtcenhall ; to whose cultivation of his taste and talents for classical composition the judge always ascribed his future success in Ufe. The 'Musse Etonenses' contain some favourable specimens of his proficiency. Though he was nominated in 1782 for King's College, Cambridge, it does not appear that he was ever matriculated. He entered Gray's Inn in November 1783, but was not called to the bar till June 22, 1792. In the interim he probably practised as a special pleader, as in 1789 he published the ' Summary of the Law of Bills of Exchange,' &c., which has ever since been the standard work on the sub ject, and of which many editions have, been issued. He also edited Lord Ray mond's Reports, with valuable notes, in 1790. The fame he acquired by these publications naturally insured him, when he became a barrister, ample employment, which did not diminish when he was raised to the degree of the coif in 1799. About this time he was elected recorder of Maidstone. After successfully pursuing his profession as a serjeant both on the Home Circuit and in Westminster Hall, he was appointed in May 1808 a judge of the King's Bench, and was knighted. There his peculiar adaptation for the judical office was at once seen, and his pro-' fessional erudition soon placed him in the first rank. Though his quickness of appre hension enabled him to see the true bear ings of a case, he was always open to con viction, and most patient in listening to the arguments raised by counsel in opposition to his opinion. No one who has attended the courts can forget the seven little red books which he always carried with him, to which he could instantaneously turn for every reported case. The ease and delight with which he got through his work at Nisi Prius caused M. Cotte, the French advocate, to exclaim, 'II s'amuse a juger.' In this court he sat for more than twenty- two years, for seventeen of which he held the next place to the chief justice, pro nouncing the judgments of the court upon delinquents with characteristic mildness. But at length he found the increasing labour too much for him, but still was willing to undertake a lighter duty. He therefore took advantage of the act authorising the appointment of a fifth judge in each court, and on November 14, 1830, was removed into the Court of Ex chequer as the additional baron, taking his place however according to his seniority next to the chief baron. On the new stage of the Exchequer he played the same prominent part for above three years more, when his advancing age prompted him to retire, before his mental 64 BAYNAED powers decayed. He therefore resigned the position he had so long graced in February 1834, receiving in the next month the well-merited honour of a baronetcy, and an opportunity being given him of still serving the state in the character of a privy counsellor. He survived nearly twelve years, and died on October 10, 1841, at the Vine House, near Sevenoaks. _ Few men in his prominent position ever passed through Ufe with such unmingled respect. He had all the requisites of a good judge— clearness of intellect, integrity of purpose, urbanity of manner, strict im partiality, and a total absence of political bias. He was a favourite -with all classes — his colleagues on the bench, the ad-vocates over whom he ruled, and the litigants, whether he decided for or against them. Amiable and benevolent in his private life, he was deeply impressed with religious feelings, which were manifested in an edi tion of the Common Prayer Book pub lished by him in 1816. By his wife, Elizabeth, daughter of John Markett, Esq., of Meopham Court in Kent, he left, besides three daughters, three sons, the eldest of whom now enjoys the title; the second is a clergyman ; and the third a barrister, who edited one of the editions of his father's work on Bills. BAYNARD, Fttlco, was of the noble family of that name, the ancestor of which, Ralph Baynard, possessed in the Con queror's time various rich lordships in the counties of Essex, Suffolk, Norfolk, and Hertford. By the conspiracy of his grand son, William, the elder son of Geoffrey, against Henry I., the barony was lost ; and ita castle, called Baynard's Castle, near St. Paul's, in London, was granted to Robert, the son of Richard Fitz-Gilbert, from whom descended the Fitz-Walters. Fulco traced his lineage from a younger brother of Geoffrey. He held eight knights' fees and ft half in Norfolk under Robert Fitz- Walter, and obtained a market in 1226 for his manor of Merton. (Rot. Claus. ii. 105.) In November of that year, 11 Henry IIL, 1226, he and three others were constituted justiciers to try some prisoners charged with murder in the custod}' of the Bishop of Ely. (Ibid. ii. 169.) Iu four pre-vious instances he had been one of four appointed to take particular assizes of novel disseisin in the county of Norfolk ; a practice then not uncommon, but which would not warrant the insertion of those so em ployed among the justices itinerant, from whom they were clearly distinct. Fulco's case is varied by his nomination to try the felonies above mentioned. Both in 2 and 11 Henry III. he was one of those selected to assess the tallage in Norfolk. (Ibid. i. 350, u. 78, &c.) In 1250 he fined for not being k-nighted, JBEALKNAP but was afterwards obliged to take that honour. In the reign of Edward I. he was nominated one of the conservators of the peace for his county, and died at a great age in 1306. By his wife, Alice, the daughter of John le Ditton, he left a son, the next-mentioned Robert. (Blo?nefield's Norfolk, i. 557.) BAYNARD, Robert, the son of the above Fulco Baynard, so early as 18 Edward I. was returned as knight of the shire for Norfolk, and represented that county tiU 20 Edward II. In 5 Edward II. the custody of Norfolk was committed to him (Abb. Rot. Orig. i. 186), and in the two following years he was among the magnates who were speciaUy summoned to parUa ment. Several of these were not barons, and were never afterwards summoned ; and he, in all the subsequent entries, is merely called 'Miles.' He was one of the con servators of the peace for the county, and was -employed as a commissioner of array, and in assessing the various grants made by the parliament. To him also was entiusted the custody of the bishopric of Durham, in 1311, on the death of Anthony Bek. On the accession of Edward III. he was appointed, according to Dugdale, a judge of the King's Bench ; and it is curious that the writ directing the payment of his expenses as knight of the shire, in the parliament of the preceding January, is dated on March 9, 1327, the same day on which he was raised to the judicial bench. He died in 4 Edward HI., m possession of Hautboys, Whatacre, and five other manors - in Norfolk, leaving a wife named Matilda, and a son named Fulk, among whose three daughters the inheritance was afterwards divided. (Cal Inq. p. m. u. 30, 148.) BEALKNAF, Robert de, had very con siderable possessions in the county of Kent before he could have acquired them from the profi ts of his profession ; yet there is no certainty who his parents were, except that their names were John and AUce. Pro bably his father was a lawyer, as an advo cate of that name occurs in the Year Book of 20 Edward III. Robert's career in the courts commences in 36 Edward III. ; and in 40 Edwai'd III. he became a king's sei^ jeant, for which he had a salary of 20/. a year, with another of the same amount as a justice of assize — a duty which he fre quently performed till his elevation to the bench at Westminster. (Liber Assisai'um.) Tnis event occurred on October 10, 1374, 48 Edward IIL, when he was constituted chief justice of the court of Common Pleas. Three months before, he had been sent to treat with the pope's nuncios as to the re former Wicliif. (N. Fcedera, iu. 1007, 1015.) He was knighted in 1386. Retaining his place on the accession of Richard IL, he continued in the steady BEALKNAP performance of his duties in court and in parliament for thirteen years. Only one in cident of importance varied the quietness of this period of his life. In May 1381 he was sent into Essex with a commission to bring to trial and punishment the insurgents who had risen against the poll-tax recently imposed. No sooner had the grand jury began to find the indictments than they were broken in upon by the rioters, their heads chopped off and carried away on poles, and the chief j ustice was compelled to swear that he would hold no more such sessions. (Turner's Engl n. 246.) The circumstance that no personal injury was offered to him proves the respect with which he was re garded, and that the outrages of the people were not directed against lawyers as la-wyers. In October 1386 the parliament insisted on the removal of the king's favourites, im peached and convicted the chancellor, Mi chael de laPole, and passed the ordinance by which the executive government of the country was substantially placed in the hands of eleven commissioners, with a complete control over the public revenue. The Arch bishop of York afterwards charged Bealknap with having devised it ; but this was evi dently without foundation. In the following year that prelate, -with the Duke of Ireland, the Earl of Suffolk, and Chief Justice TresUian, having stirred up the king to resist the encroachment on his authority, the judges were summoned to Shrewsbury to support this purpose by declaring the ordinance to be illegal. There a series of questions, -with answers, as some allege, ready prepared, were submitted to them for signature. Bealknap refused for some time to sign the document, but the duke and earl threatening his life if he per sisted, he at last submitted, exclaiming as he did so, ' Now here lacketh nothing but a rope, that I may receive a reward worthie for my desert ; and I know if I had not doone this I might not have escaped your hands ; so that for your pleasures and the king's I have doone it, and deserved thereby death at the hands of the lords.' (Holinshed, ii. 782.) The seals of all the j udges present were accordingly attached to an act of council, dated at Nottingham, August 25, 1387, 11 Richard IL, containing the questions and answers, by which they declared the whole proceedings to be contrary to the king's prerogative, and all the promoters of them to be guilty of high treason, thus in effect condemning the commissioners and all the lords of parliament to the death of traitors. The lords were not idle in securing them selves from the danger to which they were thus exposed; and adding this charge to many others, they appealed the four favour ites, together with Nicholas Brambre, of treason, of which they were all convicted in the next parUament. Ii is said that on BEAUCHAMP 65 February 3, the day of its meeting. Sir Robert Bealknap and the rest of the sub scribing judges were arrested whUe sitting in court ; but this could not be, as Bealknap was removed, and Robert de Charleton ap pointed his successor, three days before. He was, however, conveyed to close imprison ment in the Tower. At the trial, on March 2, Bealknap pleaded the compulsion under which he signed, and prayed mercy ; but the temporal lords, not admittine that excuse, found him and the others guilty, and adjudged them to be drawn and hanged as traitors, their heirs to be disinherited, and their lands and goods to be forfeited to the king. The spiritual peers, who had previously retired from the house, the case being capital, now came forward and in terceded for the lives of the unfortunate judges, whose sentence was ultimately com muted to that of banishment for life. The town of Drogheda, with three miles round it, was fixed as the retreat of Bealknap, and an allowance of 40/. was granted to him for his support. There he remained till Ja nuary 1897, when the parliament remitted this part of his punishment, and he was allowed to return to England; and in the following year the whole of the judgment was reversed, and the restoration of such of the forfeited lands as had not been alienated was decreed. (Rot, ParL iii. 283-244, 346, 858.) But all the acts of this parUament were annulled immediately on the accession of Henry IV., so that the forfeiture remained in full force. The date of his death is not precisely known. His wife was next of kin and heir of Thomas Phelipp de Baldock, and is called sometimes Sybell, and sometimes Juliana. Their son Hamon did not obtain the complete removal of the attainder till 4 Henry VI. , when he recovered possession of his estates, which descended eventuaUy to his grandson Sir Edward Bealknap, who was a privy counsellor in the time of Henry VII. and VIII. Dying without issue, the property was divided among his three sisters, one of whom married Sir WiUiam Shelley, ajudge in the latter reign. BEAUCHAMP (Bello-Campo), Robeet DE, was the son of a baron of the sarrie name, of Hache in Somersetshire, on whose death, about 7 John, he was left a minor, under the guardianship of Hubert de Burgh. In 17 John he was sheriff of Oxfordshire, and constable of the castle of Oxford. The manor and park of Woodstock were also committed to his charge, and in reward for his adherence to his sovereign in that time of revolt, he received various grants of land. (Rot. Pat. 62, 178; Rot. Claus. i. 220, 236, 251, 267.) On July 6, 1234, 18 Henry III, he was constituted one of the king's justices of the Bench, and in 26 Henry 111. he paid eighty 66 BEAUCHAMP marks to be exempted from attending the king into Gascony. He died in 36 Henry HI., his son and heir, Robert, being admitted to do homage February 1, 1252, on paying 100/. for his relief. (Excerpt, k Rot. Fin. ii. 123.) After a long succession of honours granted to his descendants, the judge is represented in the House of Lords by the Dukes of Norfolk and Somerset and the Marquis of Hertford. BEAUCHAMP (Bbllo-Campo), Walter DE, the family of Walter de BeUo-Campo was settled at Elmley Castle in Worces tershire, of which county his ancestors -were hereditary sheriffs. His father, WUliam, died before 13 John, leaving him as yet a minor. Roger de Mortuo Mari, and Isabella his -wife, had a grant of his wardship and marriage on a fine of three thousand marks. He had attained his majority in February 1216, 17 John, for he was then entrusted -with the sheriffalty of Worcestershire; but a few months afterwards he joined the barons' party for a short time. He soon, however, recovered the king's favour, but, ha-ying been excommunicated for hia seces sion, he -was obUged to apply to the pope's legate for absolution before his lands were restored to him ; and from that time, with a short interval, tiU his death he retained the sheriffalty. In 7 Henry III. he obtained the grant of a market for Kibworth in Leicestershire, and was allowed tohave the scutage of his knights and tenants. He was twice selected to perform the duties of justice itinerant, in 1226 and in 1227. For some offence, which is not stated, he was disseised of his sheriffalty in 14 Henry IIL, in which year he was summoned to show cause why he had not accounted for the preceding year ; but before the close of that year he was re instated in his office on a fine of six palfreys. He died in 1236, when William, his son, on April 16, did homage for his father's lands, and paid the usual baronial relief of 100/. for the livery of them. The son of this William became Earl of Warwick, and one of his descendants was created Duke of Warwick, a title now extinct, as are several baronies derived from the same source. The only peers who can now claim a de scent from this judge are the Earl of Aber gavenny and Earl Beauchamp. BEAUCHAMP (Bbllo-Campo), William DE, would seem to be the lord of the ba rony of Bedford, for livery of which, on the death of his father Simon, in 9 John, he gave five hundred marks and si.x pal freys. Although he was -with the king's array in the expeditions to Scotland in 13 John, and to Poitou in 16 John, he after wards deserted the royal cause, and enter tained the rebellious barons at the castle of Bedford, which, in the following Decem- BEAUFORT her, was captured by Faukes de Breaute. He was one of the barons who were ex communicated by name ; and even on King John's death he did not return to his aUe- giance, but was taken in arms by the royal forces at the siege of Lincoln, in May 1217. Before October in that year, however, he made his peace and had restitution of his lands. "When the castle of Bedford was destroyed, in 1224, in consequence of the resistance of Faukes de Breaute, William de Beauchamp had the site restored to him, -with part of the materials to erect a man sion there. In the previous year, 7 Henry IIL, he was in the expedition to Wales, for his support in which he had a grant of the scutage of the tenants of his different possessions, which were situate in eight counties. (Rot. Claus. i. 325, 326, 571, 632, 654, ii. 23.) He was again engaged in that country in November 1238, and was present when Richard, earl marshal, surprised the king at the castle of Grosmunt, when he and many of his barons narrowly escaped with their lives. In the following summer, ou July 6, 1234, he was assigned to sit at the Exche quer 'tanquam baro;' and his attestation in that character appears three years after that date. (Madox, ii. 54, 317.) In 19 Henry III. he was constituted sheriff of the united counties of Bedford and Buck ingham, which he held for the next two years. (Fuller,) He lived to a good old age, the fine roll containing an entry of his lands being seized, as usual, into the king's hands on his death, on August 21, 1262. He had five years previously settled his estates on his son William, for the king's confirmation of which the latter paid a fine of five hun dred marks . (Exceipt. e Rot. Fin . u. 264, 381 .) He married three -wives — Gunnora, the sister of WiUiam de Lamvallei, receiving with her the town of Bromley; Ida, -with whom he had the manor of Ne-wport in Buckinghamshire ; and, thirdly, in the latter years of his Ufe, Aniicia, to whom, soon after his death, the manor of Belcham was committed in tenancy. ( Ibid. ii. 883.) Both his sons, WiUiam and John, dying without issue, the property was ultimately divided among his daughters. (Dugdale's Baron, i. 223 ; R. de Wcndooer, iu., iv.) BEAUFORT, Henrt (Bishop of "Wm- CHESTER). "When the statute was passed, in January 1397, legitimating the children of John of Gaunt by his mista'ess Catherine S-winford, whom he had married in the preceding year, Henry Beaufort, the second son, was probably just of age, as he is called clericus on the roll, and his next brother, Thomas, is styled domicellua. (Rot. Pari iii. 343.) He was educated in part Ojt Aix-la-Ohapelle, and in part at Queen's College, Oxford; and when he was BEAUFORT little more than a boy he formed an ama tory connection with Alicia, daughter of Richard, Earl of Arundel, sister to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and nearly re lated by marriage to John of Gaunt him self, and had by her an illegitimate daughter named Joan. The amour did not impede his future fortunes, nor prevent his brother, King Henry IV., from placing his own son, afterwards Henry V., under his tuition in the same college. This was about the year 1399, when Beaufort had been appointed chancellor of the university, an office which he held only one year.' In the capacity of tutor he no doubt ingratiated himself with his pupil, and certainly was not a very severe preceptor, if we may judge from the money which he advanced to him while Prince of Wales ; being no less a sum than 826/. 13s. 4d., the whole of which was repaid as soon as Henry came to the throne. (Devon's Issue RoU, 329.) Bred up as an ecclesiastic, he received in the year of his legitimation the deanery of Wells, together -with a prebend in the church of Lincoln, and was elected bishop of the latter see on July 14, 1398. He accompanied King Richard on his fatal ex pedition to Ireland, during which Henry of Lancaster came back from his exile ; and he was one of three bishops who were with the king at Milford on his too long delayed return. His indifference to the event and the poUtic character which he then bore are shown by his appearing in the first parlia ment of the usurper, and consenting to the perpetual imprisonment of his late master. (Rot, ParL iii. 426.) His presence at the earlier councils of Henry W., and his being entrusted with the education of the young prince, prove that there was no interruption in the intercourse between him and his royal brother. In 1402 he was sent to escort the king's second wife, Joan of Navarre, Duchess of Brittany, to England. This marriage took place on the 7th and her coronation on the 25th of February 1403, within four days of which the young bishop received the Great Seal as chan cellor of England. For his accommodation in attending the court the towns of ' Wol- tomstowe and Old Stratford' were assigned for his livery, and ' pro herbergiagio ' of his servants and horses. (Rymer, vui. 324.) The death of William of Wykeham occur ring about this time, the king procured his election to the vacant bishopric of Win chester, the temporalities of which were restored to him on March 14, 1405. (Ibid. 302.) On his translation to this see he vacated the office of chancellor ; but during the remainder of the reign he acted as one of the council ; and on January 27, 1410, tliere being then no chanceUor, he declared the causes for which the parliament was summoned. (Rot. Pari ui. 622.) BEAUFORT 67 On the accession of his pupil and nephew Henry V., March 13, 1413, the Great Seal was immediately replaced in his hands. He retained it during the whole of the first four years and part of the fifth year of the reign, opening all the parliaments that were held during that period, and having the satisfaction to announce to that of Novem ber 1415 the glorious victory of Agincourt, won Uttle more than a week before. (Ibid. iv 62.) Just pre-vious to the king's next expe dition into France, for the support of which the bishop had advanced him the sum of 14,000/., secured on certain duties, and for the repayment of which a golden crown was deposited -with him as a pledge on July 18, 1417 (Ibid. iv. Ill), the Great Seal was resigned by Beaufort on the 23rd of that month, when he obtained a grant of pardon for all crimes and offences. (Rymer, ix. 471.) The apparent cause of this retirement was to undertake a pilgrimage to the Holy Land ; but the probable one was to proceed to the Council of Constance, then sitting, for the purpose of settling the claims of iihree contending popes, and of arranging certain reformations in the Church. Though not originally appointed on the part of England to attend this council, he deemed his ap pearance there necessary in order to ter minate a struggle which had already lasted too long. He reached Constance iu the garb of a pilgrim, and his presence was deemed by some to be very prejudicial to the cause of the reform of the Churchi The question then agitating was, whether that or the election of the pope should take precedence. By his suggestion, and on the promise of the cardinals not to delay the consideration of reform, the election was proceeded with ; bat on its faUing on Martin V. every attempt to renew the question of reform was frustrated, and the council was dissolved -without any sound improvement being effected. (Tyler's Hemy V. ii. 61.) In November following, the new pope named the bishop cardinal and apostoUc legate in England, Ireland, and Wales; but by the remonstrances of Archbishop Chichely, who considered this an encroachment on his authority, the king forbade him to accept the dignity. From Constance the bishop proceeded on his pil grimage to Jerusalem, of his adventures in which, or of the precise date of his return,. we have no certain information. We find the bishop again in England in 1421, when he was one of the sponsors for the king's son, afterwards Henry VI. ; and again lent his sovereign 14,000/. towards the prosecution of the war, for which and for the arrears of the former loan a golden crown was again given in pledge. (Rot. ParL iv. 132.) On the death of Henry V. the bishop 68 BEAUFORT and his brother Thomas, Duke of Exeter, were appointed governors of the person of the infant king, their great-nephew ; while John, Duke of Bedford, the king's uncle, was made protector of England when within the kingdom ; but when absent his brother Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, was to execute the same office. The Duke of Bedford being in France at the accession, the immediate government fell on the Duke of Gloucester; but jealousies arose, which soon resulted in a, determined hostiUty between the duke and the bishop, to whom the former attributed the checks which were placed by the council on his exercise of the supreme authority. Historians differ as to which was in fault; but probably both were in some measure to blame in the commencement of their disputes, and cer tainly in the extent to which they were carried. The bishop's ascendency in the council was naturally very great. The records prove that he never failed in his attendance there; and in February 1424 he assisted the government by advancing 4,000/., after wards increased to 11,302/. i6s. Id., for which he received certain crown jewels in pledge for repayment. On July 6 in the same year he was, by the advice of the council, invested for a third time with the office of chancellor ; and his labours being greatly increased by the absence of both the dukes from the kingdom, the council assigned him 2,000 marks per annum beyond his accustomed salary. (Acts Privy Council, iii. 146, 165.) He opened the parliament. of April 1425 ; but before that of the fol lowing year the disputes between him and the Duke of Gloucester r.an so high as to require the presence of the Duke of Bedford, who came from France to endeavour to effect an accommodation. The immediate necessity for this interference arose from the refusal of the governor of the Tower to admit Gloucester on his return to England into that fortress, in consequence of an order of council to exclude every one more powerful .than himself. Gloucester, attri- "butiDg this order to the bishop, caused the gates of the city to be closed against him, whereupon the retainers of both prepared to attack each other, and were with diffi culty prevented by the ArchbiaJiop of Canterbury and the Duke of Ooimbra, a cousin 9_f the king's. By their intercession the parties were induced to keep the peace till the Duke of Bedford was referred to. The protector on his arrival seems to have acted most fairly, although his im pressions were e-yidently in favour of the 'bishop. He issued instructions from St. Albans to the Archbishop of Canterbury and others to see the Duke of Gloucester, and endeavour to induce hi)u to attend at Northampton, and be riiconciled to the BEAUFOET bishop previous to the parliament which had been summoned for the 18th of that month. But, the duke being inflexible, it became necessary, in order to prevent col lision between the foUowers of the angty parties, to forbid any arms to be brought to the place of meeting. Evading this man date, they attended with bats and clubs on their shoulders ; from which circumstance the parliament was called the Parliament of Bats. The bishop opened the session as chancellor ; and on the Commons praying that the differences might be settled, and the protector and the lords having taken au oath to j udge with impartiality, the two contending parties thereupon agreed to submit to the arbitrament of certain lords then named. The rolls of parUament do not contain the charges made by the duke against the bishop as stated by the his torians, but only the award made hy the lords, by which they unanimously acquitted him ; and he, by their award, made a pub- Uc denial in parUament of their truth, and a public declaration of his having no ill- will to the duke ; who in his turn was re quired by the award to say, 'Fair uncle, since you so declare you such a man as you say, I am right glad that it is so, and for such I take you.' The two then, accord ing to the a-ward, took each other by the hand. This occurred on March 12, 1426, and on the next day the bishop at his own request was exonerated from the office of chanceUor. (Rot. ParL iv 296-299.) On May 14 he prayed for permission to under take a pilgrimage which he had long defeiTcd, and accompanied the Duke of Bedford to Calais. His mortification was in some measure diminished by the an nouncement of his nomination as a car dinal by Pope Martin V , with the title of Presbyter of St. Eusebius, Cardinal of England". He returned to England m September 1428, having been previously appointed legate of the pope, and captain- general of the crusaders against the Bohe mian Hussites. Here the Duke of Glou cester, who still retained his emnity, took an opportunity of annojdng him by induc ing the council to refuse to allow him to officiate on St. George's Day as chancellor of the order of the Garter, on the pretence that it was unusual for a cardinal to retain the bishopric of Winchester. The cardi nal submitted forthe time, but had influence enough to obtain permission to raise 250 lances and 2,600 archers for that crusade. These forces, however, in less than a fort night were, by reason of 'the great and grievous adversities and fortunes of war happened to the king's subjects in his realm of France,' directed to proceed to serve under the Duke of Bedford for half a year, for permitting which the cardinal was to receive a reward of 1,000 marks. (A.cts BEAUFORT Privy Council, iii. 330-345 ; Rymer, x. 414.) The pope's displeasure at this equivocal transaction was well compensated by the popularity it procured for the pre late in England, where he was allowed to resume his seat at the council, notwith standing his being a cardinal. He accom panied the young king to France, and performed the ceremony of his coronation at Paris on December 17, 1480. The Duke of Gloucester died on Fe bruary 28, 1447, previous to which the cardinal had for some years retired from court, and his o-wn dissolution took place on April 11, within six weeks of the duke's. So powerful, however, has been the en chantment of Shakspeare's genius that his dramatic picture of the cardinal's character is too often accepted as historic truth, without reflecting that the simple object of the bard was to enliven scenes developing political events, and to create a powerful interest in his audience by exhibiting the great actors of the time iu strong and exciting contrast. No doubt the cardinal was not exempt from the frailties which were then too common ; he was evidently fond of money, ambitious of power, jealous of rivalry, and more attentive to his political than his episcopal duties. But looking at the public evidences that are still extant, not excluding the multiplied charges with which the duke perpetually assailed him, there is little that can affect his character as a man anxious at once to serve his sove reign and to promote his country's welfare. The popular voice had been strongly in his favour ; and when it is recollected that during his ministerial career France was both won and lost to England, it is not surprising that the prejudice excited against him towards the close of his life should extinguish the memory of his former praises, and that, being the last popular impression of his character, it should alone survive him, and form a tradition sufficiently recognised to warrant its introduction into a dramatic represen tation. Cardinal Beaufort was a bishop for forty-nine years — seven at Lincoln, .and the rest at Winchester, No works of his are mentioned in the former diocese; but in the latter he expended vast sums in completing the cathedral, and particularly in his new endowment of the hospital of St. Cross, which owes many of its present buildings to his munificence, and to which he added the means of supporting an increased number of poor brethren. The charity which he dispensed among the poor during his life was continued under his will ; and the pious dispositions which he made in his first codicil, dated only four days before his death, are a sufficient con tradiction to the allegation that he died in BEAUFORT 69 despair. (Godmn de PreesuL 231, 296; Testamenta Vetusta, 249.) BEAUFORT, Thomas (Dvke opExetek), was the younger brother of Cardinal Henry Beaufort, being the third and youngest son of John of Gaimt, Duke of Lancaster, by his mistress Catherine Swinford, whom he afterwards married, and whose children by him were all legitimated by a statute passed in January 1397. Thomas was then a minor, being called ' domicellus ' in the record ; but two years afterwards he received a grant from the king of the castle and town of Castle Acre in Norfolk. The first notice of his knightly career is in 1402, when he was custos of Ludlow Castle, and received 88/. 18s Qd., for the wages of himself and his garrison, to resist the invasion of the rebels there. In the following year he was appointed admiral of the fleet towards the north, an oHioe which he held for many years; and in 9 Henrj' IV. was made captain of Calais. That in these commands he ex hibited considerable ability as a statesman may be infei-red from his being selected as the successor of Thomas de Arundel, Arch bishop of Canterbury, in the office of chancellor, being the only lay chancellor of that reign. v Sir Thomas received the Great Seal on January 81, 1410, From an entry in the folio-wing year it would seem that the duties were not agreeable to him, as he humbly prayed to be discharged. This, however, was refused by his royal brother (Rot. Claus. 11 & 12 Hemy IV.) ; and he had completed nearly two years of service before he was allowed to retire, on January 5, 1412. During his tenure of office he had a grant of 800 marks per annum, besides the accustomed fee. (Acts of Privy Council, i. 338.) Little other record of his pro ceedings as chancellor remains than of - his opening and adjourning the parliament of November 1411, and as an assistant of the Archbishop of Canterbury in trying John Badby for heresy, (State Trials, i. 219,) On the 6th of July following his re signation of the Great Seal he was created Earl of Dorset ; and during the remainder of his life he devoted himself to pursuits more congenial to his taste than the law, distinguishing himself to the last, in the wars of Henry V., as a brave knight and a wise commander. In the first year of that reign he was made lieutenant of Acqui- taine. He next was appointed governor of Harfleur on its surrender to the English ; and after the battle of Agincourt, October 25, 1415, in which he commanded the rear of the forces, he was constituted lieutenant of Normandy. On the 18th of November 1416 he was raised, in full parliament, to the title of the Duke of Exeter ; and was also made a Knight of the Garter. Scarcely 70 BEAUMONT a year of Henry's reign was unmarked by his prowess, either in Scotland or in France. In all of these encounters he was victorious, except in the battle of Anjou, on April 3, 1421, when the Duke of Cla rence was killed, and he was unfortunately taken prisoner. He was an executor of the will of Henry V. ; and on the death of that monarch, in 1422, he was one of the counsellors ap pointed by the parliament to assist the pro tectors of the kingdom during the minority of his successor. The four remaining years of his life were employed in this duty, and in acting in the field in the foolish and unjust war which the EngUsh carried on against France ; adding to his other honours the office of justice of North Wales. He died at his manor of Greenwich on January 1, 1427; and, as he left no issue by his wife Margaret, the daughter of Sir Thomas Nevill, of Horneby, his titles be came extinct. He was interred at the abbey of St. Edmund's Bury, where, 350 years after (see Times, Oct. 19, 1841), his coffin was discovered among the ruins, and his body was found to be ' as perfect and entire as at the time of his death.' (Dug dale's Baron, ii. 125.) BEAUMONT, RoBEEi DE (Eael oe Lei cester), succeeded, as the elder of two twin sons, his father of the same name, who, as Earl of Mellent in Normandy, was one of the principal ministers of Henry I., and acquired the reputation of being the first statesman in Europe. He was allied to the family of the Conqueror ; and, accom panying him as a young man in his expe dition to England, he distinguished himself by making the first onset in the battle of Hastings. He reward was the grant of above ninety lordships in the counties of Warwick, Leicester, Wilts, Northampton, and Gloucester. Adhering to King Henry I. in his contests with his brother Robert, he was created Earl of Leicester ; and, dying in 1118, Waleran, the younger of the twins, succeeded to the earldom of Mellent, and the lands in Normandy ; while those in England, -with the earldom of Leicester, devolved on this Robert, who was surnamed Bossu. Although this earl was also in great favom- with Henry I., and was -with him at his death in 1136, he supported King Stephen in the early part of his reign, and obtained a grant of the town, castle, and county of Hereford. On the arrival, how ever, of Henry, Duke of Normandy, he declared- for that prince, supplied him with necessaries, and assisted him with powerful military ' aid. He was a witness to the convention between the prince and Kino- Stephen, which terminated this intestine warfare, BEAUMONT On Stephen's death, the earl was among the principal counseUors of his successor ;, and being as eminent for the quaUfications of his mind and his knowledge of the law, as he had sho-wn himself in state policy and civil affairs, he was immediately raised by Henry to the office of chief justiciary, or president of the Exchequer, which he retained during the remainder of his life. This appointment is said by some to have been held by him in conjunction with Richard de Luci ; and there are some writs which seem to show that it was so. Throughout the king's contest with Becket, he aided his royal master in main taining the rights of the state against the encroachments of the clergy. His prudence was so great, and his piety so notorious, that even the violent archbishop did not venture to include him in the sentence of excommunication which he pronounced against several of the king's counseUors, although he had been one of the principal actors, and had joined in prevailing on Becket to sign the Constitutions of Claren don. Before that contest was terminated by the murder of Becket, the Earl of Leicester died, in 1167, at the abbey of Leicester, which he had founded in 1143. He is stated to have been a canon regidar of that abbey for fifteen years before his death; but if so, his employments prove thathe had a dispensation from the observance of the strict rules of the order. Besides this abbey, he founded three other reUgious house.s, and was also a Uberal benefactor to many more. He married Amicia, daughter of Ralph de Waet, Earl of Norfolk, and had by her a son, Robert, surnamed Blanche-Maines, whose son and successor, Robert Fitz-Par- nell, dying in 1206 without issue, the male branch of the family became extinct. (Madox, i. 34, U. 138, 394; Lord Lyttelton's Henry II. ; Dugdale's Baron, i. 84.) BEAUMONT, John, belonged to a very ancient family whose barony dates from the year 1309, but which in "1507 feU into an abeyance which was not terminated tiU the year 1840, when the father of the pre sent baron (Miles Thomas Stapleton) was smumoned -to pailiament as the repre sentative of the eldest daughter of the last lord's sister. The immediate ancestor of John Beau mont was Sir Thomas, the second son of the fom-th baron, whose grandson, Thomas, was seated at Thringston, near Cole-Orton, and died in 1530, leaving, by his wife Anne Harcourt, two sons — this John, and Ed ward, whose representatives still flourish at Borrow-on-lrent in the county of Derby. John Beaumont began his legal career at the Inner Temple, and, gradually rising to BEAUMONT the bench of that society, filled the office of reader in autumn 1537, and a second time in Lent 1543, and was elected treasurer in 1647. As his name does not appear in any of the Reports, he probably did not practise in the common law courts, but confined himself to the Chancery and the Star Chamber, and to such duties as devolved upon him as surveyor of Leicestershire for the crown. In 1650 he was chosen recorder of Leicester ; and his elevation to the master ship of the Rolls took place on December 13 of the same year. On Februaiy 9, 1562, according to King Edward's journal, he 'was put in prison for forging a false deed from Charles Bran don, Duke of Suffolk, to the Lady Anne Powis, of certain lands and leases ;' and it appeared by his subsequent confession that, in a cause before him in Chancery between the succeeding duke, Henry, and the lady, he had bought her title, and had forged the hand of the late duke to support it. In addition to this, he was charged -with peculation to a large extent, an offence which was then too prevalent. In his sub mission, which is dated May 28, he de signates this by the softer name of a debt charged upon him in the Court of Wards and Liveries, amounting to 20,871/. 18s. 8d., in satisfaction of which, he was 'pleased and contented' that the king shoidd have all his manors and lands, and all his goods and chattels, -with the issues and profits of the same, pro-vided that all just allowances out of -the said debt were made to him. To this submission the surrender of his office was added. The king records his subsequent denial of his guilt, and his ultimate confession of it in the Star Chamber on Jime 20, Sir Robert Bowes was designated as his successor as early as May 10 ; and the patent of his ap pointment on June 18 contains an entry of the disgraceful nature of Beaumont's dis missal. Hayward adds that ' he was a man of a dull and heavy spirit, and there fore the more senselessly devoted in his sensual avarice.' (Burnet, Reform, ii. pt. ii. 68, 80-3 ; Kennett, U. [319].) He was evidently treated with much leniency. The monastery of Grace-Dieu, -with a considerable estate in Charnwood Forest in Leicestershire, given to him and his wife and their heirs by Sir Humphrey Foster in 1689, which he had given up at his disgrace, was in the following year granted by the king to Francis, Earl of Huntingdon, and his heirs. As the earl was uncle to John Beaumont's wife, it may be readily supposed that this was a merci ful mode of restoring the estate to the family; and consequently, on Beaumont's death five years afterwards, the lady entered on the land, which was confirmed BEAUMONT 71 to her by the then Earl Henry (Coke's 9 Rep. 183), and was enjoyed by their son, to whose posterity it descended. She was Elizabeth, the daughter and heir of Sir WiUiam Hastings, the younger son of William, Lord Hastings ; and by her he had two sons — one of whom, Francis, is the subject of the next article. ( Wotton's Baronet, iu. 236^ BEAUMONT, Francis, the eldest son of the last-named, John Beaumont, was a fellow-commoner of Peterhouse, Cambridge, in 1664, when Queen Elizabeth -visited the University. He represented Aldborough in 1572, and in 1581 he was elected autumn reader in the Inner Temple, and though neither Dugdale nor Wynne include him among the Serjeants, yet Nichols, in his ' History of Leicestershire ' (iii. 655), quotes a letter from him to the Earl of Shrewsbury, which proves that he took that degree. It is dated at Normanton by Derby, one of his manors, on July 3, 1589, and in it, after apologising ' for omitting to pay 100/. ou a certain day, he requests the earl's per mission to name him as his chief patron in his introductory speech in the court of Common Pleas as a serjeant-at-law, such being the custom ou those occasions.' He was evidently, therefore, included in the call of that year. He was promoted to the bench as a judge of the Common Pleas on January 26, 1593; but sat there little more than five years,his death occurring athis paternal seat of Grace-Dieu on April 22, 1598. He was buried in the church of Belton, -within which parish his seat is situated. (Ath. Cantab. ii. 246.) Burton, the historian of Leicester shire, who was three-and-twenty when Beaumont died, caUshim a 'grave, learned, and reverend judge;' and it may well be believed that his legal attainments alone would not have procured his elevation to the judicial ermine, had not his character for integrity been such as to remove the stigma attached to his father's name. It would be curious to discover the origin of an absurd story told by Nichols from a manuscript note to Burton's work, which states that two men came before the judge at Grace-Dieu for justice, and one of them prayed that the ground might open and he might sink if what he attested was not true ; that the ground immediately did open, but the judge, by pointing with his finger, ordered them to go off, and it closed again ; and that, according to the affirma tion of his great-granddaughter's son, the place sounded in his time, being struck on. By his -wife, Anne, daughter of Sir John Pierrepoint, of Holme-Pierrepoint in Not tinghamshire, and reUct of Thomas Thorold, of Marston in Lincolnshire, he had three sons. His eldest son, Henry, was knighted, and died at an early age, leaving only a 72 BECKET daughter. His second son, John, then suc ceeded to Grace-Dieu (Beaumont's Case, Coke's 9 Rep. 138) and obtained a baronetcy in 1626, which expired in 1686, after hav ing been enjoyed by his two sons in suc cession. Sir John, however, has a better claim to memory than his title, in being the author of ' Bosworth Field ' and other poems, which not only were admired by his contemporaries Jonson and Drayton, but have received high praise in our own time from Campbell and Wordsworth. The judge's third son, Francis, has given an immortality to the name of Beaumont which, it cannot be denied, the highest legal attainments fail to secure. Fletcher, the partner of his labours, was, curiously enough, the son of a bishop ; and unbecom ing as it might then have been deemed that the representatives of two respected mem bers of the episcopal and judicial bench should devote themselves to the theatre, yet, such is the power of genius over learn ing, the twin stars of dramatic excellence have so entirely eclipsed the glories of their fathers, that little more is known of the bishop or the judge than that the poets were their sons. BECKET, Thomas (Archbishop oe Canterbury), was a native of London, having been bom in the parish of St. Mary Colechurch, on the north side of Cheapside, in the year 1118. (Monast. vi. 646.) His ancestors, according to his o-wn ac count, were citizens there, somewhat above the lowest rank, ' non omnino infimi ; ' but the condition of the family had evidently improved in the time of his father, Gilbert, since he had filled the office of sheriff or portgrave of the city. His mother's name was Matilda, and the story other union -with Gilbert, of which neither Becket nor any of his contemporaries state anything ex traordinary, was enlivened about two centuries after his death with a romantic addition, which soon after was popularly accepted as an undoubted truth. Gilbert was said to have become a captive in the Holy Land, and to have inspired -with love his master's daughter, by whose assistance he escaped ; that she followed him to England, and, with no other knowledge of the English vocabulary than the words ' London ' and ' Gilbert,' was lucky enough to work her way to the metropolis, and to discover the object of her search; that Gilbert forthwith procured her baptism, at which six bishops assisted, and rewarded her devoteduess by making- her his wife. Omitting the omens of future greatness by which Thomas's birth was said to be attended, and the miraculous incidents which were attributed to his youth, it will be enough to relate the simple course of his early years. Intended for the Church, he was placed BECKET at the age of ten under Robert, the prior of Merton, and afteiwards studied at the schools in London. He next proceeded to Paris to finish his education, and on his return is said to have been employed as a clerk to the sheriffs of London, an occu pation not unlikely for him to obtam, considering that his father had held that dignity, and was now reduced in his cir cumstances. The superiority of his parts and the cap tivating grace of his manners had already procured him the friendship of those who frequented his father's house. From one of them, a rich baron, he obtained Uttle more than a zest for the amusements to which he was introduced ; but to two Nor man ecclesiastics he was indebted for more solid advantages, and in fact for the means by which he ultimately raised himself to his highest position. They procured his admittance about 1145 into the family of Archbishop Theobald, who, soon discern ing his abilities, took him into his favour, and obtiiined for him canonries in St. Paul's and Lincoln, besides presenting him ¦with the livings of St. Mary-le-Strand (nr as some say St. Maiy-at-Hill) in London, and of Otford in Kent. By the primate's kindness, also, Becket was sent to the schools of Bologna and Auxerre, to study the canon and civil law; and, returning to England no mean proficient in them, he was employed by his patron in several embassies to the court of Rome. Among these was one to obtain the restoration of the legatine power to the see of Canter bury, and another to procure a bull prohi biting the coronation of Eustace, the son of King Stephen. The abilities which he evinced in these negotiations, and his suc cess in both of them, not only confirmed the archbishop's goodwill towards him, but formed the groundwork of the favour -with which Henry, when he ascended the throne, immediately distinguished him. In the meantime, however, he was re warded -with the archdeaconry of Canter bury, about 1168. Whether this dignity was followed or preceded by the provostship of Beverley is uncertain, but the date of 1139, as it stands in the Usts, is obviously erroneous. The death of Stephen, on October 25, 1154, enabled King Henry to show his ap preciation of Becket's talents ; and there seems very little doubt that immediately on his coronation he appointed him his chancellor, although Thynne, Philipot, Old mixon, and even Dugdale affix a later date to his nomination ; inasmuch as a charter has been found, granted in the first year of Henry's reign, among the witnesses to which is 'Thomas the ChanceUor.' (ArcheeoL Journal, xii. 236.) Credit is taken on behalf of that monarch BECKET for naming an Englishman to the office, and thus breaking through the practice, which had obtained from the time of the Con quest, of conferring all places of trust and confidence on Normans. It is, however, impossible not to see that the amalgama tion of the two races, which one hundred years had produced, must have necessarily tended to destroy the exclu.sive system, and that the reason upon which it was founded no longer existed. Although the monarch might naturally regard his native land with aft'ection, he would consider Eng land as his dearest inheritance ; and the disputed successsions of William Rufus, Henry I., and Stephen must have shown how little ground there was for fearing opposition from an Anglo-Saxon claimant. Becket was undoubtedly an Englishman in reference to his o-wn birth, and probably to that of his father also; but whether he was of Norman or Saxon descent is an undecided question. Though he speaks of his progenitors as citizens of London, it does not follow necessarily that they must there fore have been Saxons ; and Fitz-Stephen, his chaplain and biographer, states that a Norman origin was the bond of connection between Gilbert and Archbishop Theobald. But even were he unquestionably a Saxon by lineage as well as birth, the mere desire to flatter that race by his appointment had probably little operation on the mind of Henry, who was much more likely to be influenced in his selection by the recom mendation of Theobald, by his own obser vation of Becket's character, and by his conviction that his acknowledged abiUties and popular manners best qualified him to meet the exigencies of the time. During the eight years of Becket's chan cellorship, Robert de Beaumont, Earl of Leicester, and Richard de Luci were chief justiciaries; and to the united efforts of these three, aided and encouraged by the wisdom of the king, is to be attributed that amelioration in the state of the country which became visible before many years of the reign had elapsed, in the removal of private oppression, the suppression of rob bers, the restoration of property wrongfully withheld, the improvement of agriculture, and the encouragement of all peaceful arts. His more laborious occupations were re lieved by those diversions in which the court indulged, his apparent devotion to which could not but be gratifying to a youthful and joyous king, and is said by some to have been assumed forthe purpose of riveting the infiuence he possessed over the royal mind. Nor are less innocent amusements omitted to be charged against him, which, on the other side, are met by an indignant denial. His intimate footing with Henry, however it may have been gained, is undoubted. The free and happy BECKET 73 intercourse between them, which bore the appearance of fraternal concord, is enlarged upon by Fitz-Stephen, who relates their playful contest when the king transferred Becket's rich cloak to the shoulders of a beggar; and dwells upon the familiarity with which the king would appear without ceremony at his table, and either take a cup of wine in passing, or seat himself un invited as a guest. Henry in these visits could not be igno rant of the extent of Becket's liberality, nor of his general magnificence and profusion. He must have seen the extravagance in which he lived, the number of his attendants and the gorgeousness of their appointments, the splendour of his furniture and the rich ness of his apparel, the hospitality of his table and the luxurious delicacy of his wines and his viands. He must have been aware that the expenses of such an esta blishment could not be defrayed solely from the profits of the Chancery and the produce ot his ecclesiastical and other preferments ; and yet the knowledge produced no dis satisfaction, nor any alteration in Henry's behaviour. On the contrary, he loaded Becket with new benefits, granting him the prebend of Hastings and the wardenship of the castles of Eye and Berkhampstead, to the former of which one hundred and forty knights were attached. The custody also of various vacant bishoprics and abbeys was entrusted to him, from the proceeds of which much of his lavish expenditure was no doubt supplied. The external dignity of the office of chan cellor must have been considerably en hanced by the publicity of Henry's favour, and by the profuseness of the favourite. They formed in fact the first step* towards that advanced position which the possessor of the Great Seal eventually obtained in the councils of the kingdom. It would almost seem that it was with some view of pro moting such an advance that, in the em bassy Becket undertook to the court of France in 1158, to ask the Princess Margaret in marriage for Henry's eldest son, he re doubled his habitual magniticence, and ex hibited so pompous a cavalcade, the details of which are minutely described by Fitz- Stephen, that the inhabitants of the French towns through which he passed, on hearing that it accompanied the Chancellor of Eng land, loudly speculated on the power of the master whose officers made such a display. At Paris he pursued the same course. He prevented Louis from paying him the cus tomary compliment of providing for the ambassador's expenses, by contriving to anticipate the supply; he distributed his gold and silver, his jewels and plate, and even his rich apparel, in gifts around him ; and the sumptuousness of his table surprised even the Parisians, by whom a dish of eels 74 BECKET which'cost a hundred shillings was not soon forgotten. But he attained his object, and brought back a favourable answer. In the following year he appeared in a new character. The war of Toidouse broke out, occasioned by Henry's claim to that duchy in right of his wife Eleanor, whose former husband, Louis, King of France, in sisted on his side of his power to dispose of it. It was on this occasion that, under the advice of Becket, a payment for every knight's fee, under the name of scutage, was first substituted for personal military ser vice ; and a new element was thus intro duced into national warfare by the employ ment of mercenaries. Becket at his own expense led to the field no less than seven hundred knights, and a numerous and splendid retinue, heading them on every enterprise, and performing many acts of personal bravery. A French knight named Engelram de Trie was unhorsed by him in single combat, and left his steed as a trophy to the victor. After the retreat of King Henry, Becket remained behind, and with the aid of Henry de Essex took Cahors and other towns, and supported the king's name by his valour and conduct. These acts, though somewhat inconsistent with his clerical character, and productive therefore of some remarks among his con temporaries, do not appear to have detracted from the general estimation in which he was held, nor to have raised any doubt as to his being elevated eventuaUy to the highest ecclesiastical dignity. On the death of Archbishop Theobald, in AprU 1161, the king resolved to advance his favourite to the primacy ; but the election did not take place till May in the following year. The delay is attributed by some to Becket's own repugnance to accept the appointment, and the conviction he felt that it would place the king and himself in collision. By others it is ascribed to the remonstrances of the English bishops and the Canterbury monks, together with the warnings of Matilda, the queen-mother, against the nomination of a man of so active and resolute a disposition. Nevertheless, the king, who considered that his own views would be forwarded by this promotion, persisted in his purpose ; and Becket was consecrated on June 8, 1162, having been ordained priest on the day before. Henry soon discovered his mistake. He at once lost a companion, a friend, and a counsellor ; and obtained in their stead an opponent to his claims, a rival to his great ness, and a disturber of his peace. To which of the two the blame is to be prin cipally attached will be decided according to the views of their several partisans, and as they may consider the claims of the state or of the Church should have the ascen dency. BECKET Whether the sudden change which Becket made in his mode of life on his attaining the archbishopric, from a free enjoyment of the luxuries of the world to a course bordering on asceticism, extending to the wearing of horsehair and the infiiction of flagellation, which even his contemporaries attribute to him, is or is not to be entirely credited, there is no doubt that a consider able alteration in his conduct was soon apparent. The sacred nature of his office would demand an abstinence from all that would savour of irregularity, and a stricter attention to his external demeanour ; and of these the king was not likely to complain. But it must be allowed that he had reason to consider himself deceived when, almost without notice, and certainly contiary to his expectation, Becket shortly afterwards sent in his resignation of the chanceUorship, on the pretence of his incompetence to perform the duties of the two offices. As this doubt of his own powers could not have been the result of experience, inasmuch as sufficient time had not elapsed to try them, and as the two offices could not be considered in compatible, several bishops having already held the Great Seal, Henry might be justly indignant that Becket, far-sighted as he was, should not have anticipated the diffi culty, and prepared him for such a determi nation. He could not, therefore, avoid sus pecting that it was a foregone conclusion, and that some other cause had produced it. The stricter course of life wMch he had already adopted, and the resumption of some of the Church's ancient rights which he was then beginning to attempt, in conjunction with his resignation of the Great Seal, natu rally led the king to fear that, instead of the able assistant in his plans of government which he had expected, the archbishop was about to become a declared antagonist in all those improvements connected with the, clerical order which he contemplated. The precise time of his retirement from the office of chancellor has not been men tioned ; nor do any of the numerous charters that bear his name in that character afford any e-vidence by which the date can be ascertained. To none of these is his name attached as bearing the two offices of arch bishop and chanceUor ; and it is generally believed that he resigned the latter before the close of the yeai- 1162. The name of his successor has not been discovered ; and there is an hiatus of about eleven yeai's in the list of chanceUors, which has stUl to be filled up. The history of his after-years offers so many problems difficult to solve, even where both parties agree upon the facts, and so many discrepancies where they differ, that the pursuit of the enquiry is a thankless labour to one indifferent to the pretensions of either of the combatants, satisfied that BECKET Such pretensions can never again come into controversy, and feeling that, with what ever justice each side was originally sup ported, the contest eventually became, as most contests do, an alternate exhibition of pride, temper, suspicion, and folly on both parts. That Becket in the first instance claimed privileges for the Church to which no good government could submit few will attempt to deny ; but it must also be admitted that Henry was aiming at a royal independence of papal authority, for which the time was not yet ripe. The first opposition of Becket no doubt led to an increased de mand by the king, unaccustomed to be thwarted in his views ; and thus those ultimate proceedings were caused which, by the violence of both parties, introduced the French king for his own political ob jects into the contest, and terminated in the catastrophe which not only obliged Henry to desist from his efforts, but made the cro-wn for a time more than ever the slave of the papal power. Without enter ing into aU the details of the confiict, it will be enough to notice the principal in cidents in the order of their occurrence. On Becket's resigning the chancellorship, the king required him to give up the arch deaconry of Canterbury, which he wished to retain ; but at the same time he con tinued to entrust him with the education of Prince Henry, his eldest son, who for several years had been under his care ; and the prince remained -with him till the fol lowing May, when Becket proceeded to the Council of Tours. The archbishop having resolved to re sume aU the possessions which had ever belonged to his see, claimed among others the custody of the castle of Rochester, because it had been bestowed on his prede cessor ; and required the Earl of Clare to do him homage for the castle of Tunbridge, though it had been held by that family of the crown for nearly a hundred years. He went further : on the pretence that he had a right to bestow all churches situated on the manors of his tenants, he presented one of his clerks, named Lawrence, to the church of Eynesford. William, the lord of that manor, however, who was also a tenant of the king, and possessed the ad vowson, immediately turned out the in- triider, whereupon the archbishop incon tinently excommunicated him ; and it was not without some hard words between the prelate and the king that the sentence was taken off. This kind of procedure, violent and in temperate as it was, would of course be displeasing to the king, and prompt him to dwell upon and endeavour to restrain other encroachments of the clergy. That body claimed the privilege of having every BECKET iO case in which any member of it was en gaged tried before its own tribunals, how ever gross in its character or however obnoxious to the peace of the community. The sentence in the ecclesiastical courts was that of deprivation and loss of orders ; operating, of course, as a very slight re straint. The consequence was, that mur ders and other atrocities by claimants of clerical exemption were sadly numerous. As a remedy for the evil, the king pro posed that clerks should for such offences be subject to the same jurisdiction as lay offenders ; and that, on conviction, they should be degraded by the Church before the secular sentence was executed. This the archbishop resisted as an innovation, contending for these immunities as an in herent right of the Church ; but, a horrible case of the kind just then occurring, Henry determined to bring to issue a question in which aU who were interested in preserv ing the public peace joined in wishing him success. Had he confined his endeavours to that object, he must have overcome aU opposition. At a meeting of the prelates at West minster in October 1163 he stated his views ; and on the bishops, at the instiga tion of Becket, hesitating to concur, the king asked them whether they would obey the customs of his ancestors. All of them, save one, Hilary, Bishop of Chichester, in answering that they were -wilUng to do so, added the words ' saving their order.' On hearing this reservation, the king angrily broke up the council, and deprived the archbishop of the custody of the castles of Eye and Berkhampstead. After some little time the bishops with drew their opposition, and even Becket consented to retract the objectionable salvo. A council was accordingly held at Claren don in January 1164 in order to record their assent. There the king required that the ancient customs of the kingdom should be reduced to -writing ; and they were forthwith drawn up in the form now known as the Constitutions of Clarendon. They not only made clerks accused of crimes amenable to the king's courts, and referred all questions of presentation to benefices to be decided there, but prohibited all ecclesiastics from leaving the kingdom without the king's licence, and forbad ex- commtmication to be pronounced against his tenants in chief, and the members of his household. They brought also the patronage of the sees and abbeys more under the royal control, and gave the king power to compel the archbishop to do justice to the suitors in his court. The barons gladly adopted them, and the bishops acquiesced. Becket alone resisted for some time; but eventually, on the pressing remonstanee of his brethren and 76 BECKET others, went at their head to the king, and promised to keep the laws ' legitime et bona fide.' In doing this he can scarcely be excused from the charge of deliberate perjury, committed, as he himself pre viously said, ' to be repented hereafter as I may.' His successful solicitation for the pontiff's absolution from his oath would receive its natural interpretation from the king, and would at once show the insincerity with which he joined in the application for the pope's confirmance of the constitu tions. It is not to be wondered at that Henry .should feel indignant at conduct which Becket's warmest admirers do not pretend to justify, or that the archbishop's request for an interview with the king at Wood stock should be refused. The royal dis pleasure was greatly increased by two at tempts then made by Becket to proceed to Rome iu defiance of the constitutions. On both occasions he was baffled by con trary winds; and in a subsequent conlerence with the king he was asked whether one kingdom had not room for both, and was advised to return to the duties of his pro vince. His friendly biographer, Herbert of Bo- sham, shows that his subsequent proceed ings were far from temperate, and not con ducted in a manner to soften the anger of the king. In a short time they came again into conflict. John the marshal, an officer of the Exchequer, having a suit in the archbishop's court relative to the manor of Pageham in Sussex, obtained a writ to remove it, requiring Becket to answer him in the king's court. Instead of appearing personally according to the law, he sent four knights with excuses, which the king deemed frivolous and insufficient. Another day was appointed, namely the 6th of Oc tober (1164), when a great council of the bishops and barons had been summoned to meet at Northampton. He was there charged with treason for his omission, and was condemned to be ' at the king's mercy,' or, in other words, to a forfeiture of all his effects, which was commuted for a fine of 500/. Henry was not satisfied with this, but somewhat unfairly caused him to be ar raigned on other charges, of which, as far as it appears, he had received no previous notice. He was called upon to refund 500/. which he had received as constable of the castles of Eye and Berkhampstead. He submitted, though he alleged that he had spent more iu their repair, and gave secu rity for the amount. It is curious that one of his bondsmen for this money was WiUiam de Eynesford (Brady, i. 385), the subject of his former excommunication. The next charge was for 500/. alleged to have been lent to him by the king during BECKET the war of Toulouse. For the payment of this also, .though he declared it was a free gift, he was obliged to bind himself. _ And lastly, a demand was made upon him to account for the moneys he had received from the vacant sees and abbeys while under his charge, the amount of which is variously stated as 230,000, 30,000, and 44,000 marks. To answer a charge of such magnitude, he demanded, and obtained, a day for deliberation, during which his anxiety produced an illness which delayed the meeting till the foUowing Tuesday. He then proceeded to the council, bearing his cross in his own hands; an unusual proceeding, caused by foolish reports that violence was intended him. The king, how ever, came not into the hall, but sent to him to know his answer. He declared that he had expended all he had received in the king's service ; and that, on being raised to the primacy, he had been expressly discharged from all secular liabiUties in the name of the king, by Prince Henry, and Richard de Luci, the chief ju.sticiary. He refused, therefore, to account, and appealed to the pope. The bishops endeavoured to dis suade him, but he prohibited them from interfering in the cause. Others attempted to intimidate him, but without effect ; and when the Earl of Leicester, at the head of the barons, came to pronounce judgment against him, Becket interrupted the earl, and, refusing to hear him, referred the cause to the pope, and slowly retired from the haU. Stigmatised by several of the corn-tiers as a perjurer and a traitor, he showed hy his replies that he was by no means defi cient in the grosser language of vitupera tion. Whether he really beUeved that the king would resort to personal violence may be doubted, but upon this pretence he con trived to escape iu the middle of the night from St. Andrew's Monastery, where he lodged, and by a circuitous route to reach Sandwich about a fortnight after, where he embarked in a small boat, and safely landed near Gravelines. Both Pope Alexander and King Louis of France attached themselves to Becket's interests — the one warmly, from political rivalry ; the other with more caution, lest Henry should unite himself to the cause of the anti-pope. From both of them Becket had a most honourable reception — first at Soissons from Louis, who furnished him with a train of 300 knights to proceed to the pope at Sens. There he is said by some to have resigned the archbishopric into the hands of the pontiff, and to have been immediately reinstated. Alexander committed him to the care of the Abbot of Pontigny, a Cistercian monastery about twelve leagues from Sens. King Henry, on Becket's flight, had sent ambassadors to Louis to demand that the BECKET archbishop should be given up, and to Pope Alexander to pray for his deprivation. No sooner had he heard a report of the failure of both missions, than he ordered all the archbishop's property and revenues to be seized, banished all his kindred and attendants, and deprived the clerks at tached to him of the income of their pre ferments. These orders were rigorously executed, chiefly by Ranulph de Broc, an old enemy of Becket ; and the unfortunate relations, without regard to age or sex, ¦were transported beyond sea in the depth of winter, but were hospitably received and pro-vided for in Flanders and France. Becket remained at Pontigny nearly two years, habited as a Cistercian monk, but served as became his dignity. In this asylum he pursued a course of study ill- suited for one of his temperament and austere habit of life. Although his friend, John of Salisbury, remonstrated with him, and, pointing out his inflammatory ten dency, recommended the perusal of the Psalms and St. Gregory's Books of Morals, wisely asking him, ' Who ever rises pricked in heart from reading laws or even canons?' the prelate still persisted; and the fruits were soon apparent. The correspondence during this period was most voluminous. According to the opinion of one who has read much of it, it does not ' give a favourable idea of the time. There is abundance of violence, fraud, and insincerity ; mean selfishness and artifice trying to veil themselves under fine professions and language ; cant, too evidently known by those who used it to be nothing better than cant ; strange toss ing to and fro of Scripture perverted by allegory and misapplication ; on the part of the pope there is temporising and much that must be called duplicity ; the cardinals and other high dignitaries appear corrupt and crafty ; Becket is arrogant, intemperate, and quarrelsome ; Henry at once violent and slippery; Louis weakly hypocritical; and Foliot smooth, politic, and tricky.' (Robertson's Becket, 172.) A negotiation opened between the king and archbishop had failed. It began in smoothness, proceeded in heat, and ended in threats and fury. Becket had been re strained by the pope from taking any steps against the king until after Easter 1166 ; and Henry, when that time arrived, thought it best to anticipate the sentence of excommunication which he expected Becket would pronounce by appealing to the pope. Envoys were sent to Pontigny to serve the notice of appeal, but were obliged to content themselves with reading it aloud, as Becket had gone on a pilgrimage to Soissons. There he remained a few days, and then proceeded to Vezelay, where, pn the Sunday after Ascension-day, after BECKET 77 preaching at high mass, he, in the presence of a vast concourse of people, without any previous communication to his clerks of his intention, pronounced sentence of ex communication against John of Oxford Richard de Luci, and others; anathe-^ matised six of the Constitutions of Claren don, and all who should act upon them ; suspended the Bishop of Salisbury; and summoned King Henry to repent on pain of being anathematised if he should persist in his courses. The English bishops ap pealed to the pope, fixing the foUowing Ascension-day as the term for hearing. It was not to be supposed th.it Henry would permit such a provocation to pass unnoticed ; and accordingly, in the follow ing September, he caused an intimation to be given at a general chapter of Cistercians that if the archbishop were admitted into any of their monasteries, he would con fiscate all the English possessions of their order. The consequence, of course, was his retirement from Pontigny ; and the French king having desired him to choose a residence in his dominions, he selected a monastery near Sens. The pope had by this time removed to Rome, whither Henry despatched a mission. At the head of it was John of Oxford, who contrived not only to procure a re versal of his excommunication, and a con firmation of his appointment to the deanery of Salisbury, but also to obtain the no mination of two cardinal legates, William of Pavia, and Otho, during the continu ance of whose commission Becket's power was entirely inoperative.; and the pope prohibited everybody but himself from excommunicating the king. Becket's in dignation appears in violent and most offensive letters, in which the pope him self is not exempted from his_ vehemence. The cardinals made some efforts to pro cure a reconciliation, but through the obstinacy of both parties failed, and re turned to Rome. These proceedings occupied nearly a year, during which the term assigned" for the appeal of the English bishops had ex pired. Becket refused a second appeal they wished to enter, and towards the close of 1167 extended his excommunications to the Bishop of London, Geoffrey Ridel, his own archdeacon (whom, as an instance of his choice of expressions, he called, iu one of his letters, 'Archidiabolus noster'), and a long list of others, among whom were so many about the court of King Henry that ' there was hardly one that could offer him the kiss of peace at mass, but such as were excommunicated either by name or im- pUcitly.' The Roman pontiff was puzzled what to do between Henry's remonstrances adn Becket's representations, supported a-s the 78 BECKET latter were by the French king. Irresolute to act firmly on either side, he took a middle course. He endeavoured to effect a recon ciliation ; and, despatching envoys for the purpose, he suspended the sentence Becket had pronounced tiU the following Lent ; that is, Lent in 1169, for great part of the preceding year had been then ex hausted in the diplomatic negotiations. The world had now begun to be tired of the quarrel. To the pope, Becket's_ perti nacity could be productive of nothingbut annoyance ; Henry, feeling that his king dom and his clergy were kept in a state of continual anxiety, was sincerely desirous of some accommodation ; Louis was not un- -wilUng to get rid of a troublesome guest ; and Becket's own friends and dependents were sighing after a restoration to their former ease. Becket alone refused to make any concession. At an interview between Henry and Louis at Montmirail, in January 1169, Becket was admitted, when, after lamenting the differences which had arisen, and throwing himself upon the king's mercy, the inflexible archbishop qualifled his submission by the words ' salvo honore Dei.' Henry was indignant, justly considering that the reservation was intended to, or at least would, warrant any future resistance ; but, after reproaching him with his pride and ingratitude, declared that he would be satisfled if Becket would act towards him with the same submission which the greatest of former primates had shown to the least powerful of his predecessors. Becket, however, evaded the proposal. Even the King pi France was disgusted, and the meeting terminated without further colloquy. Becket accordingly prepared to retire from the French territory, when Louis, from a new quarrel with Henry, again changed his' policy. On the termination of Lent, therefore, Becket resumed hostiUties by renewing at Clairvaux the excommimi- cations, and including among the denounced the Bishop of Salisbury and others. Not withstanding the efforts made to prevent the admission into England of any letters from Becket, he contrived that the sentence against Foliot, Bishop of London, should be delivered at the altar of St. Raid's on the next Ascension-day. The pope was annoyed, and directed that further proceedings should be stayed tUl he had tried the effect of another mission. This led to a second interview between Becket and the two kings, which took place at Montmartre, near Paris, on No vember 18, 1169, and had nearly led to a friendly result, when Becket demanded the kiss of peace, which Henry, in conse quence of a foolish oath he had taken, having refused, the treaty was again broken off. Becket now threatened' to BECKET place the kingdom under an interdict, and even to excommunicate the king ; and the pope renewed his efforts to produce a re- concUiation. Rotrou, Archbishop of Rouen, one of the new papal commissioners, absolved the Bishop of London ; and Becket's letter of complaint shows that he was as little inclined to pay respect to the pope as to the king, when his own cause was not supported. He says, 'In the court of Rome the Lord's side is -always sacriflced ; Barabbas escapes, and Christ is put to death.' Becket soon found a new grievance in the Archbishop of York having officiated at the coronation of the king's eldest son Henry, which was solemnised at West minster on Sunday, June 14, 1170, that privUege rightfully belonging to him. This, however, did not prevent a meeting taking place near Freteval, on the 22nd of the folio-wing July, between him and Henry, when a formal reconciliation was concluded, the king promising togiye him the kiss of peace in his o-wn dominions. A full restoration of Becket's possessions, and those of his adherents, the advance of a sum of money to pay his debts, and amends for the injury he had sustained in the late coronation, were among the articles agreed on; and the archbishop was to retnrn to the exercise of his functions, and to show aU due obedience to his earthly sovereign.- The performance both of the king's pro mises and Becket's return was delayed; but, after two more interviews at Tom-s, the last of which was a friendly one, Becket resolved to set out, although Louis advised him first to insist ou receiving the kiss of peace. Disappointed of meeting Henry at Rouen, as promised, and of re ceiving a supply for his expenses, he was obliged to stibmit to the escort of his warmest adversary, John of Oxford, and to borrow 800/. from the Archbishop of Rouen. In the meantime he had received from Rome letters suspending the Archbishop of York and other prelates for assisting in the coronation, and renewing the ex communication which had been pronounced against the Bishops of London and Salis bury. Receiving these after the recon ciliation, he might have suppressed them, and little doubt can exist that had he been acting with sincerity and good faith, he would have taken measm-es for the purpose, On the contrary, however, he forwarded them to England before he embarked ; thus exhibiting the intolerance of his spirit, and exciting the greatest exasperation. He saUed from Witsand, near Calais, and landed on December 1, 1170, at Sandwich, where John of Oxford protected him from the threatened interruption of the sheriff of Kent and others. BECKET His reception at Canterbury, after an absence of more than six years, was most enthusiastic ; and his progress in the fol io-wing week to see the young king was something in the nature of a triumph. His conduct, however, with reference to the bishops being known, he received orders to return to his diocese, -without obtaining an interview. When there, he occupied himself till Christmas in exercis ing his archiepiscopal functions, Ranulph de Broc and his other enemies stiU offering him every species of annoyance. On Christmas-day, at high mass, he preached to the people, and after affecting them by a reference to one martyr among their archbishops, and the possibiUty that there might be a second, he concluded with one of those furious denouncements by which he dealt ' damnation round the land ; ' uttering, in a tone ' fierce, indignant, fiery, andbold,'avehement invective against his enemies, and pronouncing sentence of excoinmunication against Ranulph de Broc and his brother Robert, and also against Nigel de Sackville, a court chaplain. The Archbishop of York and the ex communicated bishops had not been idle. They had sailed to Normandy, and meeting the king near Bayeux, had communicated to him the recent proceedings of Becket. Henry's anger knew no bounds, and iu the heat of it he unguardedly dropped words reflecting on the cowardice of his courtiers for suffering him to be so long insulted by a turbulent priest. Four knights then present — Reginald Fitz-Urse, "WilUam de Tracy, Hugh de MoreviUe, and Richard Brito — interpreting these unhappy words too readUy, at once embarked for England, and repaired to Saltwood, the castle of Ranulph de Broc, where they arrived on December 28. Henry, on their departure from the court, suspected their intention, and instantly despatched the Earl of Man- deville and two others, with orders to overtake them and to arrest the arch bishop. But they did not arrive tiU the tragedy was completed. On Tuesday, December 29, the knights arrived at Canterbury, and intruding into the chamber of the archbishop, they de manded of him the withdrawal of the bishops' excommunication. Becket's an swer was proud and firm. He offered to absolve the Bishops of London and Salis bury if they would swear to submit to the determination of the Church ; but he said the pope alone had jurisdiction over the arch'bisnop. On reminding three of the knights that they had been his vassals, they broke into fury, and the discussion ended with most violent threats on their retirement from the room. It was now the hour of vespers ; and the monks and clergj', thinking he would be BECKET 79 more safe in the church, hurried him through the cloisters. But the knights also, regardless of the sanctity of the place, had obtained an entrance, fully armed ; and calUng out, ' Where is the traitor ? ' and then, on receiving no answer, 'Where is the archbishop ? ' Becket replied, ' Here I am; no traitor, but a priest of God.' They repeated their demand for the bishops' absolution, which he met by a repetition of his denial, adding that he was ready to die, but commanding them not to touch his people. The knights then endeavoured to remove him from the church,, but, finding their efforts to drag him away unavailing, Fitz-Urse struck him on the head with his sword, wounding at the same time Grim, his cross-bearer and biographer ; and TracyTand Brito repeat ing the blows, the archbishop'[was soon a breathless corpse at their feet. Hugh de MoreviUe did not strike Becket, being em ployed in keeping off interference ; and the four, rushing out of the church, repaired to Hugh de Moreville's castle in Yorkshire. Though the above four knights only are recorded, other persons were apparently engaged in the atrocious project. Robert de Broc, who joined them, pointed out the private passage to the cloisters ; and Robert Fitz-Ralph, or Fitz-Ranulph, is spoken of by Dugdale as having been concerned in it. "WilUam, the son of the latter, was a jus ticier in this reign, and wiU be mentioned in a subsequent page. Thus terminated the life of one whose character, though distinguished by sterling qualities, was alloyed with many human imperfections : to which the preponderance is to be given is still, and seems likely to be, a question to be agitated by historians and biographers. Too frequently they become the advocates of the one or the other party, instead of being impartial judges between them ; and the difficulty must be admitted of defining the precise line which divides firmness from obstinacy, energy from intemperance, and an honest zeal in claiming the privileges of one order from an insidious encroachment on the prero gatives of another. Whatever opinion may be formed of the claims made by Becket on behalf of the Church, few will praise him for temperance in his enforcement of them, or consider that he adopted the wises-t course to obtain their recognition ; and, whUe none wiU deny the extent of hia acquirements or the briUiancy of his talents, many will attribute his canonisa tion more to the swords of his murderers than to the virtues of his life. Two years after his assassination he was canonised ; and his body, which the monks had hurriedly buried without ceremony in the crypt, from fear that it might other wise be exposed to indignity, was removed 80 BECKINGHAJI in 1221 to a chapel prepared for its recep tion, where his shrine for many subsequent ages was visited by pilgrims from all pa,rts, whom the successive popes, to keep alive the natural horror which his martyrdom had excited, and to connect it with reUgious zeal for papal supremacy, assiduously en couraged by granting them extraordinary indulgences. The riches which supersti tion lavished on this shrine were enormous, and continued to flow in, till Henry VIII., assuming the title of ' Defender of the Faith,' and deeming Becket's example a provoca tion to opposition, ordered the shrine to be destroyed, seized the accumulated treasures, and,^ directing his bones to be burned a,nd his ashes to be scattered to the winds, stig matised him as a rebel and traitor to his prince, and struck his name from the ca lendar of saints. Becket had two sisters who survived him. One of them, Mary, was made Abbess of Barking in Essex, in 1173 ; and the other, Agnes, was married to Thomas Fitz- Theo'bald de Helles, by whom, about the end of Henry's reign, was founded a hos pital in London, on the land which had belonged to Gilbert Becket, and where Thomas was born. It was called the Hos pital of St. Thomas the Martyr, of Aeon, and consisted of a master and several brethren of a particular order, professing the rule of St. Augustine, about that time instituted in the Holy Land. It of course did not escape the dissolution under Henry VIIL, and now belongs to the Mercers' Company, part of it being called the Mercers'" Chapel. (MonasL i. 487, vi. 645.) BECKINGHAM, Elias de, was one of the two judges who alone were found pure, when all the others were convicted of cor rupt practices, and dismissed in disgrace from the seat of justice. Nothing is re corded of him beyond this fact and the dates of his judicial career.' He is first mentioned at the bottom of the list of justices itinerant into Middlesex in 2 Edward I., 1274 ; but he clearly was not then a regular justicier, as he is mentioned in a liberate of the foUowing year as a king's serjeant. In 4 Edward I. he was one of the justices of assize then appointed. He afterwards filled the office of keeper of the records and writs of the Common Pleas ; and au allowance of twenty shillings was made to him for the expenses of their carriage from Westminster to Shrewsbury, where the king, on his expedition to Wales in 11 Edward I., had ordered the court to be held. (Madox, ii. 7.) It was not till Michaelma.s, 13 Edward I., 1285, that he was raised to the bench as a judge of the Common Pleas ; and -when the judges were all apprehended by the king on charges of bribery and corrup tion, he and John de Metingham only were BEDINGFIELD honourably acquitted. This occurred to- -wards the end of 17 Edward I., 1289 ; and the ParUament Roll of 20 Edward I. con tains an honourable record of his purity, (Rot. ParL i. 84.) He retired from the bench, or died, in 34 Edward I., 1805, the last fine levied before him being dated in fifteen days of St. Martin in that year. ( Orig. Jurid. 44.) He was buried at Bottisham Church in Cambridgeshire, and on his sepulchral memorial he is de.signated ' Justiciarius Domini Regis Anglise.' BEDINGFIELD, Thomas, was the second son of Thomas Bedingfield, Esq., of Darsham Hall in Suffolk, which he afterwards purchased from his elder brother, Philip. He was bom about 159.3, and, ha-ying been admitted a student at Gray's Inn in 1608, was called to the bar on February 17, 1615, and was reader there in Lent 1636. He acquired such eminence iu his profession that he was made attorney- general of the Duchy of Lancaster,* and was thereupon knighted. He was assigned by the House of Lords in 1642 to conduct the defence of Sir Edward Herbert, the attorney-general, against the impeachment of the Commons ; but declining to plead, in consequence of the latter threatening any counsel who presumed to appear against them with their displeasure, he was committed to the Tower by the peers for his contempt of their commands. He did not, however, long suffer under this choice of predica ments, being released from his incarceration in three days. (State Trials, ii. 1126, 1129.) The Commons showed their esti mation of him in 1646 and 1647 by several times inserting his name as one of the per sons they propo.sed as commissioners of the Great Seal ; but the appointment never was completed, in consequence of the dis agreement of the Lords. But both houses concurred in October 1648 in a vote ap pointing him one of the judges of the Common Pleas. Not long, however, did he retain his new dignity, for on the decapi tation of the king, in January 1649, Sir Thomas refused to act under the commis sion offered by the executioners. ( White loeke, 224, 278.) Retiring into private life, he outlived the interregnum, and on the return of Charles II. , in 1660, he received immediately and in legitimate manner the degree of the coif. He died at Darsham, on March 23, 1660-1, where his monument still remains. By his wife, Elizabeth, daughter of Charles Hoskins, of the county of Surrey, he left a son of the same name, and three daughters. (Suckling's Suffolk, U. 222, 226.) BEDINGFIELD, Henrt, was the fourth of five'sons of John Bedingfield, of Hales- worth in Suffolk, the younger brother of BEK the above Thomas, and himself a bencher -of Lincoln's Inn, by his wife, Joyce, daughter and coheir of Edmund Morgan, of Lambeth. He was bom in 1633, and', hav ing been caUed to the bar at Lincoln's Inn on May 7, 1667, was raised to the degree of the coif in 1663 ; being made king's Serjeant some time after, and knighted. In 1684 he was elected sub-steward of Crreat Yarmouth, Roger North calls him ' a grave but rather heavy lawyer ; but a good church man and loyal by principle.' He relates (p. 246) that Lord Guildford ' had cast his ¦«ye upon him,' and informed him of his intention to nominate him for a vacancy on the bench. The seijeant gratefiiUy de clared he would ' ever own his preferment as long as he lived to his lordship, and to no other person whatever.' But on hear ing this. Chief Justice Jeffreys, jealous of the lord keeper's power, sent to the Serjeant's brother, a woollen-draper in London, afterwards lord mayor, who was one of his creatures and boon companions, and told him that if his brother so much as went to the lord keeper, he would oppose him, and he should not be a judge at all. The poor serjeant, whose 'spirits were not formed for the heroics,' was obliged to conform, and accordingly was not raised to the bench during Lord Guildford's life. He however received the promotion soon after that nobleman's death, being ap pointed a judge of the Common Pleas on February 13, 1686. It is to be presumed that, either from his own conviction or the arguments of Jeffreys, he acknowledged the king's power to dispense with the penal laws, as two months after, upon the recom mendation of the same arrogant patron, he was raised to the head of that court, on April 21, on the discharge of Chief Justice Jones. He did not enjoy this dignity much more thau nine months, dying suddenly while recei-ving the sacrament in Lincoln's Inn Chapel, on Sunday, Febru- ^ary 6, 1687. A mural monument of white marble was erected to his memory in Halesworth Church. (Suckling's Suffolk, ii. 837 ; Bramston's Autobiog. 221, 223, 268.) BEK, Thomas (Bishop oe St. David's), was second son of Walter Bek, or Becke, baron of Esseby in Lincolnshire ; and Mr. Hardy (p. 12) places him in his ' Catalogue of Keepers of the Great Seal,' on the questionable ground that when John de Kirkeby, in whose possession it was left by Robert Bumel, the chancellor, was commanded to attend the king in May 1279, 7 Edward I., he was directed to leave the Seal, sealed up with his own seal, in the custody of Thomas Bek ; and that in the same month they were both ordered to at tend with it at Dover, and there to await the king's messenger. Bek was no doubt BELET 81 at that time, as he certainly was three years before (Issue Roll, iii. 91), keeper of the king's wardrobe, the usual place of the Seal's deposit. In the same year, also, he was constituted treasurer ; but remained so a short time only, as Joseph de Cancy, prior of St. John of Jerusalem, held it very soon after. Like most of the officers of the court in those days, he was an ecclesiastic, and in 3 Edward I. was in possession of the arch deaconry of Dorset, which he held till he was elected Bishop of St. David's, on June 3, 1280, He sat there for thirteen years, during which time he founded two colleges in Wales — one at Abergiully, and the other at Landewy-brevy. He died on April 14, 1293. (Godwin, 580 ; Le Neve, 218, 512.) His brother, Anthony Bek, was an officer in the Exchequer, and ultimately became Bishop of Durham. BELER, Roger, whose family was fixed at Kirkby, on the Wrethek, in Leicester shire, in which and in the neighbouring counties they held large possessions, was the son of "WilHam Beler and A-vicia his -wife, and the grandson of another Roger Beler, who was sheriff of Lincolnshire in 40 Henry III. (Monast. vi. 511 ; Madox, n. 142.) In 12 Edward II. the king granted him the hundred of Framelond, and certain farms in Leicestershire, for his laudable services. (Abb. Rot. Orig. i. 230.) It is not stated in what capacity they were rendered ; but in the same year he received a general pardon as an adherent of Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, and was confirmed in his office of bailiff and steward of Stapel- ford in Leicestershire. (Cal Rot. Pat. 86.) He was afterwards occasionally employed in judicial commissions till July 20, 1322, 16 Edward IL, when he was raised to the Exchequer bench. He came to a violent end, being attacked and murdered on January 29, 1326, on his journey from Kirkby to Leicester, by Sir Eustace de Folville, lord of the neighbour ing manor of Ashby, who was himself mortally wounded with an arrow. A com mission was issued to try the offenders ; and the goods of Roger la Zousch, lord of Lubesthorp, and Robert de Helewell, charged as accessories and flying from justice, were thereupon ordered to be seized into the king's hands. Sir Roger was buried in the chantry chapel he had erected at Kirkby, where his tomb, with a fine alabaster effigies of him in complete armour, still remains. By his -wife, Alicia, he left an infant son. (Madox, ii. 60 ; ParL Writs, n. 622 ; Rot. ParL U. 432 ; Abb. Rot. Orig. ii. 6-171 ; Royal Progresses to Leicester, by W. Kelly.) BELET, MicHAEl, was the second son of Hervey Belet, and eventually succeeded to the lordship of Wrokeston in Oxford- 82 BELET ford'shire, and to the manor of Shene or Richmond, which King Henry I. had granted to the family by the serjeanty of chief butler or cupbearer to the king. The sheriffalty of various counties -was entrusted to him — of Worcestershire, Wiltshire, Gloucestershire, Warwickshire, and Leicestershire — at various dates from 22 Henry II. to the end of the reign. (Fuller's Worthies.) In 23 Henry IL, 1177, and the two fol lowing years, he acted as a justice itinerant in various parts of England ; and when the great council of Windsor, in the last of those years, divided the kingdom into four parts, and sent judges into each to admi nister justice, he was one of the five selected for the circuit comprehending ten counties of the home district. There are records of his acting in this character, not only in these but other cotmties, through many succeeding years, as late as 3 John, 1201-2. Many instances occur, also, of his partaking in the judicial duties of the Curia Regis at Westminster, fines being levied before him from 28 Henry IL, 1182, through the reign of Richard, tiU the third of John. About this period he died, leaving by his wife. Emma, daughter and coheir of John de Keynes, several sons, two of whom, Hervey and Michael, succeeded in turn to his honours. Hervey died -without issue, and Michael is the subject of the next article. BELET, Michael. There were two Michael Relets in the reign of Henry III. — one, the son of Robert Belet, of Cumbe, who died in 3 Henry III. ; and the other, the subject of this notice, who, from his pro fession, was always called Magister Michael Belet. He was the second son of the above Michael Belet. In 2 John the king granted to him, as his 'dilecto et familiari clerico,' the church of Hinclesham ; and in 6 John that of Setburgham, in the diocese of CarUsle. (Rot. Chart. 75, 134.) In 3 John he paid forty marks for having the marriage of Robert de Candos ' ad opus sororis suse ; ' and on the death of his brother, Hervey Belet, he fined 100/. for having the king's butlery, which he inherited as attached to his manor of Shene or Richmond in Surrey. (Rot. de Oblatis, 180, 368.) He was some time afterwards disseised of his lordship of Wroxton in Oxfordshire, having incurred, as the record says, the king's ' malevolentiam ' for some offence -which is not named ; but in 14 John he recovered his lands and the king's goodwill by a timely fine of five hundred marks. In the next year, however, the roU says that he is not to be summoned for sixty marks which he still owed for the butlery, ' because the king keeps that office in his own hands, and as yet holds it.' (Madox, i. 462, 474.) During King .lohn's troubles BELL he remained faithful to the royal cause-, and in the last year of his reign had a* grant of the land of Wischard Ledet, who' was with the king's enemies. In 8 Hemy TIT, he was custos of the rents of the- bishopric of Coventry; and in the tenth, year was appointed to audit the accounts! of the justiciers of the quinzime, being himself one of those assigned to coUect it in Northamptonshire. (Rot. Claus. i. 286j 683, 585, 599, U. 96, 147.) These offices indicate that he was then in the Exchequer; and Madox (ii. 817) includes him among the barons of that court, on the authority of a writ attested by him in 22 Henry HI.,. 12.38. He executed the office of chief butler at the marriage of King Henry in the- twentieth year of his reign ; and founded the priory of Wroxton, for canons of the order of St. Augustin. The date of hi* death is not stated. BELL, Robert, a barrister of the Middle Temple, became reader there in autumn 1665. Though he is afterwards occasionally noticed in the Reports of Dyer and Plowden, he seems to have been more sedulously engaged in senatorial than in professional duties, having been a mem ber for Lyme Regis in aU EUzabeth's parliaments from 1562 tiU the period of his death. In October 1566 he was one of the committee appointed to petition the queen about her marriage, and expressed himself, as some other members did, -with considerable boldness, on the unsatisfactory- nature of her majesty's answer. This led to a dissolution in the foUo-wing Januaiy, and no new parUament was caUed till April 1571, when Mr. Bell was named among those who were assigned to confer with the spiritual lords for the reformation of the abuses in religion. In a debate on the subsidy, having urged ' that the people- were galled by two means, . . . namely, oy licences and the abuse of promoters,' and having pressed ' for the caUing in of certain licences granted to four courtiers to the utter undoing of 6,000 or 8,000 of the queen's'- subjects,' he was sent for by the council, 'and so hardly dealt with, that he came into the house with such an amazed coun tenance, that it daunted all the house in- such sort, that for several days there was not one that durst deal in any matter of importance.' Another parUament was summoned in the following year, of which Mr. BeU was elected speaker on May 10. (ParL Hist. i. 715-794.) By various prorogations this parliament was kept alive till February 8, 1676, when it again met, and the session was rendered remarkable by the committal of Mr. Peter ' Wentworth for the boldness of his speech on the first day. . At the close of it ther' disagreeable duty was imposed on th* BELLA FAGO speaker of moving the queen on the sub ject of marriage. This he seems to have done with a great deal of skiU, artfuUy in terlarding his address -with graceful flattery, and concluding it -with the welcome offer ing of a subsidy. It is evident, from the lord keeper's answer, that her majesty was not offended, for she gave a conditional assent to the prayer, and -with gracious words prorogued the parliament on May 14. This prorogation lasted nearly five years, and the interval was an eventful one to the speaker. Notwithstanding the freedom of his language in the earlier part of his parUa mentary life, his conduct in the speaker's chair had been so satisfactory to the queen that she took the first opportunity to re ward him. A vacancy occurring in the- office of chief baron, he was invested with it on January 24, 1577, and was at the same time honoured with the order of knighthood. His judicial career, however, was brought to a fatal termination -within a very few months. At ttfe summer assizes at Oxford, on the trial of one Rowland Jenkes, ' a sawcy foul-mouthed bookseller,' for scandalous words uttered against the queen, every person in court was seized -with such a malady, arising, it was beUeved, from the stench of the pri soners, that they all died within forty days, to the number of three hundred. Among the victims were Chief Baron Bell, the sheriff, and several knights and gentle men of the county, Serjeant Barbara, and other lawyers. (Camden's Elizabeth, in Kennett, ii. 459.) The chief baron was buried at Leominster. Sir Robert's elevation to the bench rendered him incompetent to sit in parlia ment, and he consequently could no longer flu the speaker's chair ; but, as the pro rogation stiU continued, neither of the vacancies could be supplied till the next session, which did not occur till nearly four yejis after his death, when the first act of the House of Commons was to elect a speaker in his place. (ParL Hist. i. 809.) Camden describes him as 'a sage and grave man, and famous for his knowledge in the law.' He was of a respectable Norfolk family, and by his marriage with Dorothy, daughter of Edmund Beaupre, of OutweU in that county, he became possessed of Beaupre HaU. His male descendants long flourished in the cotmty, (Anecdotes and Traditions, Camden Soc. 2, &c. ; Blomefield's Norfolk, iv. 133.) BELLA FAGO, Rogee de, is prcrved by the RoUs of ParUament (i. 160, 218) to be one of the justices of assize for Wai-wick- shire in 33 Edward I., 1306, and to have been afteiTvards appointed a justice of trailbastpn for Comwall and nine other counties. His harshness and cruelty in BENSTEDE g3 performing this duty are commemorated in a contemporary song. ( Wrights Pol. Songs, 233.) He resided in Oxfordshire. It does not appear in what manner he was related to the opulent family of his name, which was settled in Norfolk, and which traced its lineage to Ralph de BeUa Fago in the time of the Conquest. BENDINGS, William db. When the great council which met at Windsor in 1179, 25 Henry IL, divided the kingdom into four districts, and sent -wise and learned men into each for the admini stration of justice, WUUam de Bondings was selected as one of the six justiciers to whom the northem counties were appro priated, and who were also specially con stituted to sit in the Curia Regis, to hear the plaints of the people. This seems to have been the first instance of the nomina tion of extra judges in the king's courts ; the prelates and barons of the kingdom, -with the great officers of state, having- hitherto acted almost entirely in that capacity. _ Previously to his elevation to the bench, he was one of four commissioners sent to Ireland in 1174 to settle the differences there, and to bring over Raymond, whom; the king had recalled. He was alive in the beginning of the reign of Richard I. (Madox, i. 94, 138, 285; Bradt/'s England, 363; Pipe Roll, 1 Richard L) BENEFAOTA, Richard. See R. Fitz- Gilbert. BENET. The only notice recorded of Benet, ' Magister Benedictus,' is the sen tence of excommunication pronounced against him by the chancellor, WiUiam de Longchamp, Bishop of Ely, because he presumed to hold the Great Seal against the statutes of the king and kingdom, as the denunciator asserts, and con-ti:ary to his prohibition. (Madox, i. 77.) This no doubt was when Prince John and the barons removed Longchamp rom the government, and forced him to quit the kingdom, in 1192. The Seal was probably then placed in the hands of this Benet, to perform the necessary duties during the vacancy. BENSTEDE, John de, was in frequent employment under Edward I. and Edward II. He was clerk, or secretary, to the former, whom he accompanied to Flanders on August 22, 1297, on which occasion the Great Seal, which the king took with him, was placed in his hands, and another seal left m England with the chanceUor. On the king's return in the following March, John de Benstede was the messenger em ployed by him to carry this latter seal to the Exchequer, the Great Seal being then given back to the chancellor. (Madox, i. 72.) He afterwards held a place in .the g2 84 BEEEFOED king's wardrobe, when the Seal was several times deposited with him. His closeness to the king's person in 33 Edward I. is shown by a letter addressed to him by Edward, Prince of Wales, re questing him to present to the king a peti tion which he enclosed from the Earl of "Ulster and others, and to pray, on his part, that such justices should be assigned as would redress the grievances they com plained of He was advanced to the post of chancellor of the Exchequer in the same year (Cal Rot. Pat. 65) ; but he resigned it in 1 Edward IL, when he became keeper of the wardrobe. (Madox, u. 29.) In 2 Edward II. he was again in the Scottish wars, and was sent with Roger Savage to the King of France to arrange a meeting between him and the King of Eng land. (Baronage, ii. 91.) On October 6, 1309, in the third year, he was constituted one of the justices of the Common Pleas, and fines were levied before liim from the next year till 1320 ; in which, en October 16, William de Herle was ap pointed a judge in his place. (Orig. 44; Madox, ii. 7, 31.) He probably resigned then, as, according to the inquisition (Cal. i. 319), his death did not occur till 1323 or 1324. In 8 Edward II. he was sent on the king's service to Scotland, and in the tenth year had been selected as an envoy to Rome on the Scottish affairs; but the mission Ijeing stopped, he had a payment of 1/. per diem for the eleven days he was employed, together with au aUowance of 12s. bd. for a loss he had in the purchase and sale of 169 florins provided for his journey. (Archceol xxvi, 322.) In the following year he was one of the commissioners to treat for peace with Robert de Brus ; and in 12 Edward II. he was sent -with the Bishop of Here ford and others to the papal court, to solicit his hoUness for the canonisation of Thomas de Cantilupe, chanceUor and Bishop of Hereford in the reign of Henry III. He had large possessions in various coun ties, with a manor-house caUed Rosemont, at Eye, near Westminster, which he had licence to fortify with walls of lime and stone, and in 15 Edward II. he was re turned by the sheriff of Hertford as a knight banneret. (ParL Writs, ii. p. ii. 691.) He was married twice : his first wife was named Isabella, and his second Petronilla, who survived him. His son Edward suc ceeded him, whose descendants were Uving in the county of Essex tiU the reign of Henry VII. (Morant's Esse.v,i. 34, ii, 496; Chauncy's Herts,33B; Hasted's Kent,y. 149.) BEREFORD, Richaed DE,was not im probably the brother of the imdernamed chief justice, WiUiam de Bereford; and the only trace of the place of his residence while in England is in his being appointed BEEEFOED assessor and collector in the county of Worcester for the thirtieth granted in 10 Edward L, 1288. He was treasurer of the Exchequer of Dublin from the twenty-eighth to the last year of that reign, and probably at the beginning of that of Edward H. ; but in the fourth year of the latter (1310) he was the last named of the three justices of assize assigned for six counties. In 7 Edward H., 1314, he was raised to the chancellorship of Ireland, and retained that office tiU August 1317, after which date there is no mention of his name. (Pari Writs, i. 404, U. p. u. 526 ; Abb. Rot. Orig. i. 112 ; Abb. Placit. 255 ; Cal. Rot. Pat. 61, 77.) BEREFORD, William de. Mr. Ni- clioUs, in his 'History of Leicestershire' (348), commences the pedigree of WiUiam de Bereford, or Barford, with his father, Osbert de Baiford, whom, on the authority of a descent taken from Mr. H. Ferren's 'MSS. of Antiquities,' he caUs chief gentle man of Ralph de Hengham, the chief jus tice. It seems, however, more probable, from two entries on the Plea RoUs, that this Osbert was his brother, and that both were the sons of Walter de Bereford. (Ahh. Placit. 215, 280.) He was a justice of the Common Pleas. Prynne (on 4th Inst. 20) gives two commis sions to him, in conjunction with Robert de' Hertford and Robert Malet, to enquire as to a mm-der in 20 Edward I. ; and in the parliament that met after Easter in the fol lowing year Eustace de Paries and John his brother were convicted of insulting ' WiUiam de Bereford, a justice of our lord the king,' in the Aula Regis, by imputing to him corrupt and improper conduct during his iter into StaffdrdsMre ; and they were imprisoned in the Tower for their contempt (Rot. ParL i. 96.) He continued to act during the remainder of the reign, and was one of those selected to treat with the Scots in 83 Edwardi, and was placed in the commission of trail- hasten for the northem counties in the last year of the reign, (Rot. ParL i. 218, 267.) On the accession of Edward II. his patent in the Common Pleas was renewed, he holding the second place. He was raised to the office of chief justice of that com-t, as the successor of Ralph de Hengham, on March 15, 1309, 2 Edward H. ; and the last fine that was acknowledged before him in that character is dated in the first week of 20 Edward II., July 1326. (Orig. 44.) In the same month he died, leaving large possessions in eight counties, the principal of which were in Waa-wickshire and Oxfordshire. (Cal In quis. p. m. i. 333.) By his wife Margaret he left two sons, named Simon and "WiUiam. BEEEFOED BEREFORD, Ralph de,! was in all probability not very distantly connected with the above WilUam de Bereford. Ac cording to the certificate in 9 Edward H., he possessed property in the townships of Bourton, Milcome, and Bereford, or Bar- ford, in the county of Oxford. In the same year he was appointed one of the custodes of the vacant bishopric of Winchester ; and on several occasions during the re mainder of that reign was employed on commissions of Oyer and Terminer in va rious counties. In 1329, the third year of the reign of Edward IIL, he was the second of five justices itinerant into Nottingham shire, and was named in a similar commis sion for five other counties. (ParL Writs, ii. p. ii. 626; Abb. Rot. Orig. i. 227, 257, n. 24 ; N. Fosdera, U. 637, 574.) BERE-WYK, John de, was an officer of the court, as appears from the nature of his various employments. In 7 Edward I. he was appointed custos of the vacant abbey of St. E&mund, and in th^ next year had a simUar grant over the bishopric of Lincoln. (Abb. Rot. Orig. i. 33, 35.) In 11 Edward I. he was assessor in Dorset shire of the thirtieth granted by the coun ties south of Trent. (Pari. Writs, i. 13.) In 13 Edward I. he was keeper of the queen's gold (Madox, i. 361) ; and in 18 Edward I. he delivered into the wardrobe the Roll of Peace and Concord between the chanceUor and scholars of the uni versity of Oxford and the mayor and burgesses of that city. (Rot. Pari. i. 33.) His high character is evidenced by his being one of the executors of Queen Eleanor. (Abb. Rot. Orig. i. 80.) Although it does not appear that he was a judge at Westminster, he held a high place among the justices itinerant. In aU the circuits in which he was named over various counties, extending fr-om 20 Ed ward I., 1292, to nearly the end of the reign, he was invariably at their head. He was summoned also among the judges to parliament during the same interval, and on one occasion was appointed to receive and answer all petitions from Ireland and Guernsey which could be answered without reference to the king. (Pari Writs, i. 468.) That he acted as a justice itinerant under Edward II. there can be little doubt, as he is summoned among them to the parlia ments of the first two years of that reign. (Ibid. ii. 636.) He died in 6 Edward IL, 1312, and was possessed of several manors and other lands in the counties of Essex, Hants, Wilts, Norfolk, and Suffolk. (Cal. Inquis. p. m. i. 260.) His heir in one entiy is caUed ' Roger, his son,' and in another, ' Roger Huse, consanguineus.' (Abb. Rot. Orig. i. 194, 196.) BERKELEY, Maueice db, was the BEEKELEY 85 son of Robert Fitz-Harding, who, having obtained a grant from Henry H., while Duke of Normandy, of the castle and lordship of Berkeley, of which Roger de Berkeley had been deprived for his ad herence to King Stephen, assumed the surname ; but Roger stiU urging his claim to the lordsTiip, an agreement was entered into between them, -with the consent of the duke and King Stephen, that Maurice, the son of Robert, should marry Alicia, the daughter of Roger. This taking effect, Maurice on his father's death, on February 6, 1170, succeeded to the barony, which he enjoyed till his own decease, on June 16, 1190, having just previous to that event added one thousand marks to the purse which King Richard was making for the support of his holy war, under the pre tence of a fine for the confirmation of his title. In the last year of his life he acted as a justice itinerant in Gloucestershire, his pleas appearing on the roU of that .year. (Pipe Roll, 1 Ric. I. 168.) He was buried in the church of Brent ford, Middlesex, to the building of which he had greatly contributed. He was a liberal benefactor also to several religious houses, and founded two hospitals — one at Lorwing, between Berkeley and Dursley ; and the other, that of the Holy Trinity, at Long-Brigge in Gloucestershire. By his wife, the above-mentioned Alicia, he had six sons, the eldest of whom is the next-mentioned Robert. The present holder of the barony is his lineal descendant, with the title of earl. BERKELEY, ROBERT DE, the eldest of the six sons of the above Maurice de Berke ley, on the death of his father, in 1190, succeeded to the large inheritance, paying a fine of 1000/, for Uveiy thereof. In 10 John, 1208, he was one of the justiciers before whom fines were acknowledged at Derby. He was among the principal movers in the contest between King John and his barons, and was accordingly included in the sentence of excommunication pronounced against them by Pope Innocent IH. (Wendover,iii. 297, 856.) His castie of Berkeley and the whole of his lands were also seized, but by his submission at the commencement of the next reign they were all restored, except Berkeley and its castle, which were retained till his death. This event occurred on May 13, 1220, 4 Henry IIL, when he was buried in a monk's cowl, in the abbey of St. Augustin, near Bristol, to which he had been a mu nificent benefactor, as well as to many other religious houses. He also founded the hospital of St. Catherine at Bedmins- ter, near Bristol, and two chantries. He married twice. His first wife was 86 BEEKELEY JuUan, daughter of William de Pontearch, and niece to William Mareschall, Earl of Pembroke. The name of his second was Lucia, who after his death married Hugh de Gumey. Leaving no issue by either, he was succeeded by his brother, Thomas, to whom Berkeley and it castle were restored. (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. 4 Hen. HI. i. 62.) BERKELEY, Aenald de, was a baron of the Exchequer, attesting a charter with that titie m 48 Henry IIL, 1264 (Madox, n, 1319) ; but nothing further has been discovered about him, except that he had manors in Merkele, Bradefeld, and Brok- hampton, in Herefordshire, and that a process was issued to the sheriff in 51 Henry HI., to enquire if Henry de Calde- well came and took his goods and chattels there. (Abb. Placit. 160.) BERKELEY, ROBERT, traces his de scent from the above Maurice and Robert de Berkeley, through a succession of a multitude of younger sons. His grand father, William, was mayor of Hereford in 1545, whose eighth son was Rowland Berkeley, who, having little to begin the world with, by his industry became a very eminent and wealthy clothier at Worcester, and purchased, among others, a consider able estate in the neighbouring parish of Spetchley. By his wife, Catherme, daugh ter of Thomas Hayward, Esq., he had a family of seven sons and nine daughters. Robert Berkeley, the second son, was born at Worcester in 1584. He was ad mitted at the Middle Temple in 1600, and caUed to the bar May 6, 1608. On the death of his father, in 1611, he became possessor of the Spetchley estate, and in 1613 he was sheriti' of his native county, and thirteen years afterwards, in 1626, he became autumn reader of his inn of court. At the commencement of the next year he was called to the degree of the coif, and on April 12 was nominated one of the king's Serjeants. From this time his name ap pears in the Reports ; and it fell to his lot in 1629 to argue for the king that the return made to the Habeas Corpus obtained by William Stroud and the other members imprisoned for their conduct in the last parliament was good and sufficient in law, his argument showing great ability. (State Trials, iu. 844.) _ On October 11, 1632, having been pre viously Imi^hted, he was created a judge of the King's Bench. He had a deep feel ing in favour of the king's prerogative; and, though he agreed that the king could not on all occasions impose charges on his subjects without consent of parliament, saying, 'The people of this kingdom are subjects not slaves, freemen not -villains, to be taxed de alto et basso,' yet he contended that his majesty might do so when the good and safety of the kingdom in general BEENINGHAM are cdncemed, and that he is the sole judge of the danger. He therefore in the great case of ship money, after a most elaborate and learned argument, which^ however ¦wrong it may be thought in its foundation, at least showed his conscientious conviction of its truth, pronounced his opinion against Mr. Hampden. (Ibid. ui. 1087-1125.) For this he was called to severe account by the Long ParUament. He was one of the six judges whom the Lords, on Decem-, ber 22, 1640, bound in 10,000/. apiece to answer the charges which the Commons were preparing against them. On Febniary 13 he was singled out for the first example, and, being impeached for high treason, was arrested in open court whUe sitting on the bench, to ' the great terrour of the rest of his brethren, and of all his profession.' ( Whiteloeke, 40.) He was kept in custody of the sheriff of London tUl October 20, 1641, when he appeared at the bar of the House of Lords, and, pleading ' Not giulty,' obtained permission ^o go with a keeper to Serjeants' Inn to look out papers and ad- -yise with his counsel. The trial, which was fixed for November 2, was put off at the instance of the Commons for want of witnesses. In Michaelmas Terml642, of the three judges of the King's Bench that were then left. Heath being with the king, Malet in the Tower, and Berkeley under im peachment, the two houses at a conference resolved 'That Judge Berkeley, ha-ving carried himself -with modesty and humiUty, and inoffensively to both houses, be pitched upon for keeping the essoigns.' (Fairy's Parliament.) The Lords in the foUo-wing September — that is, the ten that remained — sentenced the judge to pay a fine of 20,000/. and to he for ever disabled from holding any office in the commonwealth. But, the parliament being then pressed for money to pay an instalment of their subsidy to the Scots, he was let off on payment of half to then' own officers. (Clai-endon, iT. 286.) In the conflict that afterwards took place. Sir Robert Berkeley suffered much from the plundering and exactions of both the par ties. Even Whiteloeke represents him as ' moderate in his ways,' and acknowledges him to be ' a very learned man in our laws, and a good orator and judge.' He outlived his sovereign above seven years, dying on August 6, 1656, at the age of 72. He was bmied under a handsome monument, with au excellent marble flgure of the judge upon it, in a chancel he had built to the church of Spetchley. He married EUzabeth, daughter of Thomas Conyers, Esq., of East Barnet, Herts, by whom he had one son, Thomas,' whose descendants still enjoy the family estate. BEBNINGHAM, Richard de. There BEESTEDE -were two families of this surname, and two individuals of both names flourishing in the reign of Edward H. ; one connected with the coun-^ of York, and the other with that of Norfolk. The former was son of John de Bemingham, or Bamingham ; and the latter not improbably was the son of Walter, who, in 1316, was lord of the manor of Hauteyns in Bamham, Norfolk. Sir Francis Palgrave considers that the .nresumption is somewhat in favour of Richard de Bemingham, of Yorkshire, being the person who was so often sum moned to council among the justices and ¦others, and the first entry among the Parliamentary Writs in which his name .appears seems amply to justify this opinion. He is therein required to lay aside the caption of certain assizes in the northem counties, which had been fixed during the meeting of parliament, and to repair to Westminster instead. This was on Sep tember 6, 1318, 7 Edward IL, and his summonses continue till the fourteenth year, during which period he is included an several commissions in the county of York, to which, perhaps, his judicial func tions were confined. He is mentioned as a knight in that county in 17 Edward IL, and his death is recorded in 3 Edward IIL, possessing property therein. (Blomefield! s Norfolk, 1. 636; Pari Writs,VL. p, U. 534; Cal. Inquis. p. m. ii. 19.) BERSTEDE, Walter de, was sub- •eheriff' of Kent to Reginald de Cobbeham when he died, in December 1257, 42 Henry IIL, and was appointed to act as sheriff for the remainder of the year. In 1262 he was appointed constable of Dover Castle, and custos of the Cinque Ports (Cal. Rot. Pat. 38) ; and also went as one of the justices itinerant into Leicestershire, and the next year into Norfolk, Suffolk, .and Lincoln.shire. He is placed among the justices of the bench in 50 Henry IIL, on the authority of a fine levied in February 1266; and a writ of assize to be taken iefore him occurs in the following Septem ber. (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. ii. 268, 446.) BERTIE, Veee, was the fourth son of Montagu, second Earl of Lindsey, lord chamberlain, by his first wife, Martha, daughter of Sir William Cockayn, of Rush- ton in Northamptonshire, and -widow of John Ramsay, Earl of Holderness. To Tthe devoted loyalty of both his father and grandfather he probably owed his profes sional advancement, which was somewhat rapid. He was called to the bar of the JMiddle Temple on June 10, 1659, and, -though chosen a bencher in January 1673, ¦the law reports are silent as to his forensic merits. Though this may be accounted for iby his employment by government as secre- itary of the treasury and treasurer of the (ordiiance, it may be presumed that he was BEST 87 not altogether deficient in legal acquire ments, inasmuch as he was appointed a baron of the Exchequer on June i, 1675. From that court he was removed, on June 15, 1678, to the Common Pleas, where he sat for only ten months, being discharged from his place in April 29, 1679, -with three other judges — viz., Sir WiUiam Wilde, Sir Edward Thurland, and Sir Francis Bram ston. It is a remarkable circumstance that, five days previous, all these four judges were in the commission for the trial of Na- thanael Beading, indicted, on the testimony of the infamous Bedloes, for endeavouring to stifle and lessen the king's evidence against the lords then in the Tower ; and it may be a question how far their conduct or opinions on that trial caused their dis missal. Vere Bertie died unmarried ten months afterwards, on February 23, 1680, and was buried in the Temple Church. (State Trials, vii. 261.) BERTRAM, Rogee. There were two noble families of this name in Northumber land — one Bertram of Mitford, and the other Bertram of Bothall — and the Christian name Roger was common to both. The subject of this notice belonged to the former family, and was the son of WiUiam de Bertram and Alice de UmfravUle his ¦wife. (Baronage, i. 543.) His father died about 1 John, for in that year the guar dianship of Roger was granted to WiUiam Briwer, but was afterwards transferred to Peter de Brus, who fined thirteen hundred marks for the same. Towards the end of the reign, being found in the ranks of the insurgent barons, his lands and castle of Mitford were given into the custody of Philip de Ulecot, who seems to have re sisted the royal order for their restoration when Roger returned to his obedience on the accession of Henry IH. He was obUged, however, to submit, and Roger was rein stated on a fine of 100/. (Rot. Chart. 48 ; Rot. Claus. i. 70, 246, 316, 386, 342, 367.) From this time he acted the part of a loyal subject, and was frequently employed as a justice itinerant in the northem coun ties, fi-om 9 to 18 Henry III. He died before May 24, 1242, on which day his lands were delivered into the custody of Walter de Crepping on behalf of his son Roger, who did homage for them on June 28, 1246, on attaining his majority. (Excerpt. e Rot. Fin. i. 379, 466.) In the reign of Edward H. the barony terminated by the failure of male issue. BEST, William Draper, did not ob tain his title of Lord Wynford till he had retired from the bench. He was bom on December 13, 1767, at Hasselbury Plunk- nett in Somersetshire, and was the thfrd son of Thomas Best, Esq., by a daughter of Sir WilUam Draper, weU known as the antagonist of ' Junius.' Left an orphan ia 88 BEST infancy, he was sent to the school of the neighbouring to-wn of Crewkeme, and at the age of fifteen was removed to 'Wadham College, Oxford, where he was educated -with the view of entering the Church. This plan he relinquished iu consequence of coming to the possession, by the death of a near relation, of a considerable estate ; and, entering the Middle Temple, was called to the bar on November 6, 1789, and joined the Home Circuit. Very early in his career he had the good fortune to extract a flattering eulogium from Lord Kenyon in a case which he argued in the court of King's Bench. This was so unwonted in the chief justice that it was sure to attract attention; and he consequently soon received ample employ ment. Though superflcial in legal know ledge, his readiness of comprehension and fluency of speech enabled him to avail himself of his early success, and his increase of business warranted him in accepting the degree of the coif in 1800. His services were iu great requisition, in all the courts of Westminster Hall ; and he sometimes appeared on important criminal trials. He entered parUament in 1802 as member for Petersfield, and took a prominent part in its proceedings, particularly in reference to naval affairs and pubUc accounts. He was one of the acting managers on the im peachment of Lord Melville, and, with Sir Samuel Romilly, answered the legal ob jections taken by the counsel for the de fence. In 1814 he represented Bridport ; and from that time till his death, lea-ying the liberal party -with whom he had hitherto acted, he was a zealous supporter of con servative principles. In 1806 he had been appointed one of the king's Serjeants, and recorder of Guild ford; and in Michaelmas 1813 he was se lected as soUcitor-general to the Prince of Wales, then regent, succeeding in 1816 to the attorney-generalship to his royal high ness. With that prince he was a great favourite; and by the royal patronage he became successively chief justice of Chester and a judge of the King's Bench, the latter promotion taking place in December 1818. He was knighted in the following June. After sitting in that court rather more than five years, he was advanced in AprU 1824 to the head of the Court of Common Pleas, from which his increasing infirmities obliged him to retire in June 1829. By the continuance of royal favour he was at the same time raised to the peerage as Baron Wynford, the title being taken from an estate he had purchased in Dorsetshire; and he was then appointed a deputy speaker of the House of Lords. In that house and in the privy council he took his due propor tion of labour in the judicial business, as often as his violent attacks of the gout BETHELL enabled him to attend. In the debates he- strenuouslyjopposedthe ReformBiU through all its stages, and was always foundin op position to the party who supported it. He lived for sixteen years after his retirement, and died at his seat called Leesons in Kent on March 3, 1846. Lord Wynford's countenance, though not handsome, was very attractive. It indicated great cordiaUty and good humour, with much intelligence ; but it also showed something of a hasty temperament. As an advocate, he was fluent if not eloquent, acute if not learned, and his zeal for his cUents left no means untried for insuring- their success. As a judge, he was apt to form hasty and questionable opinions, and when presiding at Nisi Prius to lean in his summing up so much to one side that he was nicknamed the ' judge advocate.'' Though he was remarkable for the clearness- and terseness of his decisions, he was con sidered by the profession as an indifferent judge, and brought himself into bad odour, as weU by the political bias he often dis-' played as by his occasional irritabiUty and intemperance on the bench. His disposi tion as a man was essentiaUy kind, amiable, and charitable. He married very early in Ufe Mary Anne, the daughter of Jerome Knapp, Esq., of Haberdashers' Hall, London, and had by her ten children. BETHELL, RicHARD (Lord Westbuet), was born at Bradford in Wiltshire on. June 30, 1800, and his father. Dr. Richard Bethell, who was a descendant from the- old Welsh family of Ap-ItheU, practised as a physician at Bristol. From Bristol Grammar School he proceeded at the age of fourteen to Wadham CoUege, Oxford, of which he was afterwards elected feUow, having distinguished himself by attaining a, place in the first class in classics, and in the second class in mathematics. He took his B.A. degree when only eighteen, and then became for some time a favourite tutor- in the university. Entering the Middle Temple, he was called to the bar on Novem ber 28, 1823, For seventeen years he labom-ed as a junior counsel in the Court of Chancery,. where his practice was very considerable ; and in 1840 he attained the rank of queen's counsel, in which character he soon acqmred a most prominent lead. His university employed him as their advocate; and he flUed the office of vice-chancellor of the county palatme of Lancaster. "While en gaged in his vicaiious duties as a barrister, he devoted himself to the improvement of the mode of legal education, his exertions in which are beyond all praise. A com mittee of the benchers of all the four inns was formed, of which he was the prime mover and selected chairman ; and a body BEYNVILL of rules was issued for the admission, re gulation, and insti'uction of the students, which promise the most satisfactory re sults. From 1851 till his elevation to the peerage he was a member of the House of Commons, at flrst for the borough of Aylesbury, and then for that of Wolver hampton. Throughout his senatorial career he supported the liberal party ; and on the retirement of Lord Derby's ministry he was knighted on his appointment as solicitor- general, on December 28, 1852, and was nominated attomey-general in November 1856 ; but resigning in February 1868 on the change of ministry, he resumed it six teen months after, in June 1869, on his party retuming to power. On June 26, 1861, he succeeded to the office of lord high chancellor. During the existence of the ministry of which he formed a part he resigned his high position, under circum stances which, -though he was acquitted of personal corruption by the two houses of parliament, his judges in those houses were of opinion exhibited so much laxity of principle, and so little consideration for the public welfare, that in those respects he was a fit object for their censure ; and the general feeling of the people confirmed their decision. Without entering into the details of the cases of Edmunds and Wilde, upon which the charges were founded, or ot the disclosures then made. Lord West- bury found it was impossible to contend against the resolution of parliament, and he accordingly resigned the Seal on July 7, 1866. By his wife, the daughter of Robert Abraham, Esq., he has a numerous family. BEYNVILL, Richaed db (or Batvill), was of a knightly family of the county of Huntingdon, where he held lands of the honor of the Eail of Chester. He was appointed one of the justices itinerant for that county and Cambridgeshire in 9 Henry IIL, and died in 1288, 23 Henry III. (Rot. Claus. i. 77, 209.) BICKERSTETH, Henev (Loed Lang- dale), was born on June 18, 1788, at Kirkby Lonsdale, and was the third of five sons of Mr. Henry Bickersteth, a medical practi tioner of considerable repute in that town, and of EUzabeth, the daughter of Mr. John Batty, a farmer of the same place, and the sister of Dr. Batty, afterwards so eminent as a physician in London. To the moral and religious feelings impressed on his mind by his mother he always ascribed what was praiseworthy in his future career. After concluding his studies at the Free Grammar School of his native place, with the highest prize, he entered his father's business at Midsummer 1797, and in the autumn of the next year went to London to walk the hospitals under the guidance of his uncle BICKEESTETH 89* Dr. Batty. To perfect himself in the science of his profession, he went to Edinburgh in October 1801, and had the advantage of attending the lectures of the eminent pro fessors who then presided over the medical schools. He became a member of the Royal Medical Society, and distinguished himself in their debates by his eloquence, ingenuity, and energy. In the summer of the next year he was called home for the purpose of supplying the place of his father,, whose health required a temporary absence from his professional duties. This experience confirmed his dislike to becoming a mere country practitioner, and induced him to decUne his father's offer to give up the whole of his business to him. With the intent, therefore, of preparing himself for the London practice of a phy sician, he entered Caius CoUege, Cam bridge, in October of that year, with a scholarship on Mr. Hewitt's foundation. The application to his studies there was so intense that he was seized with a serious iUness when he went to London at the end of the term. His recovery was slow, and total relaxation became necessary to insure it. With this view his uncle Dr. Batty, fully satisfied as to his qualifications for the office, recommended him as medical at tendant to the family of the Earl of Oxford, then on a tour in Italy, whom he started to- join at the end of March 1803. While at Florence the war with France broke out, and he and his noble friends had some difficulty in escaping the clutches of Bonaparte in his disgraceful seizure of all English travellers. After remaining some little time at Venice, Vienna, and Dresden, the continuance of the war induced Lord Oxford to return home, when his lordship, experienced the benefit of the medical se lection he had made, by being safely brought. through a serious illness under the care and skill of his youthful adviser. Though proving himself a great proficient in the science, and taking great delight in the in vestigation of its mysteries, as is particularly apparent in his correspondence with Dr. Henderson, Mr. Bickersteth retained his dislike to the profession, and, determining to relinquish it, returned to Cambridge in. 1806, where, after abandoning a passing desire to enter .the army, he resolved to- study for a degree in arts ; though his long absence was much against him, and his want of practice in mathematics raised a temporary obstacle to his success. But his indefatigable industry and quick per ception overcame all disadvantages, so that in January 1808 he graduated B.A. as senior wrangler and senior Smith's prize man, in a year when he had no mean competitors to conquer, his principal oppo nents being MUes Bland, Bishop Blomfield,. and Professor Sedgwick. He was of course "90 BICKEESTETH immediately rewarded -with a fellowship in his college ; and, fixing upon the law as his new profession, he entered the Inner Temple as a student in 1808, and became a pupil -of Mr. Bell, one of the most eminent coimsel in the Court of Chancery. The tendency of his mind was always to the Uberal side of politics, and though his -extreme opinions were much moderated by witnessing the tyrannical sequence of the J'rench revolution, he stiU continued some thing more than a whig. Becoming also a friend and disciple of Jeremy Bentham, Mr. Bickersteth received from his conver sation the first impressions of the necessity of amendment in the administration of the laws. He was thus enlisted into the band ¦of law reformers, eventually producing those efforts to which his name is alUed. He was called to the bar on November :22, 1811 ; and for the next three or four years he had to contend against the usual slow progress of a barrister at the outset of his career, and even meditated giving up the profession rather than put his father to further expense. His circumstances were somewhat improved in 1814 by becoming .a senior fellow of his college, and his busi ness gradually increased. But his known connection with the philosopher Bentham and the poUtician Burdett, then deemed radicals, and particularly his support of the latter against Sir Samuel Romilly at the Westminster election of 1818, for a time proved an impediment to his success, which, however, by steady perseverance and mode ration he was soon enabled to remove. With his business his reputation ad vanced, and he was considered so con versant with the practice of his court, and •so alive to its defects, that he was called -upon to give evidence before the commis sioners appointed in 1824 to investigate the subject. In his examination, which lasted four days, he boldly pointed out the evils that attached to the whole system, and -suggested several remedies, some of which were eventually adopted. His evidence, though thought by some to be too com prehensive and visionary, was generally regarded -with attention and respect, and was particularly lauded by the great oracle of legal reform, Bentham ; and from that 'time all parties really desirous of amending the course of justice applied to him as an authority. Among others Sir John Copley, -then attomey-general, requested his assist ance in 1820, when preparing a biU for reforming the Court of Chancery, and in 1827, when appointed lord chancellor, re commended him to the king as one of his counsel, which he was appointed in May, and was then called to the bench of his inn. , In this character he was so fully em ployed that he was at length obUged to give BICKEESTETH up all practice in other courts, and to con fine himself to the BoUs, and he actuaUy refused to break his resolution, though tempted to go into the Exchequer in the great case of SmaU v. Attwood, by a fee of 3,000 guineas. When the ministry of Lord Grey came in, and an act passed for erecting a Court of Bankruptcy in 1831, Mr. Bickersteth was offered the chief judgeship of it; but he at once declined it, as he disapproved its establishment, and thought it would he wholly inefficient ; and in February 1834 he also refused to accept the vacant office of a baron of the Exchequer, which Lord Lyndhurst, then lord chief baron, was de sirous that he should fiU, from a conscien tious feeling that as an equity judge of that court, for which he was intended, he could not efficiently perform the common-law duties which would in addition devolve upon him. In April of that year he created no slight sensation by a bitter rebuke he gave to Lord Chancellor Brougham in his answer to his lordship's question, What was to prevent the University of London con ferring degrees, without the authority of an act of parliament? to which he replied, ' The utter scorn and contempt of the world.' This and the foUowing year were remark able in Mr. Bickersteth's history. In September he refused the offer of the soh- citor-generalship made to him by Lord Brougham, though it was afterwards more regularly urged upon him by Lord Mel bourne, the prime minister. On the dis solution of that ministry at the end of the year he was pressed by a large body of electors to stand for the borough of Mary- lebone, but, finding that he was expected to pledge himself to support certain mea sures, he not only refused to be nominated, but -wrote a letter denouncing the demand of pledges and promises from any candidate as both improper and impolitic. In April of the next year he drew up, at Lord Melbom-ne's request, a valuable and comprehensive paper containing excellent suggestions for the reUef of the lord chan cellor, which in a few years led, among other things, to the removal of the equity business of the Coiu-t of Exchequer, and the appointment of two additional vice-chan cellors. In August Mr. Bickersteth married Lady Jane Harley, the daughter of his old friend and patron the Earl of Oxford. In the followmg December Lord Melbourne communicated to him the intention to ap point the master of the Rolls, Sir Charles 0. Pepys, lord chancellor, offering Mr. Bickersteth Sir Charles's vacant seat at the Rolls, and urging him to accept a peerage in order that he might in parliament assist in carrying into effect his views for the reformation of the courts of equity. Mr. Bickersteth, though agreeing to accept the BICKERSTETH judicial office, hesitated to do [so if united with a peerage. His objections however were ultimately removed, and he consented to enter the House of Lords upon the express terms, fuUy understood and agreed to by the minister, of perfect political in- •dependence. He was sworn of the Privy Coimcil on January 16, 1835, and on the 19th and 23rd he received his two patents, the former constituting him master of the Rolls, and the latter creating him Baron Langdale of Langdale in the county of Westmoreland. Acting on the understanding on which he had accepted the peerage, he abstained in parliament from interfering in party ¦conflicts as inconsistent with his judicial office to do so ; and devoted himself wholly to the consideration of the various schemes of legal reform, not hesitating, when they •did not meet his approval, to state his ob jections, whether introduced by liberal or conservative legislators. To every bill that tended to render justice more easily acces sible, and to diminish its expanse, he gave •a most hearty support, arid urged with unanswerable arguments the injustice and impolicy of taxing the suitor with fees to wards the establishment and support of the courts and their officers. He himself in troduced several biUs of great moment, isome effecting substantial changes in the law and its administration, and others making important alterations in the mode ¦of transacting Chancery business ; but he never undertook the management of any of them without carefully considering whether the evil complained of would be effectually remedied by the supposed improvement, .and -without taking care that the holders •of offices aboUshed were duly compensated for their loss. It was a pleasure to -witness the extreme care he exercised in their pre paration, and the great interest and anxiety he evinced in their progress and success. He lived to see the good effects of many of the measures he promoted. As a judge he was remarkable for the strictness of proof he required on every point submitted to his decision, for the un wearied attention he paid to all the argu ments urged on either side, and for the careful preparation and logical correctness of his judgments. By his own dignified example he made his court a model of pro priety and respectful demeanour, and all attempts at professional fraud, or trickery, or any inexcusable neglect, were effectuaUy suppressed by the dread of his stern denun ciation. His judicial duties were not con fined to his own court, but were greatly increased by his attendance on the judicial committee of the Privy CouncU, of which he was often the presiding member. The case which occasioned him most trouble and anxiety there was that of the Rev. Mr. BICKEESTETH 91 Gorham v. the Bishop of Exeter (Dr. Phillpotts), relative to the bishop's refusal to institute Mr. Gorham to the vicarage of Brampton Speke, on account of a certain difference of opinion on a disputed point of doctrine with jrelation to baptism. The judgment pronounced by the committee, with the concurrence of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, in favour of Mr. Gorham, was prepared by Lord Langdale, in a very learned and elaborate paper, and naturally occasioned a severe contooversy between the parties interested on one side or the other. Not contented with these labours, he de voted himself with indefatigable industry to cleanse the Augean stable of the public records, which justly gained for him the title of Father of Record Reform. His continued endeavours through the whole of his official life to induce the government to devote the proper attention to, and to pro vide the requisite funds for, this important and national object, are fully recorded in the memoir of Mr. Duffus Hardy, who was one of his most efficient assistants in the undertaking. The perseverance with which he pressed the necessity of providing an adequate repository for the preservation of the monuments of the kingdom, and the unwearied patience with which he met the difficulties and answered the repeated ob jections raised, were at last rewarded by the adoption of the plan he proposed.^ By the application of his discriminating judg ment and patient perseverance he subjected the chaotic mass to an arrangement which, with the facility of reference afforded, must ever claim the gr.atitude of the statesman, the biographer, and the historian. As a trustee and commissioner of the British Museum, and as the head of the Registration and Conveyancing Commis sion, he devoted himself with the same ardour to the several questions submitted to them respectively. This continued exercise of the brain had such a detrimental effect on his health that when, on Lord Cottenham's retfrement in May 1850, the office of lord chancellor was pressed upon him, he refused to accept it, convinced that he could not adequately perform the multifarious duties attached to the place, nor hope to effect the reforms which he contemplated. But during the chancellor's previous illness Lord Langdale undertook his duties as speaker of the House of Lords, and on his resignation consented to act as the head of the com mission temporarUy issued for the custody of the Great Seal till a lord chancellor was appointed. The Seal was delivered to him and to Sir Lancelot ShadweU and Baron Rolfe on June 19, I860, and they held it tUl July 16, when Sir Thomas WUde was appointed lord chanceUor and created Lord 92 BIDUN Truro, The great labour thrown on Lord Langdale by this addition to his ordinary duties, with the unfortunate illness by which his brother commissioner Sir Lan celot ShadweU was incapacitated, had a palpable effect on his health and strength, and brought on a serious illness. On his partial recovery he found that he must relieve himself from the burden of office, which, with the sincere regret of his bar, affectionately expressed by Mr. (afterwards Lord Justice) Turner, he resigned on March 28, 1851, after more than fifteen years of judicial life. No sooner was the sorro-wful parting completed than his health wholly succumbed, and in three weeks he closed his mortal career. He died at Tunbridge Wells on April 18, 1851, and was buried in the Temple Church. A man with higher principle, greater integrity, more fixed iu his purpose to do right, more unwearied in his attempts to discover the truth, more regardless of self, and with a kinder nature, it would be difficult to find. Whether in the capacity of an advocate, a judge, a legislator, or in the sacred seclusion of private and domestic life, he secured the admiration, the respect, and the devoted affection of all. He left no son to inherit his honours ; but his lady and an only daughter stiU survive to venerate his memory. BIDUN, Waltee de, is inserted in Dugdale's list as chancellor to Henry IL ; but, on looking to the authority to which he refers, it seems more likely that he was chancellor to the King of Scotland. All doubt, however, of Walter de Bidun being a Scottish chancellor will be removed by the fact that he is a witness, as chancellor, to a charter, dated Jedworth, of William the Lyon, King of Scotland, granted to William de Veteri Ponte. (Robertson's Index to Scottish Royal Charters, 179, No. 137.) BIGOT, Rogee, second Earl of Norfolk, was the grandson of a Norman knight of the same name, whose lordships are recorded in Domesday Book as six in Essex and 117 in Suffolk, and the eldest son of Hugh, who was created Earl of Norfolk in 6 Stephen. Richard I. appointed him one of the ambassadors to JPhilip, King of France, to make arrangements for the crusade; and during his sovereign's absence on that en terprise he supported his authority against the attempts of Prince John. His name appears on the records as a justicier after the return of King Richard from the Holy Land, fines being levied before him from the fifth year of that reign till the third of John, (Madox, ii. 21.) That king sent him to summon Wil liam, King of Scotland, to do homage at Lincoln, and made various grants in his fa vour. But towards the end of the reign he BIGOT was imprisoned on some account or other, as- his wife Aelina fined in fifty marks for his release, the payment of part of which was excused, in 15 John. (Rot. de Fin. 465.) In that year he seems to have been restored to his sovereign's good graces, as he at tended him into Poictou ; and for a fine of two thousand marks obtained a respite for-. his whole life from the service of 120- knio-hts, and from all arrears of scutages. (Madox, i. 190, 667.) In 17 John he joined the barons, and was- one of the twenty-five who were appointed. to enforce the observance of Magna Charta. His name was accordingly included in the sentence of excommunication fulminated by Pope Innocent IIL, and his lands were cruelly ravaged among the last attempts of the tyrannic king. In the first year of the reign of Henry IH, he retm-ned to his allegiance ; and, being again taken into favour, a disputed question between the king and him as to the stewardship of the household was flnaUy settled on May 1, 122L (Bot. Claus. i. 322, 455, 469.) Before the foUo-wing August he died, and was succeeded by his son Hugh, whose son Roger, the fourth earl, is the subject of the next article. ( Wendover, iu. 297, 355, 381.) BIGOT, Roger, the fourth Earl of Nor folk, and the grandson of the preceding Roger, was at the head of the commission of justices itinerant into Essex and Hertford issued in 1234, 18 H^nry HI. He was the son of Hugh the third earl, and Matilda his -wife, one of the daughters of WiUiam Mareschall, Earl of Pem'broke. His father died in 1225, 9 Henry IH., when he, being a minor, was placed under the wardship of William Longspee, Earl of Salisbury. In the foUo-wing May he married IsabeUa, the sister of Alexander, King of Sootiand, to whom, on the Earl of SaUsbmy's death in the following year, the guardianship of Roger was transferred. (Excerpt, e Bot. Fin. i. 125, 128, 168; Rot. Claus. U, 58.) He became eminent for his knightly skill, and was with the king in France in. 1242. When the barons determined, _ in 1245, no longer to submit to the oppresave exactions made on the kingdom oy the pope, he headed those who addressed a letter of remonstrance to the general council then sitting at Lyons, and joined in the dismissal of the papal nuncio from the shores of England. By the death of the last of the four sons of WilUam MareschaU, Earl of .Pembroke, in 1245, their inheritance devolved on their five sisters, of whom his mother, MatUda, was the eldest. To her share the marshal- ship of England fell, which she transferred to Roger Bigot as her eldest son, the king soon after confirming him in the office. He was one of the principal actors in the. BIGOT ;great council held at Westminster in May 1258, when, on the barons appearing in •complete armour, the king asked of them, 'Am I then your prisoner?' 'No, sir,' replied Roger Bigot, ' but by your partiality to foreigners, and your own prodigality, the realm is involved in misery. "Where fore we demand that the powers of govern ment be delegated to a committee of barons and prelates, who may correct abuses and •enact salutary laws.' The provisions of Oxford were the consequence of this pro cedure, under which his brother the under mentioned Hugh was nominated chief jus ticiary. After the battle of Lewes, Earl Roger was appointed by the barons governor of the castle of Oxford. He died in 1270, lea-ying no issue. BIGOT, Hugh, the younger brother of the above-mentioned Roger, fourth Earl of Norfolk, married two wives, the first of whom was Joanna the daughter of Robert Burnet, and the second Joanna the daugh ter of Nicholas de StuteviUe and -widow of Hugh Wake. He received many marks of the king's favour, being made chief ranger of the forest of Farnedale in 39 Henry IIL, and rgovernor of the castle of Pickering in the next year. He accompanied the king in 41 Henry IIL in his expedition against the Welsh. On June 22; in the next year he was selected by the council nominated at the parliament of Oxford to fill the high station of chief justiciary, and at the same time the Tower of London was committed to his charge (Brady, App. 218), to which was afterwards added the command of Dover Castle, and the chamberlainship of 'Sandwich. (Cal. Rot. Pat. 31.) In 1259 he selected Roger de Thurkelby and Gilbert de Preston, two of the principal judges, as his companions on a circuit from county to county to administer justice throughout the kingdom ; and during the king's absence abroad, from November 1269 tiU April 1260, he attested aU the mandates on the fine roll (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. U. 319-324.) He is described by Matthew Paris as 'mUitem illustrem, et legum terr£6 peritum, qui officium justi- tiarise strenue peragens, nuUatenus per- mittat jus regni vacillare.' Although no complaint was made against him, and he seems to have been zealous and active in the execution of the duties of his office, he resigned it about the end of 1260, possibly in order that the coimcil of barons might carry into effect their desire to make it an annual appointment, but more pro bably because he was dissatisfied with their proceedings, as he afterwards joined the royal party. He was immediately succeeded by Hugh le Despenser, one of his coadjutors •on the councU. He was engaged in the battle of Lewes BILLING 93 on May 14, 1264, on the kmg's side ; and when the rout began, he escaped -with the Earl of Warren and others. Their flight is thus described by Peter Langtoft : — The Erie of -Warenne, I -wote, he scaped over the se, And Sir Hugh Bigote als -with the erle fled he. After the battle of Evesham, in the follow ing year, he was replaced in the government of the castle of Pickering. His death occurred about November 1266 ; his son Roger on the death of his uncle Roger became Earl of Norfolk, but dying childless in 1307, the title became extinct. BILLING, Thomas. Fuller (ii. 166) inserts Sir Thomas Billing among the worthies of Northamptonshire, where are two neighbouring villages of the name, adding that at Ashwell in that county the judge 'had his habitation in great state.' Unsupported by any authority yet dis covered. Lord Campbell (Ch. Justices, i. 145) represents him as in every respect a contemptible and worthless person. In con formity -with this -view of his character, he remarks that Fuller 'is silent both as to his ancestors and descendants.' This omis sion, however, is not uncommon with Fuller ; nor is there anything in his account of Billing to indicate, as Lord Campbell asserts, that he ' is evidently ashamed of introducing such a character among wor thies.' Fuller was not a man to conceal a truth, though discreditable to the subject of his notice ; apd of this we have two in stances immediately following the account of BilUng, besides many others throughout his work. The family was of great antiquity in the county. A Henry was certified to hold a sixth part of a knight's fee in Rushden in the time of Henry HI. ; a Robert Billing of Cuquenho was vicar of Brayfield in 1848 ; and a John Billing, probably the father of the judge, was one of the feoffees of Sir William Porter, knight, and presented to the rectory of Collyweston in 1430, No certain memorial of Billing's ancestors or of the personal history of his early years has been found; but no authority exists for the supposition made by Lord Campbell that he had been 'the clerk of an attorney;' nor if he had been, would it justify the improbable conclusion, which his lordship invents, that he would thus necessarily become well acquainted with 'the less reputable parts of the law,' He was a member of Gray's Inn, and if MS, preserved in that society is to be taken as authority in this instance, it appears not merely that 'he contrived to keep his terms and to be called to the bar,' as Lord Camp bell insinuates, but that he was so weU reputed as to be made a reader in that house. 94 BILLING That he distinguished himselt in his early professional career appears certain, since he was returned in 1448 by the citizens of London as their representative in parlia ment, and was elected their recorder on Sep tember 21, 1450, an office which he resigned at the end of four years on account 'of his manifold labours, as well at Westminster as at the assizes in different counties.' The corporation voted him a present of ' cloth engreyned ... for his diligent services in the office of recorder,' and retained him as oneof theircounsel. (City List of Recorders.) If this does not raise a sufficient doubt of Lord Campbell's assertion, that his business was ' not of the most creditable description,' further proof may be foimd in a letter in the ' Paston Correspondence ' (i, 53), that he had already acquired a high reputation, that his advice was deemed valuable, and that his personal position was such as to warrant an intimate inter course with the families of Paston and Lord Grey de Ruthyn. So high indeed was his reputation that Bishop Grey ap pointed him his chief justice in the Isle of Ely. ( Cole's MSS. xxv. 47.) Billing was summoned to assume the degree of the coif in 1458, and was ap pointed one of the king's Serjeants in 1458, 36 Henry VL, a month after the hollow .iccommodation between the two contend ing parties in the state. Lord Campbell quotes a treatise of Bil ling on the subject of the claims of the royal antagonists, -without stating where it is to be found, and asserts that the Rolls of Parliament mention his name as appearing ' at the bar of the House of Lords as coun sel for Henry VL, leading the attorney and solicitor-general,' and that on that occasion it was ' remarked that his fire had slackened much, and that he was very complimentary to the Duke of York, who since the battle of Northampton had been virtually master of the kingdom.' On referring to the Rolls of Parliament, however, no such entry is recorded, but, on the contrary, it appears that not only the judges, but the king's Serjeants and attorney, none of whom are mentioned by name, excused themselves altogether -from giving any opinion or advice on the question. (Rot. Pari. v. 376.) Lord Campbell states, without giving his authority, that on the accession of Edward IV. ' instantly Sir Thomas Billing sent in his adhesion ; and such zeal did he express in favour of the new dynasty that his patent of king's serjeant was renewed, and he be came principal law adviser to Edward IV.' He then designates him as 'this unprincipled adventurer,' although Coke speaks of him among ' other excellent men ' who flourished at the time. (Preface to First Inst.) Mr. Serjeant BiUing did nothing more than BILLING exactly what not only the other Serjeants,. but every one of the judges except For tescue, very naturally and very properly did on the change of dynasty, — he retained his legal position in the courts of law. In the very first parliament of Edward IV, we find that, besides Billing, the famous Lyttelton (who is named before him) and WiUiam Laken, Serjeants in precisely the same position, were nominated by the parUament as referees in a case between the Bishop of Winchester and his tenants ; but the RoUs do not supply any authority for the very improbable fact which Lord Campbell introduces, that Serjeant BiUing ' assisted in framing the acts by which Sir John Fortescue and the principal Lancas trians, his patrons, were attainted;' or that he took an active part in the subsequent measures of hostiUty against King Henry and Queen Margaret. No materials exist which would justify us in ascribing to BiUing the private suggestions of which Lord CampbeU makes him the author, or in judging of the coiTCctness of the motives assigned for his elevation to the bench. Neither is any evidence to be found of his presumed dis satisfaction with the office of puisne justice, nor of his resolution that ' mere scruples of conscience should not hold him back' from the woolsack. The simple fact is that on August 9, 1464, 4 Edward IV., he was added to the three judges of which the Court of King's Bench then consisted. Lord Campbell, quoting from Baker's 'Chronicle' and Hale's 'Pleas of the Crown,' mentions BiUing as the judge who tried Walter Walker for saying he would make his son ' heir to the Cro-wn,' meaning his inn so caUed ; and he gives the judge's ruling on the case, with the con-viction and execution of the unfortunate prisoner. It is ciu'ious, however, that lus lordship, when five pages before he cites Sir Nicholas Throgmorton's address to Chief Justice Bromley, omits there the chief justice's answer referring to this very 'Cro-wn' case ; by which it appears that Markham was the judge, and that an acquittal was the consequence of his honest ruling. (State Trials, i. 894.) But if this omission is curious, it is more remarkable that neither Baker nor Hale states the case as occurring inBiUing's time; and further, that Stow (p. 415) gives the precise date of Walker's trial — viz., March 12, 1460, more than four years before Billing was on the bench ; adding that the charge against him was for words spoken of the title of King Edward when he was pro claimed; and Fabyan (p. 639) confirms- him in the date. On January 23, 1468-9, 8 Edward IV., BiUing received his promotion as Chief Justice of the King's Bench, The trial BILLING and conviction of Sir Thomas Burdet, for -wishing a favourite buck of his which the king had killed in hunting, horns and all, was in the king's beUy, is said by Lord Campbell to have taken place before Chief Justice Billing in the very next term after Ms appointment, and that ' a rumour was propagated that the late virtuous chief justice (Markham) had been displaced be cause he had refused to concur in it.' It has not been discovered whence Lord Campbell extracted the ruling of Billing in this or in Walker's case, which he has printed -with inverted commas as quota tions ; but undoubtedly his lordship could not have been aware that Burdet's case had been lately referred to in Westminster HaU ; that the record of his attainder was searched for,' and found in the ' Baga de Secretis; ' and that this labour might have been spared by looking into Croke's 'Charles' (p. 120), where the proceedings against him are pub Ushed. The result of all this would have proved that the whole story of the buck and the belly was a figment, and that the charge against Burdet was for conspiring to kill the king and the prince by casting their nativity, foretelling the speedy death of both, and scattering papers containing the prophecy among the people. By the record it appears also that, instead of the trial taking place in ' the very next term ' after BUling became chief justice, no part of Burdet's crime was committed before 1474, and he was not tried tUl 1477. Little more than two years after BilUng had attained the chief judicial seat Henry VI. was restored to the crown, which he retained for about six months, when he was again expeUed by his successful rival. Itis a strong proof of the seat of justice being considered exempt from the conse quences of the civil strife, that on both these occasions the judges, with a few ex ceptions, were all replaced in their seats by new patents issued immediately after each of these kings had gained the ascendency ; so that all the conjectures as to Billing's deportment at either crisis in which Lord Campbell indulges must be deemed ap- pUcable, if at aU, to his brethren as weU as to himself It seems more natural to infer, from BUling's double re-instalment, that he had not made himself obnoxious to either party by extreme partiaUty or ' out rageous loyalty,' Sir Thomas BUUng presided in his court up to the day of his death, which took place on May 6, 1481, He was bm-ied inBitties- den Abbey, under a large blue marble slab, on which are the figures of the chief justice in his official robes, and his lady. This slab, after the dissolution of the monas teries, was removed to the chm-ch of .Wappenham, in Northamptonshire, where it now remains. BINGHAM 95- The name of the wife here represented with him is Katerina, the daughter of Roger Gifford, of Twyford in Bucks a junior branch of the noble famUy ' of Gifford, Earls of Buckingham, whom he married so early as 1447. His second wife was equally well allied, being Mary, the daughter and heir of Robert Wesenham, of Oonington in Huntingdonshire, whose first husband was Thomas Lacy, and her- second, WiUiam Cotton, of Redware in Staffordshire. By his first -wife Sir Thomas had flv& sons and four daughters; and there is another slab recording the death of Tho mas, his son and heir, in 1500, who left no male issue, but whose elder daughter, Joan, married John Haugh, the after-men tioned judge, and whose younger daughter married Richard Tresham, of Newton, the progenitor of the conspirator in the Gun powder Plot. (Baker's Northampton, 730 ; and ex inf. of R. E. Waters, Esq., a con nection of the fanuly.) BINGHAM, Richard. This family was established at Carcolston, in the hundred of Bingham, in the county of Nottingham. Richard was a younger son, and pursued the study of the law. He was called to the degree of serjeant-at-law on February 14, 1443, 21 Henry VL His last appear ance as an advocate in the Year Book is in Easter, 22 Henry VL ; and there is certain proof of his advance as a judge of the King's Bench before February 10, 1447, 25 Henry VL, he being among the judges who acted as triers of petitions in the par liament that met on that day. (Rot. Pari. i. 129.) On the deposition of Henry VI. in 1461 he was retained by Edward IV., and was continued in his place during the temporary restoration of Henry in 1470-1, being then described as a knight. On the retmm of Edward IV., however, he was not included in the new patent, being probably omitted by his own desire, as he must have then been considerably advanced in age. He married Margaret, the daughter of Sir Baldwin Frevill, of Middleton in the county of Warwick, and [widow of Sir Hugh WiUoughby, of WoUaton in Not tinghamshire ; and dying on May 22, 1476, he was buried at Middleton, where there is a monument representing him in his judicial robes. His son Richard married Margaret, daughter of Sir Thomas Remp- ston, uncle by the half blood to Sir WilUam Plumpton. In the ' Plumpton Correspon dence ' is a letter from the j udge to the latter knight, in which, 'be the advise of my master. Sir John Markham, chiefe justice,' he proposes that a variance between Sir WiUiam and Henry Pierpont should be submitted to their arbittation. (ArchteoL Journ. U. 250 ; Thoroton's Notts, i. 240 Plumpton Corr. 3, 259.) 96 BIECH BIRCH, John, would at first sight ap pear to have been the earliest puisne baron of the Exchequer who was selected from among the serjeants-at-law; but a little closer enquiry makes it very doubtful whether he was the John Birch who took the degree of the coif There were evi dently at that time two members of Gray's Lnn of that name. In autumn 1551 a John Birch was appointed reader, and was re-elected in Lent 1552; and there was ¦also a John Birch who held the same office in autumn 1558, and again in Lent 1560, being on the latter occasion called ' duplex reader,' which could not have been his title if all the four readers had been the same man. One of these John Birches was made a seijeant on April 19, 1569 (Machyn's Diary, 373), and conse- ¦quently then became a member of Serjeants' Inn; so that- it could not have been he who was the reader in Gray's Inn in Lent 1560. It follows, therefore, that the reader of 1561 must have been the serjeant, and he may possibly have been, as Dugdale de- eignates him, ' afterwards baron of the Exchequer.' But as, according to the baron's monumental inscription, he was born about the year 1515, it is far more probable that he should haye been the reader of 1558, when he would have been in his forty-fourth year, than that he should have attained that rank iu 1551, when he would have been only thirty-six. As it was not then the custom for the barons to be Ser jeants, and as there is no fact to show that any change took place on this occasion, there is little doubt that Dugdale applied the designation to the wrong man, and that John Birch the reader of 1568 and 1560, and not John Birch the serjeant, was the person who was promoted to the bench of the Exchequer on May 9, 1564, and who sat there for the next eighteen years ; especially as in his patent of appointment he is described as ' Arm.,' and not as ser jeant. (Rot. Pat. 6 Eliz. p. 8 ; Cal Slate Papers [1547-80], 594.) He died on May 80, 1581, at the age of sixty-six, and was buried in the old church of St. Giles-in-the-Fields, where this unique inscription (Stow's London, 867) was placed on his tomb : — Interr'd the Corps of Baron Birch lies here. Of Greyes Inn sometime, by Degree, Esquire. In Chequer Eighteen Yeers a Judge he vfus. Till Soule from aged Bodj-, his did passe. Alive his "Wife, Eliza, doth reraaine Of Stydfolke stooke ; oue Sonne, and Daughters Twaine, She bore to him : the eldest, in his Life, He gave to Thomas Boyer, for his 'Wife. Hisbodysleepes till Angels Trumpe shall sound- God grant -we all may ready then be found. BIECH, John, of the ancient family of Birch, of Ard-wick, near Manchester, was the nephew of the famous Colonel John Birch, BLACKBUEN who in the Grreat RebeUion distinguished himself on the parliament side, and the son of the Rev. Thomas Birch, rector of Hamp ton Bi.shop in Herefordshire, and afterwards vicar of Preston in Lancashire, by his wife Mary. He commenced his legal career at Gray's Inn in 1680, but in 1686 he trans ferred himself to the Middle Temple, by which society he was called to the bar in 1687. He was elected for Weobly in the parliament of 1700, and in all the sub sequent parliaments, except one, tiU his death. 'The only mention of his name in parUamentary history is connected -with a disreputable transaction. He had been ap pointed one of the commissioners for the sale of the estates forfeited by the rebels of 1715, and in reference to those belonging to the Earl of Derwentwater had assisted in a most corrupt and iUegal transfer. The transaction was declared void, and for the notorious breach of trust Birch was ex pelled the house in March 1732. He how ever had sufficient influence -with his constituents to be re-elected in the new parliament that met in January 1735, but he died before the end of the year. In the progress of his profession he had been included in the batch of Serjeants called in 1706, and before the discovery of the above disgraceful transaction had been, on December 11, 1729, made cursitor baron of the Exchequer, in which office he re mained till his death in October 1735. After the death in I70I of his first -wife, Sarah, the daughter of his uncle Colonel John Birch, he married secondly Letitia Hampden, of St. Andre-w's, Holbom ; but had no children by either. BIRCH, Thomas, descended from the family of Birch, of Birchfield in the parish of Handworth, near Birmingham, which flourished in the early part of the reign of Queen Elizabeth. He was born at Har- borne in the same neighbourhood in 1690, and was the eldest son of George Birch and Mary his -wife, the daughter of Thomas Foster, Esq. Destined for the law, he took his barrister's degree at the Inner Temple, and, receiving the coif in June 1730, was made one of the king's Serjeants before November 23, 1745. He is so named on gomg up with the judges' address to the king on occasion of the rebellion, when he received the honour of knighthood. In that year he served the office of high sheriff of Staffordshire, and in June foUowing he was raised to the bench as a judge of the Common Pleas, and retained his seat for eleven years. He resided at Southgate, near London, and died on March 16, 1767, leaving by his wife Sarah, daughter and co-heir of J. Teshmaker, Esq., three sons and two daughters. (Gent. Mag.) BLACKBURN, CoiiN, is one of the pre sent judges of the Queen's Bench. He BLACKSTONE was bom at Levenside in Dumbarton shire in I8I3, being the second son of John Blackbm-n, Esq., of Killeam in StirUng- shire. After passing through Eton Col lege he matriculated at Trinity College, Cambridge, where he was eighth -wrangler in 1835, and took his degree of M.A. in 1838. In Michaelmas Term of that year he was caUed to the bar by the society of the Inner Temple, and joined the Northern Circuit, attending the Livei-pool Sessions. Though with no considerable business as a counsel, he was esteemed a sound lawyer, and after above twenty years' experience at the bar he was appointed a judge of the Queen's Bench in June 1859, and received the customary knighthood. BIACKSTONE, William. The name of Blackstone is inseparably connected with the law of England. What Lyttelton and his crabbed expositor were to our legal an cestors, Blackstone is to modern students; and though some of the more earnest or more ambitious of them may seek honours by endeavouring to fathom the mysteries of the ' Tenures,' the oi iroWol of the pro fession are content to earn an easy degree by mastering the more attractive lessons conveyed in the ' Commentaries.' So popu lar have they become that, where the study was conflned in former times to those who pursued it as an avocation, few men of rank or fortune now consider their education complete without gaining an in sight into the constitution of the country through Blackstone's easy and perspicuous pages, and abridgments are even intro duced into schools for the instruction of the young. Whether this facUity is pro ductive of better lawyers must be left as a question for our critical descendants. William Blackstone was the fourth and posthumous son of Charles Blackstone, a respectable silkman in Cheapside, London, descended from a family originally settled in the neighbourhood of SaUsbury. His mother, who was Mary, daughter of Love lace Bigg, Esq., of Chilton FoUot in Wilt shire, also died before he was twelve years old. He was born on July 10, 1723, and from his birth his education was under taken by the brother of his mother, Mr. Thomas Bigg, an eminent surgeon in New gate Street. In 1730 he was put to school at the Charter-house, and in 1736 was admitted on the foundation there, becom ing the head of the school at the age of fifteen, and distinguishing himself not only in the customary oration in commemora tion of the founder, which he recited on December 12, 1738, but also by obtaining Mr. Benson's prize medal for verses on Milton. He had in the preceding month been entered at Pembroke CoUege, Oxford, and elected to a Charter-house exhibition, to which in February foUowing was added BLACKSTONE 97 one of Lady Holford's exhibitions, unani mously given by the feUows of the coUege. In the university he did not confine him self to the classics, but devoted himself to those sciences the investigation of which tended so much to the simplicity and clear ness of his -writings. Among these he was peculiarly fond of architecture, and before he was of age he composed a treatise on the subject, which, though never pubUshed, was much admired. His partiaUty for the Muses, already shown by his prize poem on Milton, and afterwards exhibited by several elegant fugitive pieces, he found too fascinating and engrossing for the pro fession to which he was destined ; and, resolving upon ' total abstinence,' he wrote, on entering the Middle Temple, a ' Farewell to his Muse,' in strains which induced many to regret he should leave the flowery path of poetry for the more rugged and sterile ways of the law. Notwithstanding this formal adieu, he could not altogether re frain ; and among other pieces he wrote some verses on the death of the Prince of Wales in 1761, which were published in the Oxford coUection as the composition of his brother-in-law, James Clitherow. He amused himself also by annotating Shak- speare, and communicated his notes to Mr. Steevens, who inserted them in his last edi tion of the plays. He was admitted a member of the Middle Temple on November 20, I74I, and was caUed to the bar on November 28, 1746. But in the intervals of his attendance on the courts he stiU continued his academical studies at the university, where he was elected in November 1743 into the Society of AU Souls, of which he was afterwards admitted a fellow, and deUvered the anni versary speech in commemoration of the founder. There also he took his degree of B.C.L. in .lime 1745. On being appointed bursar of his coUege he reduced the con fusion in which he found the accounts into lucid order, and left a dissertation on the subject for the benefit of his successors. He not only arranged the muniments of their estates, but.greatly assisted in the re- edification of the Codrington Library and in the classification of its contents ; in gra titude for all which services the coUege appointed him in 1749 steward of their manors. In 1750 he commenced doctor of ci-vil law, and in the same year published an 'Essay on Collateral Consanguinity,' -with the -view of removing the inconve nience felt by the college of electing any person who could prove himself of kin to the founder in preference to any other can didate. His arguments had so much weight that soon after a new regulation was intro duced limiting the number of foimder's kin. His progress at the bar in the meantime was so slow and tmproductive that, though n 98 BLACKSTONE he had been in 1749 elected recorder of WaUingford, he determined in 1763 to retire to his fellowship, and only practise as a provincial counsel. About this time the professorship of ci-vil law in the uni versity became vacant, and the soUcitor- general, Mr. Murray (afterwards Lord Mansfield), with a just appreciation of Dr. Blackstone'sabilities, strongly recommended him for the place. The Duke of Newcastle promised it, but it is beUeved was not satisfied with the devotion of the candidate to his grace's politics, for after a short inter view -with him it was given to another. Mr. Murray was naturally disgusted, and advised the doctor to read the lectm-es on law he had long been preparing to such students as were disposed to attend him. He at once adopted the plan and met with immediate success. These lectures form the basis of that work upon which is founded his imperishable fame ; and, as a guide to those who listened to them, he pubUshed in the next year 'An Analysis of the Laws of England,' clearly methodis ing the intricate science. One of the earUest friuts of the acknow ledged excellence of his lectures was his unanimous election to the first professorship of law, on the foundation established under the recent will of Mr. Charles Viner, the laborious compiler of that 'Abridgment of Law and Equity,' the twenty-four volumes of which must necessarily occupy the shelves of a la-wyer's library. The elec tion took place in 1768, only two years after Mr. "Viner's death ; and the new pro fessor in the same year published, not only his admired ' Introductory Lecture,' but also a treatise entitled ' Considerations on Copyholders,' which produced an act of par liament establishing their rights in the elec tion of members of parliament. The fame of his lectures was so great that he was re quested to read them to the Prince of Wales, an application which, though his eno-ao-e- ments obliged him to decline it, he so far complied with as to transmit copies for his royal highness's perusal. Justly conscious that his legal character was now esta blished, the professor resumed his attend ance at the bar iu Michaelmas 1769, but declined the honour of the coif that was offered to him, and afterwards that of chief justice of the Common Pleas in L-eland. During the whole of this period he had exerted himself iu various ways for the benefit of his alma mater in the different positions by which his efficiency was re cognised. He was appointed the arch bishop's assessor as visitor of All Souls' College ; hewas elected visitor of Michel's new foundation in Queen's College, and by his tact and management put an end to the disputes which had long frustrated the original intentions of the donor ; and as one BLACKSTONE of the delegates of the ' Clarendon Press ' he introduced new regulations, the good effect of which is seen at the present day. From that press one of the earliest andbest specimens of its reformed typography was his publication in 1769 of a new edition of the Great Charter and Charter of the Forest, which led to a controversial cor respondence on the authenticity of a par ticular copy between Dean (afterwards Bishop) Lyttleton and him, addressed to the Society of Antiquaries, of which he was a fellow. By his marriage in 1761 -with Sarah, daughter of James CUtherow, Esq., of Boston House, Middlesex, he vacated his fellowship of All Souls' ; but in the same year the Earl of Westmoreland, then chanceUor of the university, appointed him principal of New Inn Hall, by which he was enabled to continue his residence at Oxford for the deUvery of his lectures. Li the early part of that year he had been elected member for Hindon in the parUa ment then called ; and also received a patent of precedence in the courts, to which he was well entitled, not only by the fame he had acquired, but by the increase of his business. The specimens preserved of his advocacy prove the excellence of his argumentative powers. In 1763 he was constituted soU citor-general to the queen, and became a bencher of his inn. To repress the encroachments of pira tical bookseUers, who were selling imper fect copies of his lectures, he determined to issue them himself in the form of ' Com mentaries on the Law of England.' He accordingly pubUshed his first volume in 1765, and the three succeeding volumes in the four foUowing years ; and from that time to the present the work has formed a textbook for all students, admired equaUy for its expositions and the eloquence and purity of its language. With the applause which it deservedly attained, it was not likely that it should escape some amount of critical detraction. Some poUtical censors differed from his -views of the principles of the constitution ; Dr. Priestley animadverted on certain of his ecclesiastical positions, which were defended by the author ; and to an attack upon him by a member of par Uament for some observations he had made in the house, which were aUeged to be contrary to the principles laid do-wn in his work, he also published a reply justifying the position he had taken, which was se verely commented on by Junius. But all, whether opponents or supporters of his doc trines, joined in a universal eulogy of the clearness and beauty of his style, the apt ness of his classical allusions, and the allure ments with which it enriched a science which had previously repelled the student by its rugged exterior. It has become, and BLACKSTONE will for ever remain, the student's manual ; and the continued demand for it has found employment for a long succession of accom plished editors, who by ifttroducingthe sub sequent changes in the law have made it as necessary and useful to its latest, as it was to its earUest, readers. In the new parliament of 1768 he was Tetumed for Westbmy, but sat iu it only two years ; for, though from a disgust at political controversy he declined the place of solicitor-general in January 1770, he readUy accepted a judgeship which was oft'ered to him in the folio-wing month on the death of Mr. Justice Clive. He actually kissed hands as judge of the Common Pleas on February 9 ; but at the request of Mr. Justice Yates, who -wished to escape col lision with Lord Mansfield, he consented to take that judge's place in the King's Bench, and again kissed hands for that ¦court on the 16th of the same month, when lie received the honour of knighthood. Mr. Justice Yates died four months after, when Mr, Justice Blackstone removed into the Common Pleas, on June 22. Whoever reads the reports of the period -during which he sat upon the bench must .acknowledge that he was equally distin guished as a judge as he had been as a •commentator. Some of the judg-ments that he pronounced are remarkable for the learn ing they display, and for the clearness with which he supports his argument ; and in the few instances in which he differed from his colleagues his opinion was in general found to be right. He devoted his latter years to the im provement of prison discipUne, and, in conjunction -with Mr. Howard, obtained in 1779 an act of parUament for the establish ment of penitentiary houses for criminals. The beneficial effects of the system, though not at first sufficiently perceived, are now universally acknowledged ; and the amended condition of our gaols, in the cleanliness, •classification, and employment of the pri soners, is the best proof of the -wisdom and benevolence of the projectors. In the same year, having agitated the necessity of an augmentation of the judges' salaries, to meet the increased taxation and expendi ture of the time, he obtained for them an addition of 4002. to their stipend. Ere he had been long on the bench he experienced the bad effects of the studious habits in which he had injudiciously in dulged in his early Ufe, and of his neglect to talte the necessary amount of exercise, to which he was specially averse. His cor pulence increased, and his strength failed ; and, after two or three attacks of distressing illness, he expired on February 14, 1780. He was buried in a vault at St. Peter's Church at WalUngford, where he possessed a seat called ' Priory Place.' A statue of BLAGGE 99 the judge, by Bacon, was placed soon after his death in the hall of All Souls' College. The Reports which he had taken and arranged for publication, commencing -with the term in which he was called to the bar, and continuing with some intervals throuo-h the whole period of his life, were given to the world in the year following his death, under the editorship of his brother-in-law and executor, James CUtherow, Esq., -with an introduction detaiUng aU the incidents of his career, which from its fairness and impartiaUty has formed the groundwork of every future memoir. His investigation of the quarrel between Pope and Addison, which was published with the author's per mission by Dr. Kippis in the ' Biographia Britannica,' is spoken of by Mr. DisraeU in high terms of praise. He left behind him seven children, the second of whom held aU the university pre ferments of his father, and eventually suc ceeded to the estate at WalUngford, which is still possessed by his representative. Henry Blackstone, who reported cases from 1788 to 1796, was the judge's nephew, and his Reports were more popular than those of his uncle, three editions having been caUed for. BLAGGE, Robert, was made king's remembrancer in the Exchequer for life on December 6, 1602. He was advanced to the bench of that court as third baron on June 26, I5I1, 3 Henry VIH., -with con firmation of the patent of remembrancer, the duties of which he stiU continued to perform by deputy. In 1516 he was one of the surveyors of cro-wn lands and pur veyor of the king's revenues, and received a grant of an annuity of eighty marks during pleasure. In that year he obtained a patent of the remembrancership for his son Bar- naby for Ufe, in reversion on his own death or other vacancy, which patent was the subject of discussion in Dyer's Reports (197),and the resultwas thatit wasannuUed and revoked in 3 Elizabeth as insufficient and not good, because Robert Blagge had no legal estate at the time of its date, nor at any other time after he was constituted a baron. He is stated in the case to have been in possession of his place on the bench in 1523-4. He died in London, and was buried in St. Bartholomew's. He was the son of Stephen Blagge, of an ancient family in Suffolk, and Alice his -wife. He afterwards established himself at Broke Montagu in Somersetshire ; and by his marriage with Katherine, sole daughter of Thomas Brune, or Brown, he became pos sessed of Horseman's Place in Dartford, and of considerable property in the county of Kent, which descended to his sons Robert and the above Barnaby. His second -(vife, Mary, daughter of John, Lord Cobham, survived him, leaving a son. Sir George, n2 100 BLASTON -who was gentleman of the bedchamber to Henry VIL (CaL St. Papers [1609], 263 ; Hastects Kent, u. 312, 375 ; Gage's Suffolk, 620.) BLASTON, Thomas db, was probably of Leicestershire, where there is a hamlet of that name. The custody of the honor of PevereU, in that and two other counties, was committed to a Thomas de Blaston in the reign of Edward I. ; and he may have been the father of the baron of the Exche quer. The latter is first mentioned in 3 Edward III., when, imder the title of ' cle ricus regis,' he was constituted the king's chamberlain in Chester. He was raised to the Exchequer bench on November 2, 1332, 6 Edward HI. A new patent was granted to him on January 20, 1341, when the king had weeded the court, on his return from Tournay, of those whom he considered to have failed in their duty. He held the rectory of SoUhuU, in Warwickshire. (Abb. Rot. Orig. i. 39, ii. 17; Rot. ParL ii, 105; Cal. Inquis. p, m. ii. 85.) BLBNCQ-WE, John, was bom in 1642 on the manor of Marston St. La-wrence, on the Oxford border of Northamptonshire, which was granted in the reign of Henry VI. to Thomas Blencowe, whose family originally came from a place of that name in Cumberland. He was the eldest son of Thomas Blencowe, by his wife Anne, the daughter of the Rev. Dr. Francis Savage, of Ripple in Worcestershire. He was educated at Oriel College, Oxford, admitted a student at the Inner Temple in 1663, called to the bar in 1673, and elected a bencher in 1687. Raised to the degree of the coif in 1689, he was elected member for Brackley in 1690. Though not a pro minent debater, he was a firm supporter of the government. To his marriage with Anne, the daughter of Dr. John WaUis, the celebrated Savilian professor of geo metry and ' custos archivorum ' of Oxford, and the great decipherer of his day, he probably owed in some measure his ad vancement to the bench. When the pro fessor was offered the deanery of Hereford in 1692 he declined the advancement, but in his letter of refusal he intimated that a favour to his son-in-law would be more acceptable to him. ' I have,' he said, ' a son-in-law, Mr. Serjeant Blencowe, of the Inner Temple, a member of the House of Commons, an able lawyer and not inferior to many of those on the bench, of a good Ufe and great integrity, cordial to the government and serviceable in it.' (Baker's Northamptonshire, 639-646.) It was not, however, tUl four years after wards that, in September 1696, the serjeant -was constituted a baron of the Exchequer- but in Michaelmas Term of the foUowing year he was further promoted to the Court of Common Pleas and knighted. He sat in BLOCKLEY that court for the next five-and-twenty years, though several memoriaUsts of the judge, as Baker, Noble, and others, have represented him as having been removed to the Queen's Bench, for the whole of Queen. Anne's reign, from 1702 to I7I4. LuttreU (v. 183) records that in the beginning of her reign such removal was intended ; but it is clear from Lord Raymond's Reports- (769, 1317) that he was then re-appointed to the Common Pleas, and that he was stiU in that court at the end of it, and he is. never mentioned as acting in the Queen's Bench. On the accession of George I. he was replaced in the same seat, and in I7I8 he concurred with most of the other judges in favour of the king's prerogative over the marriage and education of the royal famUy. On June 22, 1722, being then eighty years of age, he obtained permission to resign,. and a pension was granted to him for the remainder of his life, which terminated on May 6, 1726. He was buried at Brackley, where there is a monument to his memory. Sir John is represented as an honest, plain, blunt man, with no brUUancy of genius nor any extraordinary attainments. He outUved his faculties, and conceived that he had discovered the longitude. A story is told of him that once he ordered his servant to lay him out, insisting that hfr was dead. Indulging his whim, the trusty feUow laid him on the carpet, and after some time came to him and obseived that he thought his honour was coming to Ufe again, to which the old judge, tired of his position, assented. A proof of his consi derate kindness of heart appears in another anecdote. Lady Blencowe having suggested to him to pension off a hewer of stones who was so old that he spoUed the work he was employed on, he repUed, ' No, no, let him spoil on; he enjoys a pleasure in thinking that he earns his bread at fourscore years and ten, but if you tm-n him off he wiU die of grief He left a numerous fanuly. His third son_ WilUam was taught the mystery of deciphering by his matemal grandfather, Dr. WalUs, and was employed to give evi dence of the letters -written in cipher which were produced on the proceeding against Bishop Atterbuiy. He was the first person to whom a salary was granted as decipherer to the government, his aUowance being 200Z. a year. The judge's second daughter became the wife of Chief Baron Probyn. The estate of Mai-stonSt. La-wrence remains in the possession of Sir John's Uneal de scendant. (Noble's Granger, u. 180 ; Nichols's Lit. Anecdotes, ix. 273.) BLOCKLEY, John db. The parish of this name m Worcestershire was probably the native place of John de Blockley, who endowed the chantry of the church of St. Mary there with some of his lands in 30- BLOET "Edward III. and subsequent years. He was an auditor of the Exchequer in 44 Edward HL, with a salary of 10/. a year ; ¦and he at the same time received an annual pension of twentymarks for certain good ser vices he had performed to the king and the late queen Philippa ; besides which he had -a grant of the custody of the manor of Ex- hulne in Warwickshire during the minority of the heir. Like most of the other officers, he was in holy orders. He was raised to the bench as a baron of the Exchequer iu 47 Edward IIL, and so continued tiU the last year of the king's reign. (Cal. Inquis. 3). m. U. 194, 263, 352 ; Issue RoU, 49, 92 ; Abb. Rot. Orig. u. 310; CaL Rot. Pat. 189.) BLOET, Robeet (Bishop of Lincoln), is -stated by both Risdon (67) and Prince (84) to have belonged to a family of that name which held the lordship of Ragland, and which for many generations Uved at Hol- -combe Rogus in the county of Devon, where it stiU flourishes. The name is •often speUed Bluett. He is described by Prince as the second son of Sir Rowland Bloet,and great-grandson of WUUam Bloet, Earl of Salisbury, of which earldom how- •ever, before the Conquest, Dugdale gives no account. But Godwin's editor, Richard son (283), calls him the brother of Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, quoting Claud. A. 8, f 118, MSS. Hutton, and referring in cor roboration to his grant of the manor of Charleton to the priory of Bermondsey, wherein he says, ' quod pro salute animse Dom. mei Willelmi Regis, et fratris mei Bajocens. Episcopi, &c., confirmavi Mo- nachis de Bermondsey Cherletonam,' &c. But this charter is of very doubtful au thenticity ; and with all these contradictory accounts, his birth, his lineage, and even his country, must remain in obscurity. It seems very probable that he was the Bloet who is mentioned as accompanying William Rufus to England upon the death of the Conqueror, (Lingard, ii. 76.) The name of Robert Bloet, -without any addi tion, appears as the -witness to one of Wil liam's charters to the monastery of Durham, granted in 1088 or 1089 ; and the signature -* Rodberto Dispensatore ' is attached to another to Chichester Cathedral, which was probably granted about the same time, and may perhaps be his. He was appointed chanceUor before July ¦or August 1090, a charter to the cathedral ¦of Lincoln of that date bearing his attes tation; another to SaUsbury, dated in 1191, and several -vrithoiit date (Monast. i. 174, 241, U. 266, vi. 1167, 1177, 1271,1296), but no doubt granted about the same time, re cord his name as chanceUor ; but no instance occurs of his signatiire as chancellor after he was raised to the bishopric of Lincoln. vCn his elevation to that see he was com- BLUNDEVIL 101 pelled to pay a large sum, varying, accord ing to different authors, from 500i.to 5000?., as the price of his advancement, or, perhaps, for exempting the see from the jurisdiction of the Archbishop of York. He was consecrated by Archbishop Lan- fi-anc in 1093, and no doubt then resigned the Great Seal. That he exercised considerable influence, not only over King William, but over his successor King Henry also, all writers agree ; but it does not appear that he held any official character under WiUiam after he retired from the chancellorship. Neither Spelman nor Dugdale introduces him in their list of chief justiciaries under Henry I., but Henry of Huntingdon, who was one of his archdeacons, and had lived long in his famUy, expressly states that he was 'justitiarius totius Anglise.' What ever doubt may be felt with regard to this author's attribution of the title to some others, it is impossible entirely to discard his authority here, considering the intimacy of his connection, and the consequent means of knowledge that he had. The period when he held the office is not men tioned, but he is further described as having been twice prosecuted in the last year of his life by the king's suggestion, and as having been flned so severely as to produce the lamentation that he was now compeUed to dress those about him in wooUen, who had formerly been clothed in rich garments. Even to the last, however, the king pre tended kindness towards him ; but when some royal flatteries were reported to him, he exclaimed with a sigh, ' He praises no one whom he does not mean to destroy,' He was in the king's company at Wood stock on the occasion of a royal hunt, when he was struck with apoplexy, and, falling off his horse, was carried to his bed, and died on January 10, 1123. His bowels were buried at Eynsham in Oxfordshire, a monastery which he had restored, and Ms body was deposited at Lincoln. He had an illegitimate son named Simon, bom to him when he was chanceUor, whom he appointed, while yet in his nonage, dean of his church. Though this does not speak well of his morals, the character given him by his contemporaries in other respects is much in his favour. Henry of Huntingdon describes him as mild and humble, a raiser of many, a depressor of none, the orphan's father, and the delight of his family ; and Matthew Paris testifies to the beauty of his person, and the sweetness and affability of his manners and conversation. (Angl. Sac. U. 694 ; Wendover, n. 41, &c. ; Turner's Engl i, 167 ; DanieTs, 58,) BLTTNDEVIL, Ranulph (Eael of Ches- tek), surnamed BlundevU (or, as Dugdale says, Blandevil, from the to-wn where he was bom, then called Album Monasterium, 102 BLYTH now Oswestry), was the son of Hugh Cyve- lipc, Ea,rl of Chester, and Bertra, daughter of the Earl of Evreux. He succeeded to the titie in 1181. WhUe King Richai-d was in the Holy Land he resisted Prince John's attempts to obtain the government, and distinguished himself in the sieges of the castles of Marlborough and Nottingham, held by the prince's adherents. In 1193 his name appears as one of the justiciers before whom a fine was le-yied; but there is no other trace of his having acted in a judicial capacity. He loyaUy assisted King John throughout the troubles of his reign, and was equally conspicuous in securing the throne to his son Henry III. As soon as the rebels were defeated, and the kingdom was at rest, he departed for the Holy Land, and was pre sent at the siege of Damietta. After his return in 1220 the activity of his disposi tion was frequently displayed, sometimes in opposition to the king, but more fre quently in his support. He died in Oc tober 1231, having presided over the county of Chester above fifty years. His first wife was Constance, daughter and heir of Conan, Earl of Brittany, and ¦widow of Geoffrey, the son of King Henry II. Being divorced from her, ' by reason that King John haunted her com pany,' he then married Clemencia, daughter of Ralph de Feugers, and widow of Alan Dinant. He left no issue by either of them. BLYTH, John (Bishop of Salisbuet), was son of WilUam Blyth, of Norton in Der byshire, by a sister of Archbishop Rotheram. He and his brother Geoffrey were sent to the university of Cambridge, where each of them successively became master of King's Hall, each also being eventually raised to the episcopal bench — John as Bishop of Salisbury, on December 22, 1493; and Geoffrey as Bishop of Lichfield and Co ventry, on December 26, 1503. At the time of his elevation to the pre lacy John Blyth was archdeacon of Rich mond, to which he had been admitted on October 8, 1485. He was also master of the Rolls, having been appointed on May 5, 1492. This office he resigned on Fe bruary 13, 1494, a few days before his con secration; and in the same year he was elected chancellor of the university in which he was educated. He enjoyed his honours only five years, dying about August 23, 1499. His remains were deposited in a handsome tomb behind the high altar in his cathedral. (Rymei-, xii. 652; Le Neve, 326 ; Godivin, 323, 352.) BOBI, Hugh de, was sheriff of York shire under Hugh Bardolph from 4 to 6 Richard I., and was one of the five justices itinerant who set the taUage in Lincolnshire in the eighth year of that reign, 1196-7. BOCLAND (Madox, i. 704.) For the first four years of John's reign he acted as a justicier as well at Westminster as on the circuit. In 2 John he was associated -with Hugh de Wells in the custody of the bishopric of Lincoln during its vacancy (Rot. Chart. 99) ; and in the next year he accounted for the rents of Baldwin Wace's lands, then in the king's hands. (Rot. Cancell 198.) The ' Rotulus de Oblatis ' of 2 John (101, 212, 271) contains an entry of his gift of one hundred pounds and a palfrey to the king ; and among the fines of 6 John is one of two hundred marks paid by him rather than trust his son as a hostage 'pro domino sue' BOCLAND, Hugh de, was a canon of St. Paul's, and is mentioned by Dugdale and Spelman as chief justiciary at the commencement of the reign of Henry I., on the authority of that king's charter of Uberties, as cited by Matthew Paris, bemg addressed to him in that character. Both Roger de Wendover and Matthew Paris give two copies of that charter — the first when it was promulgated by Henry in the first year of his reign; and the second when it was produced to the barons, 113 years afterwards, by Archbishop Langton. The first, therefore, would more probably be the correct copy, and that is addressed to him as sheriff of Hertfordshire, whUe the latter is addressed to him as Justiciarius AngUse. The continuation of the address in both is ' et omnibus fidelibus suis,tam Anglis quam Francis, in Hertfordsyre,' words which show that similar copies were sent to each county, addressed no doubt to its particular sheriflt^ as this was — according to the royal direction at the time of its grant, recorded by both these historians, ' that as- many copies of it were to be made as there were counties in England, to be deposited in the abbeys of each county as a pubUe record.' A chaiter by which King Henry made a grant of land in Essex to Otho ' aurifabro,' addressed to Mamice, Bishop of London, and Hugo de Bocland, ' et omnibus baronibus suis et fideUbus, Francis et Anglis, de Essexia ' (N. Fcedera, i. 9), affords a corroboration that he was at this time sheriff of Hertfordshire, inasmuch as the two counties of Essex and Hertford were then, and for several centuries after wards, united under one sheriff, and the she riffalty was frequently held for many years together by the same individual. Many charters prove that he was also sheriff or portgrave of London, but his position in none of them affords the slightest evidence that he ever was chief justiciary. That he never held that high and responsible, office is rendered more probable by the total silence of the historians with regard. to him, a silence which is whoUy unaccount able in reference to an officer whom they BOCLAND describe as the prime minister of the realm, and the next to the king in dignity. BOCLAND, Hugh de, may have been a descendant from the above-named Hugh de Bocland. The flrst mention of him is in 4 Hemy IL, 1168, when he was excused from the donum of Berkshire. In II66 he certified that he held two knights' fees and a half in that county, and was sheriff of it from 1170 to 1176. He acted as one of the justices itinerant in II73, to set the assize on the king's demesnes in Devon shire, and in the following year in his own county of Berks. (Pipe Roll, 124 ; Madox, i. 124, 701.) His son WiUiam was sheriff of Corn waU. BOCLAND, Geoffeev db, appears as a justicier from 7 Richard I., 1195, to 3 Henry HI., 1218, during which years fines were levied before him at .Westminster, and in 5 Henry III. he was one of the justices itinerant into Hertfordshire. There are also several entries on the rolls showing that he was connected with the Exchequer in the beginning of King John's reign. (Rot. aaus. i. 473; Rot. Chart. 99, &c.) About the year 1200 he was appointed to the archdeaconry of Norfolk, which he held tiU he was advanced by the king to the deanery of St. Martin's-le-Grand, a be nefice which he certainly enjoyed in 1216, having received grants in the interim of the churches of Tenham and Pageham. (Le Neve, 219 ; Rot. Chart. 156 ; Rot. Pat. 61.) If he were the ' G. de Bocland ' to whom a mandate was directed in 15 John, com manding him to let the king have, at the price any others would give for them, the com, pigs, and other chattels at Berkhamp- sted which belonged to Geoffrey Fitz-Peter, his brother, recently deceased (Rot. Clatis. i. 139), he was probably a younger brother of William de Bocland, who married the sister of Geoffrey Fitz-Peter's first wife, the daughter of Geoffrey de Say. As there was no other connection between Fitz-Peter and Bocland than this marriage, it would appear that in those times the title of brother was extended by courtesy to the brothers of the wife's sister's husband. Geofirey de Bocland seems to have com mitted himself with the barons in 17 John, as time and safe-conduct were granted to him to come before the king, which were twice afterwards renewed (Rot. Pat. 172, 174, 192) ; and in the same year his manor of Tacheworth in Hertfordshire was given by the king to Nicholas de Jelland. (Rot. Claus. i. 267.) On the accession of King Henry, how ever, he soon returned to his duty, and was restored to his judicial position. He died before February 4, 1231, the date of a charter to Walter de Kirkham, then dean of St. Martin's, (Maitland's London, 767.) BOLEBEC 103 BOHTIir HUMPHKET DE (EaEL OF HeEE- foed). Henry de Bohun, the father of Humphrey, was great-gTandson of the after- named MUo of Gloucester, the first Earl of Hereford, whose eldest daughter, Margery, mairied Humphrey de Bohun, the grandson of another Humphrey, who accompanied the Conqueror into England. After the death of MaheU, Eari of Hereford, her last surviving brother, her grandson Henry de Bohun, in 1199, was created Earl of Here ford, and was constable of England. He married Matilda, the daughter of Geoffi-ey Fitz-Peter, Earl of Essex, and died in 4 Henry HI., 1220. Humphrey de Bohun, then succeeding to the earldom of Hereford, was, on the death of WUliam de MandeviUe, his mother's brother, -without issue, created in 1237 Earl of Essex. His lU'e was one career of activity, now boldly demanding from the Hug a redress of grievances, and now supporting his sovereign in resisting his enemies. He was sheriff of Kent in 23 Henry HI. and the two following years ; in 34 Henry III, he took the cross and went to the Holy Land ; in 37 Henry IIL he was present in West minster HaU when the formal curse was pronounced, with bell, book, and candle, against the violators of Magna Charta. In 41 Henry IH. he had the custody of the marches of^jWales, and it was during the time that he held this office that his name appears, in 1260, as a justice itinerant for the counties of Gloucester, Worcester, and Hereford. In the troubles which shortly followed he joined Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester, and was taken prisoner at the battle of Evesham, August 4, 1265. His former services, however, availed him to obtain a restoration of his lands and honours, with additional marks of favour. He Uved tiU September 24, 1275, 3 Edward L, and was buried in the abbey of Lan- thony. He founded the chm-ch of Augus tine Friars in Broad Street, in the city of London. He manied first, Maud, daughter of the Earl of Ewe, by whom he had a son Humphrey, who died during his Ufetime, leaving a son, also Humphrey, whosucceeded to the earldoms of Hereford and Essex. His second wife was called Maud de Avene- bury, by whom he had a son, John de Bohun, lord of Haresfield. BOLEBEC, Hugh de, was the son of Walter de Bolebec, a great baron in North umberland, by his wife Margaret, one of the sisters and co-heirs of Richard de Montfichet. He was a frequent attendant on the court, witnessing several charters, assisting his sovereign, King John, in his contentions with the barons, and receiving his reward from the lands of their adherents. In 4 Henry III, the county of Northum- 104 BOLINGBEOKE berland was placed under his charge (^Rot. Claus. i. 421), and he was again sheriff of it in 20 Henry HI., when he held it for ten years. Though placed at the head of the justices itinerant for the Uberties of Durham in 1228, he does not seem to have had any subsequent judicial appointment till 1262, when he was named as one of the justices itinerant for pleas of the forest. He died in October in that year, leaving his wife Theophania surviving. By her he had a son Hugh, who died unmarried during his father's life, and four daughters, who succeeded to his property. (Rot. Chart. 179, 220; Rot. Claus. i. 246, 314; E.rcerpt. e Rot. Fin. ii. 385-393 ; Baronage, i. 452.) BOLINGBROKE, Eael of. See O. Si, John. BOLINGBEOKE, Nicholas de, judging from his name, Iselonged to the county of Lincoln. In 4 Edward II. he was the last of three judges of assize sent into that cotmty and five others, and in the tenth 3'ear was named in a special commission to try some rioters in Lincoln. In 12 & 13 Edward II. he was commanded to cause all proceedings before him as a judge of assize to be estreated into the Exchequer. He certified as one of the lords of the township of Gargrave in Yorkshire. (Pari. Writs, ii. p. ii. 661.) BOLLAND, William, was the eldest son of a London merchant of the same names, and was born in 1772. He was sent for his education to Dr. Valpy's school at Reading, then noted for producing scholars of high literary attainment. WhUe there he was a great favourite with his master, and wrote several prologues and epilogues for the annual dramatic performances for which the school was renowned. He thence pro ceeded to Trinity CoUege, Cambridge, where he formed a life-long intimacy with John Copley, afterwards Lord Lyndhurst, and took his degrees with him in 1794 and 1796. In the latter and two following years he gained the Seatonian prize for his poems on 'The Epiphany,' 'Miracles,' and ' St. Paul at Athens ; ' and subsequently evinced considerable poetic powers in se veral pieces of great elegance. But soon his devotion to Astrsea compelled him to desert the Muses. He entered her (Inner) Temple, and placed himseU under her priest George Holroyd, and, after some initiation into the mysteries, was permitted to join in the ministrations. To descend from these altitudes, he was caUed to the bar on April 24, 1801, having previously acted for some time as a special pleader. He joined the Home Circuit, practising at the usual sessions attached to it, but principally at the Old Bailey, and in 1804 he became one of the four city pleaders. In all of these he commanded a BOLLING large share of business, and acquired so good a reputation that in I8I5 he was selected to join Mr. Holroyd in a commission to Jersey to enquire into the existence of cer tain 'doleances' complained of by the in habitants. In I8I7 he was made recorder of Reading, the place of his pupUage ; and in 1822, when, from the respect he had ob tained as senior city pleader, he would cer^ tainly in ordinary times have been elected common serjeant of London, he was, from the poUtical excitement arising from the trial of Queen CaroUne, defeated by a smaU majority in favour of Mr. (afterwards Lord Chief Justice) Denman, who had acted as one other majesty's advocates. After eight-and-twenty years' labour at the bar, he was called to the bench of the Exchequer on November 16, 1829. The nature of his business had not led him to that abstruse learning which is so necessary for a judge, except in regard to criminal law, with which he was intimately con versant. But, gifted with good sense and discriminative judgment, he fulfiUed his duties with great discretion. He occupied the judicial seat for nearly ten years, when disorders and infirmities obUged him. to resign in January 1839, after which he Uved little more than a year, his death taking place on May 14, 1840. He was one of the most popular men of his time. His eminently handsome and benevolent countenance made the first fa vourable impression, which his pleasantry, cordiality, and kind disposition more than confirmed. He had a mania for old EngUsh literature, and everything which was ancient and rare. The Roxburgh Club originated at a dinner party given by him, and he fm'- ni-shed the first book circulated among his associates, being a reprint of Lord Surrey's version of the second book of the .3 the high office of chief justiciary of Eng land. To this office were added many grante, and the custody, among others, of Dover Castle. He was in charge of this important for tress in May I2I6, when, at the instigation of the barons, England was invaded by Prince Louis of France, who in the next month began to besiege it. Hubert by his skUl and courage successfully resisted the enemy's attacks until the death of King John, when Louis, finding his warlike efforts unavaUing, endeavoured to tempt him to deliver up the castle by promises of large rewards. The loyal governor's honour, however, being as impenetrable as his walls, the foiled prince raised the siege and hastened from the scene. (Wen dover, iU. 368, 380, iv. 4.) He next defeated the French armament sent under the command of Eustace le Moyne to aid Prince Louis, the conse quence of which victory was the retire ment of the French prince and the com parative restoration of peace to the king dom, under the prudent management of WiUiam MareschaU, Earl of Pembroke, the young king's governor. (Lingard, iii. 79.) That Hubert remained in the office of chief justiciary on the accession of the new king is proved by various mandates ad dressed to him under that character in 1216 and for many years after that date. A salary of 300/. per annum was assigned for his support in the office, and 1000/. for the custody of Dover Castle. (Devon's Issue RoU, 2.) On the death of the earl marshal iu 1219 the regency was conferred on Hu bert, while the king's person was placed. 140 BUEGH under the care of his rival, Peter de Rupi bus, Bishop of Winchester, His govern ment was marked by wisdom and firmness, not unaccompanied, however, with some degree of severity. He repressed a dan gerous insurrection in London in 1222, and caused Constantino, the ringleader, to be executed ; he compelled the barons to sur render their castles into the king's hands, and in 1224 he punished Faukes de Breaute, a ferocious ma:gnate raised by the late king, for imprisoning Henry de Braybroc, one of the judges, by destroy ing his castle of Bedford, hanging those w^ho had defended it, and banishing the principal offender. In 1222 Hubert's interest at comt had been still further strengthened by his mar riage with Margaret, the eldest sister of Alexander, King of Scotland, thus be coming allied to his sovereign, whose sis ter, the princess Johanna, had been re- centljr united to the Scottish king. When the king attained his majority he continued Hubert as his minister, and raised him, in 1227, to the earldom of Kent, a title which his ancestor, William, Earl of Moreton, had forfeited his freedom and his life in his endeavours to recover. In the following year his office of chief justiciary was confirmed to him for life; and the numerous grants with which he was en riched, and responsible offices entrusted to him about the same time, are proofs at ¦once of the influence he possessed over the king's mind, and the manner in which he exercised it to his own aggrandisement. His uncontrolled authority could not fail to excite some jealousy among the barons, nor could his enemies be slow to find in stances of rapacity in the rewards which he accumulated. But the success of his ministry and the favour of his sovereign silenced all loud complaints. The feeling ¦of the time may, however, be judged from the derisive title of ' Hubert's Folly,' which was given to a castle, commenced but not completed by him, at Cridia, to overawe ¦the Welsh. (Wendover, iy, 173.) His career was nearly arrested in September 1229 by the irritable temper of the king, who, having coUected avast army at Ports mouth vrith the object of making an at tempt to recover his French dominions, found such scanty naval preparations to transport his armament that in his passion ate disappointment he called Hubert an eld traitor, charged him with receiving a bribe from France, and would have instantly despatched him with his own hand had he not been restrained by the Earl of Chester. The royal indignation did not long continue, and Hubert was re stored for a time to his former power. Even in 1231 he obtained the privilege of appointing a substitute as Justiciaiy of BUEGH England in case of illness or absence, and the grant of the office of chief justiciary of Ireland for life. But the seed of suspicion had been so-wn, and there were many to encourage its growth. He was charged with conni-ying at certain depredations which had been made against the Italian clergy, under Robert de Tuinge; and the frequent dis turbances on the Welsh frontier were attributed to his incapacity. The restora tion of his ancient rival, Peter de Rupibus, Bishop of Winchester, to favour seemed to foreteU the coming- storm, and that prelate was not backward in insinuations which he knew would hasten it. He represented that the poverty of the tteasury was occasioned by the rapacity of some, and the maladministration of others, of its officers, and used his interest to procure the dis missal of several functionaries who owed their places to the justiciary's protection. Hubert's fall was not long- delayed. He was removed from his office on July 29, 1282, 16 Henry HI., and Stephen de Segrave was nominated in his stead. He was called upon to account, not only for the disposition of aU the treasure he had re ceived, but for the exercise of all the privi leges entrusted to him, both in the reign of John and of the present king ; and various criminal charges were brought against him by those who rejoiced in his disgrace. So inveterate was the king against his former favourite that Hubert did not dare to appear at the time appointed, but took sanctuary on two occasions, the sanctity of the latter of which was harshly violated, and he was dragged to the Tower. His imprisonment there did not last long, for the king, under the Bishop of London's threat of excommunication for violating the sanctity of the church, was compeUed to replace his captive in the asylum he had chosen. The church was then encircled and besieged, so that, being deprived of food and the means of escape, Hubert was at last obliged to sm'render himself and re turn to his prison in the Tower. The exertions of his friend Henry, Archbishop of Dublin, could only obtain authority to offer him the choice of abjming the realm, or perpetual imprisonment, or confessing himself a traitor and putting himself at the king's mercy. He at once rejected all these conditions, but replied that, though he had done nothing deserving his present ti-eat- nient, he would, for the satisfaction of the king, retire from the kingdom, although he would not abjure it. The king being somewhat pacified by his submission, and by the remembrance of his former services to his father and himself, consented that he should retain his patri monial inheritance and the lands he held of mesne lords, forfeiting those that he held in BUEGH chief from the king, and that he should be kept in safe custody in the castle of Devizes under the charge of four earls. Thither he was accordingly transferred; but iu the fol lowing year, hearing that his old enemy was about to obtain the custody of his person, he dropped from the waU into the moat, and took refuge in the church of St, John at Devizes, Here he was again vio lently dragged from the altar, but, the bishops interfering, was obliged to be re stored to his sanctuary. On this, however, a precept, dated October 16, 1238, was issued ' to the good men of Wilte,' commanding them, if Hubert de Burgh would not give his abjuration of the realm to Ralph de Bray and Ralph de Norwich, justices whom the king had sent there, or submit himself to be judged by them, to surround the church and the cemetery thereof as they should be instructed. (Neiv Fcedera, i. 211.) He was, a few days afterwards, rescued from his intended starvation by a body of armed men, who, overpowering his guards, led him from the church, and conveyed him to the Earl of Pembroke, then in arms against the king in Wales, His outlawry immediately followed. The disgrace of Peter de Rupibus oc curred in April 1234, and was soon after foUowed by the restoration of peace be tween the king and the barons, with the restitution of their forfeited lands. In this leconciUation Hubert participated, but at the same time surrendered his title to the office of chief justiciary. (Wendover, iv. 204- 310.) Even after aU these trials, his loyalty to the king was conspicuous. In the con federacy of the barons headed by Richard, the king's brother, in 1288, he alone re mained faithful to his aUegiance. But with a monarch so weak and fickle, so avari cious and extravagant, it was impossible to remain long in peace. In 22 Henry III. the king took offence at the marriage of Hubert's daughter Margaret -vrith Richard, Earl of Gloucester; and, though it was proved that Hubert had no knowledge of the affair, the royal indignation could only be appeased by a considerable fine. In the following year, upon some frivolous pre tence, a new quarrel was fixed upon him, and, many of the old charges against him having been revived, a day was appointed for the ti-ial. His answers to aU the eight articles aUeged against him were fuU and satisfactory, but he felt compeUed, in order to avoid an unjust sentence, to make a peace-offering to the king of four of his castles. (State Trials, i. 13,) 'The few years that he lived afterwards he was suffered to pass in quiet, and his eventful life was closed on May 12, 1243, 27 Henry III., at Banstead in Surrey. He was buried -within the church of the Friars BUEGH 141 Preachers, or Black Friars, in Holbom, to which he had been a large benefactor. His pious donations were too numerous to be recorded here, but among them may be mentioned his grant to that fraternity of his palace at Westminster, which was after wards purchased by the Archbishop of York, and is now kno-wn by the name of White hall ; and his foundation of the Hospital of Our Lady, and the church of the Maison Dieu, at Dover. Whatever faiUngs marked the character of Hubert, it cannot be doubted that he was a faithful servant and a -wise cotm- sellor to the monarchs whom he served. The distractions of the kingdom after he had ceased to be Henry's minister speak loudly of his power of guiding and con- trolUng the passions of a foolish and capri cious prince. He left two sons and two daughters, but of which of his wives they were the issue is a debateable question. The eldest son, John, did homage for his father's lands, but never bore the title of Earl of Kent. His branch of the famUy failed in 1279, by the death of John's son John, without male issue. Hubert's second son was named Hubert, from whomdescended Sir Thomas de Burgh,, who in 1487 was created a peer, as Baron Borough of Gainsborough, a title which in 1598 fell into abeyance among the four sisters ofRobert, the sixth baron. (Nicolas's Synopsis.) One of his daughters, Margaret, was cer tainly by the Princess Margaret, as she is so described in a charter dated April 14, 1227, Her clandestine marriage with Ri chard de Clare, Earl of Gloucester, in 1237, abeady aUuded to, was quickly followed by her death, as the earl took another -wife in the following year. (Archceol. Inst, at York, I8I6 ; Holy Trinity, 129.) BURGH, HuaH de. When John de San dale, the chancellor, went from York to London on August 26, 13I6, 10 Edward IL, he, by the king's directions, left the Grea-fc Seal in the custody of WilUam de Ayre mynne, the keeper of the Rolls, under the seals of Robert de Bardelby and Hugh de Burgh, clerks of the Chancery, Hugh de Burgh, clericus, was paymaster of the forces raised in Cumberland and Westmoreland in 27 and 31 Edward I, ; and was one of the procurators of the Bishop of Carlisle in the parUament of 16 Edward H., and for the abbot of St. Mary's, York, in that of the following year. (ParL Writs, i. 606, ii. p, U. 616.) He held the Uving of Pa trick Brompton in Yorkshire, and died in 2 Edward IIL (CaL Inquis. p. m. U. 21.) BURGH, William, was apparentiy of a Norfolk family, although he had property in the counties of Leicester, Rutland, and Lincoln. His first appearance as an advo- 142 BURGHEESH cate in the Year Books was in 43 Edward III,, 1869 ; and he is mentioned as one of the king's Serjeants in 3 Richard II,, 1379 (Rot. Pari. iii. 79), receiving in the same year the appointment of seneschal of the domain of Okeham 'ad placitum regis.' (Cal Rot. ParL 203, 208, 231.) In Trinity 1383, 7 Richard IL, we find him acting as a judge of the Common Pleas, to which he had probably been only just appointed, as in the following Christmas he was knighted at Eltham, having previously received the materials for his robes as a banneret. (Dug dale's Orig. 46, 103.) He was one of the judges who, in August 1887, were induced, or, as he pleaded, com peUed, to sign the opinions stigmatising as treason the ordinance of the previous par liament, appointing commissioners for the government of the kingdom; and, being impeached in consequence, was condemned with his colleagues to die. His sentence, like theirs, was commuted to banishment for life ; and the city of DiibUn, with two miles round it, was named as the place of his exile, with an allowance of 40 marks per annum to live on. His expatriation lasted till 1397, when he had liberty to return. The reversal of the original pro ceedings against him and the others, which passed in -the next year, was in its turn an nulled by the first parliament of Henry IV., two years afterwards. That king, however, in the fourth year of his reign, restored him ¦wholly to the property which he had for feited, (Rot. Pat. iu, 258-491 ; Cal. Inquis. p. m. iii. 107.) BUEGHERSH, Henet de (Bishop oe Lincoln), The family of Burghersh derived its name from a manor so called iu the county of Sussex. Its possessor in the reign of Edward I. was Robert de Burghersh, who was constable of Dover Castle, and warden of the Cinque Ports. He died in 1306, and Henry, bom about 1290, is de scribed in the statutes of Oriel College, Oxford, as the son of Robert de Burghasse, knight, and Matilda, his wife. He owed to his connection with Bartho lomew de Badlesmere, of Ledes Castle, Kent, his uncle, that favour which produced the king's intercession -with the pope to raise him to the vacant see of Lincoln. In one of the royal letters he is called canon of York. (Pari Writs, ii. p. i. 406-418.) The necessary bull having been procured, he was consecrated bishop on July 20, 1820, 14 Edward II. In the next year his brother and his uncle were both in arms on the side of the Earl of Lancaster ; and it is e-yident that he was suspected of adhering to the same party, as there is a memorandum on the Roll (Ibid. 650) that he is not to be requested to raise men-at-arms to march ao-ainst the rebels and adherents of the earl. Tlie strong terms of -vituperation which the BUELAND king uses in his letter to the pope on that occasion, praying for the bishop's expulsion, form a curious contrast with the laudatory expressions in his five letters of recommen dation two years before. (New Foedera, i, 464.) -The temporaUties of his bishopric were, however, seized into the king's hands; but were restored by the first parliament of Edward III, (Ibid. 697.) Soon after the accession of Edward IH. he was placed in the office of treasurer, which he filled till, in the next year, on May 12, 1328, he was appointed chanceUor, In 1329 he accompanied the Mng to France, to do homage to King PhUip for the lands held of that crown, and is said to have re ceived some hint of an intention to surprise and seize the person of Edward, who there upon lost no time in escaping. He retained the Great Seal tiU the downfaU of Mortimer and Queen IsabeUa, when the king, on No vember 28, 1330, placed it in the hands of .lohn de Stratford, Bishop of Winchester, but gave Burghersh a general pardon. (Cal. Rot. Pat. 109.) We find him, however, in the royal con fidence, as treasurer, from the eighth year of the reign tUl the end of his Ufe, and en gaged in various negotiations as to Edward's claim to the crown of France, accompanyiiig the king iu his expeditions, and becoming bound for him for a loan of 10,000/. (New Fcedera, i. 898-1134.) The bishop died at Ghent in December 1840, and his body was removed to England for burial in his own cathedral. He is reputed to have possessed great natural abiUties and extensive learning. His poUtical character must have been high, since for ten years after the king had re leased himself from his mother's domination he was employed, although one of her party, in embassies requUing skill and prudence as weU as confidence and trust. He and his brother founded a grammar-school in Lin coln, to which he left maintenance for five poor prieste and as many poor scholars for ever. Bartholomew, his brother, was the an cestor of the present Earl of Westmoreland apd the Baroness le Despencer and Burg hersh. (Godwin, 294; Barnes' sEdtoard III. 86-210.) BURLANB, John, belonged to a fanuly which was for a long series of years settled at the manor of Steyning, in the parish of Stoke Courcy in the county of Somerset. His- father was also named John Burland, and his mother was Elizabeth, the daughter of Claver Morris, of WeUs,M.D. Their son was educated at BaUiol College, Oxford, from 1740 to 1743, when he entered the Middle Temple, and was called to the bar in January 1746. The next year he mar ried Letitia, daughter of William Berkeley Portman, Esq., of Orchard' Portman, by BUENEL Anne, the daughter of the speaker. Sir Edward Seymour. In 1762 he was honoured with the degree of the coif, andiu 1764 was appointed king's serj eant. After he had held the recordership of "Wells for some time -with great reputation, the corporation thought fit to remove him, but on application to the Court of King's Bench in 1767 a peremptory mandamus was ordered to be made out for his restora tion. He was constituted a baron of the Exchequer on April 8, 1774; but -within two years he died by the bursting of a blood-vessel in his brain, on March 28, 1776, and was buried in Westminster Abbey. He left a son, who became member of parlia ment for Totnes. (Collinson's Somerset, i. 217 ; Gent. Mag. xxxvn. 91.) BURNEL, Robeet (Bishop oe Bath and Wells), appears to have been (after con sideration of the various descriptions ) of his parentage) the son of another Robert Bumel, and to have been bom at Acton- Burnell, In 1266, 50 Henry IIL, he is -described as clerk or secretary to Edward, the king's eldest son (Archceol. Journal, ii. .326), and as being signed with the cross with the prince in 1269, whom he accom panied to the Holy Land. Having returned "before him, he held in the first year of Edward's reign a high place in the council during the king's absence (Madox, ii. 207), and there are also several letters addressed by him to Walter de Merton, the chancellor. (6 RepoH Pub. Rec, App. U. 92, 93, 113.) He was at this time canon of "Wells and archdeacon of York, and probably held some office in the Exchequer. King Edward returned to England on August 2, 1274, and was crowned on the 19th. Within a month afterwards Burnel was raised to the chancellorship, the Great Seal being delivered to him on September 21,1274. He fiUed this office aU the re mainder of his life, and never during the •eighteen years that it lasted lost the con fidence of his royal master; a distinction which he well merited from the wisdom of his counsels, and the zeal and assiduity ¦with which he aided his sovereign's efforts in the improvement of the law. In January 1275 he was elected Bishop of Bath and WeUs, and was consecrated at Merton in the foUowing April. On the abdication of the archbishopric of Canter bury by Robert Ascwardby in 1278, the monks elected Bishop Burnel as his suc cessor, but the pope, not deeming him a man fitted for his purposes, annulled the appointment, and placed John Peckham in the vacant seat. On his various expeditions into foreign parts he left the Great Seal in the custody of different officers of the Chancery, to transact the necessary business, Acton-BumeU, the place of his birth and BUENET 143 residence, has acquired an interest in his torical recollections by having given its name to the Statutum de Mercatoribus, which was enacted there on October 12, 1288, 11 Edvvard I. _ The king was then paying a -visit to his chancellor, while a parUament, which he had summoned to meet at Shrewsbury, were determining the fate of the Welsh Prince David. "When that trial was over, the parUament joined the king at Acton-Burnell, and passed this statute, after which the king extended his royal visit till November 12, Some re mains of the room in which the parliament sat stiU exist. They belong to the old mansion of the bishop's ancestors, which he replaced by a new buUding, stiU remaining, but -with great alterations. One of his last acts is his attendance at Norham as chancellor at the meeting of the Scottish peers on June 3, 1291, when King Edward acted as arbitrator between the competitors for that crown. (Lingard, iu. 206.) On October 25, 1292, he died atBerwick- on-Tweed, when his body was removed to Wells and buried there. Bishop Bumel was an active and a wise minister, serving the crown with zeal, energy, and prudence. No chancellor be fore him had ever held the Seal so long or retained so uninterruptedly his sovereign's confidence. The monk of Worcester gives his character in these words: 'Regi tam utUis, plebi tam affabiUs, omnibus amabilis: vix nostris temporibus illi similis inve- nietur.' (Angl. Sac. i. 514.) BURNET, Thomas, was not the first of his family who obtained a seat on the judicial bench, his grandfather having acquired high legal eminence in the Scot tish tribunal as Lord Cramond, His father was the celebrated whig prelate, Gilbert Burnet, Bishop of Salisbury, whose exer tions at the Revolution, the piety of whose life, and the value of whose works have thrown around him a lustte which is rather brightened than diminished by the controversies which the latter occasioned. His mother was the bishop's second wife, Mrs, Mary Scott, a wealthy and acoom- pUshed Dutch lady of Scottish and noble extraction, Thomas Burnet was their third and youngest son, and was bom about 1694. He was first sent to Merton College, Oxford, and afterwards in 1706 to the University of Leyden, where he studied for two years, and then visited Germany, Switzerland, and Italy. On his return he entered himself at the Middle Temple in 1709, ^ His student life was divided between law and politics, and he acquired equal notoriety for the wildness of his dissipa tions and for his genius and wit. Swift, in one of his letters to Stella of 1712, speak- 144 BUENET ing of the Mohocks when they terrified the town by their lawless and mischievous exploits, reports that ' the Bishop of Salis bury's son is said to be of the gang.' This, however, may haye been only a current calumny of the day, which the tory dean found pleasure in promulgating. The groundlessness of the report seems the more probable, inasmuch as at this period Bumet was issuing from the press no less than seven pamphlets against the adminis tration, and in defence of the whigs ; and was engaged in the composition of several poetical pieces, which were not given to the world till long after his death : occu pations which would leave him little leisure for the imputed connection. One of the pamphlets, entitled 'A certain Infor mation of a certain Discourse, that happened at a certain gentleman's house, in a ceitain county, written by a certain person then present, to a certain friend now in London; from whence you may collect the great certainty of the account,' so stung the ministers that they imprisoned the author. There is no doubt that his course of Ufe at this time was dissolute and Ucentious. A story is told that his father one day, seeing him uncommonly grave, asked him the subjecte of his thoughfe. 'A greater work,' repUed he, ' than your lordship's " History of the Reformation."' 'What is that, Tom ? ' ' My own reformation, my lord.' The bishop expressed his pleasure, but at the same time his despair of it. On the accession of George I. he wrote some other political squibs, now forgotten, and at his fether's death he published the ' character ' of the bishop, with his last will. In 1715 he and Mr. Ducket wrote a travestie of the first book of the Iliad, under the title of ' Homerides,' which na turally procured them a place in Pope's 'Dunciad.' On the whig party regaining power he was sent as consul to Lisbon, where he got involved in some dispute with Lord Tyrawley, the ambassador, and adopted a curious mode of ridiculing his noble antagonist. Having learned what dress his lordship intended to wear on a birthday, he provided liveries for his ser vants of exactly the same pattern, and appeared himself in a plain suit. He con tinued at Lisbon several years, and on his recall to England he published his father's 'History of his o-wn Time,' to the last volume of which he added a Ufe of the bishop. Resuming his original profession, he was caUed to the bar in 1729, twen-ty years after his admission to the Middle 'Temple. He showed so much ability and met with such success that in 1736 he received the degree of the coif, and in 1740 was ap pointed king's serjeant. In October of the next year he succeeded Mr. Justice For- BUEEOUGH tescue on the bench of the Common Pleas, where he administered justice with a great reputation for learning and uprightness for nearly twelve years. He was knighted in November 1745, on the occasion of aU the judges, Serjeants, and barristers presenting an address to the king expressive of their- ' utter detestation of the present wicked and most ungratefiU rebeUion.' He died unmarried on January 5, 1753, of the gout in his stomach, and was buried near his father in St. James's Church, ClerkenweU. Whatever were the fraUties of his youth, he redeemed them by his after-life, com manding in the latter period the respect of the wise, as he had gained in the former the admiration of the wite who dis tinguished the reig-n of Queen Anne. He- rejoiced in the esteem of many friends, and his merite and his worth were recorded after his death in several pubUcations. BUENHAM, Thomas de, was the last justice of four to whom the ffi-st com mission of ttaUbaston into the counties of Lincoln, Nottingham, and Derby, dated November 23, 1304, 38 Edward I., was addressed. (Rot. ParL i. 407.) On the renewal of the commissions in ihe foUow ing April, he was not reappointed ; but he had in the meantime been returned as laiight of the shire for Lincolnshire, which he had already represented in three parUa- ments, and was again elected to that of 2 Edward H. BURNTON, William de, the last named of five justices itinerant appointed in 30 Edward I., 1302, for the county of Corn wall, may have been the same as WilUam de Brompton, the justice of the Common Pleas in this reign, whose name was some times -written Bm-ntou; as thuteen years had elapsed since his disgrace. BURROUGH, Jambs, was the third son of the Rev. John Burrough, of Abbotts-Ann in Hampshire, in which county and in- Wiltshire he possessed considerable pro perty. He was bom in 1760, and, shovring great ability as a youth, his father deter mined on bringing him up to the legal profession. He was called to the bar of the Inner Temple in 1778, having pre viously practised for a short tiihe as a spe cial pleader. Joining the Western Circuit, he gradually acquired a good share of business, and was particularly noticed for his profound knowledge as a sessional law yer. In 1792 he was appointed a commis sioner of banla-upts, and to Lord Eldon's estimation of his intelligence and worth he owed his ultimate elevation. He was selected in 1794 by the Earl of Radnor as his deputy in the recordership of Salisbury, and afterwards became recorder of Portsmouth, both which appointments he held till he was advanced to the bench. That event did not occur till May 1816, BUESTALL "when he was sixty-six years of age. He was then constituted a judge of the Com mon Pleas, and knighted. As a judge he held a distinguished rank. To his legal knowledge he added patience and strict impartiality; and he was par ticularly esteemed for the kindness and simplicity of his demeanour. He was apt to deal in apophthegms, one of which was, ' PubUc policy is an unruly horse, which if ajudge unwarily motmte, ten to one he is run away with.' His mode of illustration too was especially quaint. He once ad dressed a jury thus : ' Gentlemen, you have been told that the first is a consequential issue. Now, perhaps you do not know what a consequential issue means ; but I dare say you understand nine-pins. Well, then, if you deliver your bowl so as to strike the front pin in a particidar direc tion, down go the rest: just so it is with these coimts ; knock down the first, and aU the rest -wiU go to the ground ; that's what we caU a consequential issue.' When he had attained the age of se venty-nine he was obUged by his infirmi ties to apply for his discharge, which he obtained at the end of 1829. His life was prolonged till March 26, 1839, and his re mains were deposited in the Temple Church. His daughter Anne, his only surviving child, •erected a monument to his memory in the church of Laverstock,near SaUsbury. (Lord Campbell's Chancellors, iv, 666 ; Laiv Mag. Ui. 299,) BUBSTAIE, William de, is first men tioned as a clerk, or master, in Chancery in .a document recording that the Great Seal was placed in the custody of four indi-vi- duols, of whom he is the second named, on March 16, 1371, to hold during the absence of Sir Robert Thorpe, the chanceUor, The next time his name appears is in an entry dated the 28th of the same month, stating the delivery by the Bishop of Winchester, the late chanceUor, of certain seals which had been left in his possession. He is then called master of the Rolls, and Dugdale fixes that as the date of his appointment. In 49 Edward III. there was a contest in the court of Rome between him and a car dinal relative to the presentation to the parish church of Hoghton in the diocese of Durham, which the pope decided in his favour. (Neio Foedera, iii, 1087,) Under Richard H, he continued master of the Rolls during the first four years of his reign, and died in 1381. During his time the Domus Conversorum in Chancery Lane was permanently annexed by Edward HI, to the office of master of the Rolls, BURTON, John de, was appointed mas ter of the RoUs on October 24, 1386, but whether he was the John de Burton who held benefices about this time in Cam- BUEY 145 bridgeshire and Yorkshire, and was very liberal to the institutions of those counties is uncertain. He held the office till July 22* 1394 ; and from March 26 to AprU 19, 1893, he was entrusted with the Great Seal dur ing the absence of the chancellor. There is proof that he died in possession of the place by the mandate to give up the Rolls of the Chaucei-y being directed, not to him, but his executors. (Rot. Pat. 18 Rich, H. p. i. m. 28.) BURY, Richaed de, or DE AUNGEE- VILLE (Bishop op Diteham). The real name of this learned and eminent prelate was Richard de Aungerville, a to-wn in Normandy; but he assumed that of de Bury from the place where he was bom. Bury St. Edmunds, in Suffolk. He was son of Sir Richard de Aungerville, and was bom in 1281. Being of very tender years when he was left an orphan, the care of his education devolved on his uncle, John de Willoughby, a priest, by whom his youthful studies were well directed. In due time he was re moved to Oxford, where he pursued them with so much diligence that he became dis tinguished for his learning, and at the same time acquired the higher character of a man pure in his Ufe and manners. On leaving Oxford he entered the convent of Durham as a monk. From this seclusion he was withdrawn by being selected as the tutor of the king's eldest son ; but, as the prince was not born till 1312, this event could scarcely have occurred before the year 1319 , or 1320, when our monk would have been nearly forty years old. His con duct in his new position was so exemplary that he was rewarded with the treasurer- ship of Guienne, where he was established when Queen Isabella, and his pupil the prince, went to France in 1325. The asylum he gave them there, and the pecuniary aid he afforded out of the royal treasures in his keeping, had nearly proved fatal to him. Although the latter rightly belonged to the prince, as his father had ta'ansferred the duchy to him, he was pursued by the emissaries of the Despencers, and, escaping to Paris, was compelled to conceal himseU" for seven days in the beUry of the church of the Friars Minors in that city. On the accession of his princely pupil to the throne his services were not forgotten. He was retained near the person of the king, then Uttle more than fourteen years of age, and was rewarded successively with the offices of cofferer, treasurer of the ward robe, and keeper of the privy seal. Nor was his clerical preferment overlooked. He held at first a smaU prebend in the church of Chichester ; and the king, in a letter to the pope on de Bury's behalf, caUs him_ ' his secretary,' and, speaking of his services, 'a pueritia nostra,' uses these strong expressions : ' Quod novimus ipsum L 146 BUEY virum in consiliis providum, conversationis et vitse munditia decorum, literarum scien- tia prseditum, et in agendis quibuslibet cir- cumspectum.' The object of this letter was to induce the pope to reserve for de Bury the prebends in the churches of Hereford, London, and Chichester, with the other be nefices which Gilbert de Middleton, arch deacon of Northampton, lately deceased, had possessed. Before an answer could have been received to this application, de Bury was collated to the vacant archdea conry on January 6, I830-I ; but the pope, according to the too common practice of the day, usurped the appointment, and, on the 1st of the following March, granted the dignity to Peter, one of his cardinals ; but prebends in the cathedrals of Lincoln, Sa rum, and Lichfield were among the grants soon after made to de Bury. In October 1331 he went -with Anthony de Pesaigne on a mission to the pope at Avignon, where he formed an intimacy with Petrarch, among his conversations with whom is one relative to the Island of Thule, on which, however, Petrarch complains that the learned ambassador was either unable or imwilUng to offer any elucidation. On his return from this embassy he was sent, with two others, to Cambridge, with a com mission to enquire into the conduct and claims of such scholars as were supported in that university by the king's bounty. It was probably during this visit that he be came one of the guild of St. Mary's there, to the union of which with that of Corpus Christi the college of the latter name owed its foundation. (Masters, 9.) In 1332 he was admitted dean of Wells, and in the next year was sent again as am bassador to the pope, by whom he was ap pointed one of his chaplains. While he was absent on this mission, Lewis Beaumont, Bishop of Durham, died ; and the pope used the opportunity at once of exercising his own power, and of gratifying King Edward, by setting aside an election made by the monks of Durham, and placing Richard de Bury in the vacant seat. He was conse crated at Chertsey on December 19, 1333. King Edward estimated his ability and his prudence so highly that he fixed on him to fill the most important offices in the state. He was accordingly constituted treasurer on Februaiy 8, 1334, and raised to the chan cellorship on September 28 in the same year, "Whether he found that he was un qualified for its cares and responsibilities, or that they -withdrew him more than he wished from those of his diocese, he resigned the latter office, after holding it less than nine months, on June 6, 1335. He was employed in the foUowing and several sub sequent years in frequent embassies to France on the subject of the king's claims — an occupation to which his learning and BUEY talents were probably more peculiarly fitted.. His allowance on these missions was at the- rate of five marks a day. (Neio Foedei-a, n.. 960.) Though frequently absent, he neglected none of the requirements of his diocese. He- had the habit of turning aU his time to ac count, and neither his meals nor his travels- were spent idly. During the former he was- read to by his chaplains, among whom were numbered some of the most celebrated.men of the day, and afterwards he discussed with them the various subjects suggested by the reading. During the latter he occupied himself in forming what became the largest- library in Europe, the possession of which was one of his greatest glories, and its ac cumulation formed his chief deUght. He- spared no expense in securing the most curious and valuable manuscripts, and speaks- with evident glee of the motives which in fluenced the donors of some, and of the difficulties he had to overcome in obtaining others. The stores he had thus coUected he bequeathed to the students of Dtu:ham (since caUed Trinity) College, in Oxford, being the first pu'blio Ubrary that was founded in that university ; and in his work called ' Philobiblon ' he not only gives in structions for ite management, but endea vours to excite a love of Uterature and a taste for the liberal arte. His o-wn devotion to books may be esti mated by the language he uses regarding them : — ' Hi sunt magistri qui nos instruunt sine virgis et ferula, sine verbis et colera, sine pane et pecunia. Si accedis non dor- miunt, si inquiris non se abscondunt, non, remm-murant si oberres, cachinos nesciunt si ignores.' His ardom- in thefr pursuit did not end -with then- attainment. He read and used them ; and he relates that the first Greek and Hebrew grammars that ever appeared in England were derived from his labours. He encouraged the acquaintance and assisted the enquiries of all learned and inteUigent. men, and never enjoyed himself so fuUy as in the pleasures of their conversation ; ands his understanding was so cultivated, his wit so piercing, and his spirit of enquiry so eager, that few subjects were beyond his genius and penetration. His virtues and his charities were equal to his talents and learning. He was beloved by his neighbours, with whom he Uved on. terms of reciprocal affection ; to his clergy he was an indulgent superior ; to his tenants- and domestics a considerate master. He was most bountiful to the poor, distributing- eight quarters of wheat every week for the relief of those around him, and never omit ting in his journeys to appropriate large sums for the indigent in those places through which he passed. He closed his useful life, iu the 64th year ^i BUEY of his age, at his palace of Auckland, on April 24, 1345, and was interred in his cathedral. BUEY, Thomas, the youngest son of Sir WiUiam Bury, knight, of Linwood in Lin colnshire, was bom in 1655, and, entering Gray's Inn in 1668, was called to the bar in 1676. After twenty-fom* years' practice, he obtained the degree of serjeant in 1700, and on January 26 of the next year he was made a baron of the Exchequer, Speaker Onslow in his notes to Bumet states that it was said that it appeared by Bury's ' Book of Accounte ' that Lord Keeper Wright had 1000/. for raising him to the bench. This ^creditable story, however, depends on very slight testimony. The new baron was of course knighted, and sat in, that court during the remainder of his life ; for fifteen years as a puisne baron, and for six as chief baron, to which he was advanced on June 10, 1716. In the famous Aylesbury case in the House of Lords he supported the opinion of Chief Justice Holt, when the judgment which he had opposed was re versed. He died on May 4, 1722, and was buried at Grantham, where there is a handsome monument to his memory. BYLES, John Baenaed, one of the pre sent judges of the Common Pleas, was bom at Stowmarket in Suffolk in 1801, and is the eldest son of John Byles, Esq., of that place, by the only daughter of William Barnard, Esq., of Holts in Essex, Called to the bar by the Inner Temple iu November 1831, he joined the Norfolk Circuit, and attended the sessions attached to it In 1840 he was appointed recorder of Buckingham, and in 1843 received the degree of the coif, to which was added a patent of precedence in all the courts in 1846, the year in which the act was passed opening the Court of Common Pleas to all barristers. In 1857 he was promoted to the dignity of queen's serjeant. During the whole period of his career as an advocate his sagacity and sound judgment secured for him a considerable, and ultimately a leading, business. His professional reputation must have been universally acknowledged to have in duced alord chancellor so much opposed to him in poUtics as was Lord Cranworth -to select him for a judge's place, Mr, Ser jeant Byles was not only a tory, or rather a conservative, in his opinions, but had ad vocated the principles of that section of his party which supported protection in an able pamphlet, caUed ' Sophisms of Free Trade,' Not-withstanding this apparent impediment to his advance. Lord Cranworth, deeming that a good j udge was better than a political partisan, made choice of one who in the estimation of the legal world held the high est place. Mr. Byles was therefore ap- BYEUN 147 pointed in June 1868 to fUl the vacant seat on the bench of the Common Pleas, He has been twice married. His first wife, a daughter of J. Foster, Esq., of Big gleswade, he lost very early; his second is a daughter of J. Weld, Esq., of Royston. Besides the above-mentioned pamphlet, he published a work ' On the Usury Laws,' and some others. BYNTE-WOETH, Richaed de (Bishop OE London), had a grant of the manor of Bynteworth, now caUed Bentworth, in Hampshire, -with the advowson of its church, from the Archbishop of Rouen, in 9 Edward III., and probably was a native of the place. He was employed in the previous year as one of the ambassadors to negotiate the marriage of the king's brother, John, Earl of Comwall, with Maria, daughter of Fer dinand of Spain, and in several subsequent years on other missions, in all of which he is caUed 'juris civiUs professor.' In II Edward III. he was keeper of the king's privy seal ; and he appears to have been a canon of St. Paul's at the time of the de cease of Stephen de Gravesend, Bishop of London. By his conduct in these employ ments his character had been so firmly es tabUshed that he was immediately called upon to fill the vacant see, his election to which took place on May 4, 1338. On July 6 the king appointed him his chan cellor. But his sudden death put an end to his tenure of both these offices on December 8, 1339, before he had illustrated either by any memorable act, (Godivin, 185,) BYRLAY, William de (Birlaco), can hardly be considered entitled to the desig nation given to him by Sir T. D. Hardy as keeper of the Great Seal. He seems to have been merely a clerk in the Chancery, to whom, with two of his brethren, the Great Seal was on some occasions entrusted dur ing thetemporary absences of the chanceUor, the first occurring in March 1298, 26 Ed ward L, and the last in 1308, BYR-UN, .loHN DE, was named in a sepa rate commission of trallbaston, issued on March 13, 1306, 33 Edward I., for the county of Lancaster, which in the follow ing month was consolidated -with the other northem counties in a new commission, in which his name was not included. (Pari, Writs, i. 407, 408.) He was a lineal descendant from Ralph de Burun, who at the time of the Con queror's survey had eight lordships in Not tinghamshire and five in Derbyshire, and whose family subsequently obtained con siderable propertyin Lancashire. His father was also named John, and his mother was Joan, daughter of Sir Baldwin Thies, and widow of Sir Robert Holland. Seated at Clayton, iu Lancashire, his father was one of the conservators of the peace for that county in 15 Edward 1, the improvement of the laws, and several statutes owe their existence to his intro duction. On the ministry beginning to- totter in 1841, they were so determined before their exclusion to reward their at torney-general for his political and pro fessional exertions, that they ventured on the bold and questionable step of removing their ancient colleague, Lord Plunkett, from the chancelloivship of Ireland, for the= CAMPBELL purpose of raising Sir John to that dignity and decking him -with a peerage. With reluctance Lord Plunkett submitted; and Sir John, on June 22, I84I, became Lord CampbeU of St. Andrews and lord chan cellor of Ireland. After sitting only one or two days in the Irish court he made a speech to the bar, in which he plainly in timates his expectation of soon 'being ' re duced to a private station.' (Speeches, 518.) The ministiy succumbed in August, and Lord Campbell, retiring with them, finished his short tenure of office; but though enti tled to a pension of 4000/., the job was so gross and notorious that the ministry did not venture to offer nor he to claim it. During the nine years that followed his retfrement he applied himself to his sena torial duties, taking a leading part in the Lords' debates, and assisting greatly in the appellate jurisdiction of the house. But his active habits required further occupa tion, and in 1842 he found it by pubUsh ing his 'Speeches at the Bar and in the House of Commons.' But his ambition was not satisfied with this slight offering ; aiming at literary fame, he next chose a subject from the execution of which he hoped to obtain it. This was ' The Lives of the Lord Chancellors,' the first three volumes of which he published at the close of 1846, continuing them in 1846 and 1847, till he had filled seven volumes, concluding -with the Life of Lord Eldon. This work acquired an immediate popularity, and, though condemned by some critics for its looseness and occasional incorrectness, it should be remembered that the mere ¦writing of seven volumes, each consisting of between six and seven hundred closely printed pages, in the course of little more than two years, was of iteelf an extraordi nary effort of labour, and that it would be unreasonable to expect any strict investi gation of records or authorities, or more than a compilation from previous writers. In 1849 he published two volumes of 'The Lives of the Chief Justices,' to which, in 1857, he added a third gossiping volume, including those of Lords Kenyon, EUen borough, and Tenterden, in which a ten dency to disparage his noble predecessors is too apparent. The only other literary production which he printed was ' Shak speare's Legal Acquirements,' being an attempt to prove that the great dramatist spent his youth in an attorney's office. This was a mere enlargement of the idea that had been previously suggested by Malone, Chalmers, W, S. Landor, J. P. Collier, and, so lately as in 1888, by Charles Armitage Bro-wn, . *> When his party came again into power \ \ in 1846, Lord John Russell, the prime minister, admitted him into the cabinet, and gave him the appointment of chan- CAMPBELL 153 cellor of the duchy of Lancaster. This office he fiUed tiU March 6, I860, when, Lord Denman having retired from ill health and advanced age, Lord Campbell was raised to the chief justiceship of the Queen's Bench, although only two years younger than his predecessor. On assum ing it he of course relinquished his seat in the cabinet council, as he had expressed his strong disapproval of the union of the two positions by Lord Mansfield in 1757, and Lord EUenborough in 1806. (Ch. Just. U. 451, ui. 185,) Lord Campbell was specially fitted for the office to which he was thus appointed. During the nine years that he filled it he is aclmowledged to have performed its im portant duties in a most exemplary manner, preserving the dignity of the place, and administering the law with apparent ease and strict impartiality. When Lord Pal- merston assumed the premiership for a second time in 1859, he offered Lord Camp bell the chanceUorship ; and it surprised the world that he should be tempted to leave a court where he was so much at home, for one in the practice of which he could not be expected to be so conversant, especially when its tenure was so uncertain. But ambition decided, and he received the Great Seal on June 18. He presided over the Court of Chancery for two years, and the practisers in it were astonished at the readiness with which he mastered the forms of the court, and the discrimination he showed in the judgments he pronoimced. In the midst of his duties, in the full tide of his triumph, he was sud denly cut off. On Saturday, June 23, 1861, he had attended a cabinet council, and, after having entertained a party of friends at his house at Knightebridge, had retired to his chamber in his accustomed health and spirits, and applied himself to preparing a judgment which he had promised ou Monday. On Sunday morning he was found dead in his chair with the blood oozing from his mouth, caused by the burst ing of one of the great arteries near his heart. Thus awfully terminated the life of one who, during ite whole continuance, never relaxed from his labours, who never was satisfied unless he was doing something, and was indefatigable in all his pursuits. Commencing as a poor and dependent man, he worked his way by industry and per severance, not only to wealth, but to the highest honours of his profession. In the temporary cessation of his legal life, his love of employment led him to aspire to the acquisition of a Uterary name. It is not, however, probable that his fame as a lawyer, a legislator, or a judge, will be superseded by Ms repute as an author. The transient popularity of his works has afready in a 154 CAMVILLE great measure subsided, for, though they must ever be regarded as an extraordinary effort of laborious industry, and as composed in a pleasant and easy, though somewhat egotistic, style, they are not looked upon as authority by those who are best versed in the history of the various times of which they treat. It has been considered a material detraction from the merits of his works that fr'om the beginning to the end of them he takes every opportunity of referring to the incidents of his own life, and the ad- -vice and opinions he gave in his professional capacity. It will be seen that this volun teer information has been serviceable in the preparation of the present sketch. Tii the year before his own death he lost his wife, Liady Stratheden, to whose title their eldest son, William Frederick, suc ceeded, thus taking a place in the peerage which, but for his father's position as chancellor, would have given him prece dence in the House of Lords. Lord Camp bell left two other sons and four daughters. CAM'VILLE, Geeaed de (de Cana Villa), the ancestor of whose family came into England with William the Conqueror, was the eldest son of Richard de Camville, the founder of Combe Abbey in Warwick shire ; and by his marriage with Nichola, the eldest of the three daughters of Richard de Haya, and the widow of William Fitz- Erneis, had in her right the office of con stable of the castle of Lincoln. A charter exists among the archives of the duchy of Lancaster (Archeeologia, xxvii. 112) which is curious as having been granted by Rich ard I, between the demise of his father and his own coronation, and as showing that he did not then assume the style and title of ' King,' but only called himself ' Dominus Anglise,' It confirms to Gerard de Cam- viUe and his wife Nichola all the right and heritage of Nichola in England and Nor mandy, together with the custody and constableship of Lincoln Castle. He was also made sheriff of the county of Lincoln. On King Richard's departure to the Holy Land, Gerard de Camville having joined the party of Prince John, William de Longchamp, the chief justiciary, laid siege to Lmcoln Castle, whicli Nichola resolutely defended (Madox, i. 22), and compelled Longchamp to withdraw his forces. On the king's return Gerard was not only de prived of the sheriftalty and constableship, tjut also of his o-wn estate, and was reduced to the necessity of purchasing restitution of the latter, with the king's favour, by a fine of two thousand marks. On the accession of King John he recovered the sheriffalty, which he retained till the end of the seventh year of that reign, and received other proofs of the king's regard. When the kingdom was placed under interdict in 9 John, the king committed to him and CANTEBEIG to WiUiam de Comhill all the lands and goods of the clergy in the diocese of Lincoln who refused to perform divine service. (Cal. Rot. Pat. 3.) He received the ac knowledgment of fines at Cambridge in 10 and II John, 1208-9, and he and his asso ciates are there specially caUed 'justicii He died in 16 John. (pid. 8, 10.) His ¦wife, Nichola, survived him for some years, during which she held the sheriffalty of Lincolnshire, and was constituted governess of the castles of Frampton and Lincoln, the latter of which she gaUantly defended against the confederated barons. She died about 15 Henry HI., 1230-1. CAM'VILLE, Thomas de, was a nephew of the above Gerard de CamvUle, being the third son of his brother WiUiam by Albreda, the daughter and heir of Geoffrey Marmion. He held Westerham, in Kent, of the honor of Bologne, in 2 and 3 John, and paid fif teen marks for three knights' fees in that county, and two marks for one knight's fee in Essex. (RoL Cancell 161, 220.) His adherence to the rebeUious barons at the close of that king's reign was punished with the loss of all his lands, which, however, were restored on his obedience to the go vernment of Henry III. In II Henry HI. he had the grant of a market for his manor of Fobbing, in Essex, (Rot. Claus. i. 243, 825, ii. 194.) He is only once named as a justicier, on the authority of a line being levied before him in May 1229, 13 Henry III. (Dugdale's Orig. 42.) His death oc curred in 1235, leaving Agnes, his -widow, and a sou Robert, who married a daughter of Hiimo de Crevequer, (Hasted, iii, 162.) CANTEBEIG, Thomas de (Cambridge), described as of the clerical profession, was an officer in the Exchequer in 29 Edward L, and his appointment as a baron of that court took place on September 16, 1307, two months after the accession of Edward II. In the foUowing year, on October 24, he had a patent authorising him to take the place of William de Carleton, the senior baron, when he was absent, and to sit next to him when he was present— a clear proof of the royal favour, as there were then two barons in the comt senior to him in standmg. He remained in this place tiU July 17, 1310, when his removal doubtless arose from his services being more valuable in another character, as during the time he held the office, and for several years afterwards, ex tending to 1317, he was employed in foreign negotiations. (Neio Fcedera, i, 984, ii. 15, 176, 273, 383 ; Madox, U, 58 ; ParL Writs, U, p. U, 4, 680, 1408,) CANTEBRIG, John de, could scarcely be the son of the above Thomas de Cante'brig, as Masters, in his ' Corpus Christi College' (p, 8), suggests, the latter being a clergy man, though he was probably nearly related CANTILUPE to him. From 4 Edward H. he was con- •tinually employed in the judicial commis sions in the county of Cambridge, and was returned member for it to several of the parliamente from the 14th to the 19th year. He is mentioned as a counsel in the Year Books of Edward II. and Edward III. In the third year of the latter he was one of the king's serjeante, and as such was joined in the commission into Northamptonshire, &c., and on October 22 in that year was made a knight, tenquam banerettus. In 1831 he was seneschal of the abbot of St. Albans (Newcome, 223), and on Ja nuary 18 he was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas, and, for some reason that ¦does not appear, had a new patent on Ja nuary 30, 1334. His death occm-red in the next year. His property was very extensive in the to-wn and neighbourhood of Cambridge, and both during his Ufe and by his will he devoted a great part of it to the guild of St. Mary, in that to-wn (afterwards Corpus Christi OoUege), of which he was a member, and twice alderman, (Dugdale's Orig. 45 ; Abh. Rot. Orig. 95; Pari, Writs, ii. p. ii. 630.) CANTILUPE, Simon de. See S. Nok- MANNUS. CANTILUPE, William de. The noble family of Cantilupe, so called from the ori ginal Champ de Loup, [or Campus Lupi, followed the Norman Conqueror in his en terprise on the EngUsh monarchy. William, whose father was Walter de Cantilupe, in 2 John held the office of steward of the household. (Rot. Liberal. 1.) In the fol lowing year he was sheriff of Worcester shire, Warwick and Leicester, and Hereford ; and over one or the other of these counties he presided for many years. From 5 to 10 John his name appears as one of the justi ciers before whom fines were acknowledged, (Hunter's Preface.) During the remainder of that reign he was in frequent personal attendance on his sovereign, accompanying him to Ireland, and firmly supporting him both under the interdict and in his wars -with the barons. It would be endless to recite the grante which were made to him by King John, even up to the last month of his reign (Rot. Claus. i. 290) ; and on the accession of Henry III, his loyalty was still conspicuous, both he and his son assisting in the siege of Monteorel in Leicestershire,' and in raising that of Lincoln, In 2 Henry III. he was again made sheriff of Warwickshire and Leicestershire, with the custody of the castle of Kenilworth, where he fixed his chief residence ; and in the next year he was appointed one of the jus tices itinerant into Bedfordshire and the neighbouring counties. He stUl enjoyed the office of seneschal, which his son also held after his death ; and during the remainder CANTILUPE 155 of his life received repeated marks of the royal favour, the only interruption to which arose from his joining the barons who were dissatisfied with the ministry of Hubert de Burgh. He built a hospital at Studley, at the gates of a priory there, the advowson of which belonged to him. His death occurred in April 1238, leaving four sons — William, the next-mentioned Walter, John, and Nicholas. CANTILUPE, Walter de (Bishop op Woroestee), the second son of the above William de Cantilupe, was educated for the Church, and in 10 John was presented to the living of Eyton. This was followed in the course of the next eight years by no less than seven benefices, besides a prebend in the chm-ch of Lichfield, — Wurefield, Burton, Long Huchendon, Rammcham, Preston, Herdewic, and half of Stokes. (Rot, Pat. 87, 106, &c, ; Rot, ChaH. 192,) In 16 Henry IIL, 1231, he was one of the sevenjustices itinerant namedfor several counties, being the only occasion on which he appears to have acted in that capacitj'. In August 1236 he was elected to the bi shopric of Worcester, and in his episcopal character he boldly resisted the papal ex actions, influenced probably by the remem brance of his o-wn pluralities ; at the same time, however, exhibiting so much zeal ' that, to advance the heroic designs of Christian princes in the Holy Land, he went himself thither, accompanied by William Longspee, Earl of Salisbury,' Towards the close of his life he sided with Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester, for which he was excommunicated by the pope's legate ; but he lived long enough to repent of his disloyalty, and to obtain abso lution. He died at his manor of Blockley ou February 12, 1265. His character, ac cording to the historian of his nephew, St. Thomas de Cantilupe, was that of ' a person of mind and courage equal to his birth,' He founded the nunnery of White Ladies, and was otherwise munificent to his see, (Life and Gests of S. Thomas de Cantilupe, by R. S. S. I. Gant, 1674,) CANTILUPE, Thomas de (Bishop op Heeepoed), was the grandson of the above WilUam de Cantilupe, whose heir of the same name was his father ; his mother being Milicent, the daughter of Hugh de Gournay, and the widow of Almeric, Earl of Evreux in Normandy, .md of Gloucester in England, He was born about the begin ning of the reign of King Henry III,, at his father's manor of Hameldone in Lincoln shire, Under the advice of his uncle, Walter, Bishop of Worcester, he was brought up ¦with a view to the clerical pro fession, and studied at Oxford under Robert Kilwarby, who became Archbishop of Can terbury and a cardinal. He afterwards re moved to Paris, and applied himself to the 156 CANTILUPE study of philosophy, in the College of Sor- bonne, whence he proceeded to Orleans to read the civil law with an eminent pro fessor there. Returning to Oxford, he ap plied himself to the canon law, and proceeded doctor. The nobility of his blood, as well as the eminence of his learning, pointed him out, in 1262, as worthy to fill the office of chancellor of the university, in performing the duties of which in the suppression of a riot between the southern and northem scholars, he is said to have greatly exerted himself, to the injury both of his person and habiliments. The barons having assumed the ascen dency, and the king being completely under their dictation, he was selected by them to fill the office of chancellor on February 21, 1265. Then- power, however, being termi nated by the battle of Evesham, and the death of De Montfort in the following August, his removal was the natural con sequence. Having retired to Oxford, he completed a course of divinity by taking the degree of doctor, his ancient friend and master, Robert Kilwarby, then Archbishop of Canterbury, honouring his act with his presence. His connection with the insurgent barons did not blind King Henry to his merits, and accordingly, in 1266, he was appointed arch deacon of Stafford, to which were added ' many and fatt benefices,' as he held at the same time canonries in York, Lichfield, London, and Hereford, Neither was he in less favour with Edward I., being elected Bishop of Hereford on June 20, 1275, The remainder of his life was devoted to the sacred duties of his office, on the per formance of which his biographer is very eloquent, not forgetting ' his com-age in defence of ecclesiasticall libertyes,' which engaged him in many controversies, and eventually led to his death. Archbishop Peckham having laid some injunctions on the sees within his jurisdiction which were prejudicial to their liberties, and considered to be beyond the verge of his power, our bishop volunteered a journey to Rome to obtain redress. There he was received -with great distinction, and having prosecuted his suit to a successful issue, he commenced his journey homeward ; but being seized ¦with sickness, he could not proceed further than Monte Fiascone, where he died on August 26, 1282, in the sixty-third year of his age. His flesh was buried at the place of his death, and his bones were removed to Eng land and interred in his cathedral. The miracles which were performed on both these events, and on other occasions during his life, and at his shrine, are stated to ex tend to the number of 425. The fame of them was so great that he was canonised about thirty-two years afterwards by Pope CAELETON John XXII., on April 17, 1320, being the last Englishman so honoured. The Bishops of Hereford in his honour assumed his family coat as the arms of their see — viz.. Gules, three leopards' heads in verted, each with a flower de luce in his mouth. Or. (Life and Gests of S. Thomas Cantilupe.) CARILEEO, William de (Bishop op Durham), a native of Bayeux, was so named from having been a monk of St, Carilefo, from which he was advanced to be abbot of St, Vincentius ; both being monasteries in the province of Maine ; the former being a cell at Covenham in Lincoln shire, and the latter one at Abergavenny in Montgomeryshire. He was elected Bishop of Durham on No vember 10, 1080, in the place of Walcherus, who was slain about six months before. The church of Durham having been greatly neglected, the present ediflce was com menced by him, and affords sufficient proof of the muniflcent expenditure, not oifly of this bishop, but of his successor, Ranulph Flambard, iu its structure. WiUiam of Malmesbury (Gesta Regwm, 486, &c.), who describes him as a man of a ready tongue, and very powerful in his time, says that he was appointed by WUUam Rufus to administer the pubUc affairs in 1088, and Roger de Wendover (u. 32,34) distinctly mentions that he was made 'jus ticiarius.' His tenure of that office, how ever, must have been very short, for Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, is described as holding it at the previous Christmas, and Carilefo in the spring had joined that prelate in the confederacy to depose King William, and raise his brother Robert to the throne. The insurrection being queUed by the defeat of Odo, the king proceeded to Durham to chastise the bishop, whom he obUged to smTender and to quit the king dom. After a banishment of two or three years he was permitted to return, when he endeavom-ed to ingratiate himself with the king by taking 'part against Archbishop Anselm, He was, however, soon after summoned to the court to meet certain charges made against himself CompeUed to obey, he reached the comt of Wmdsor ¦with difficulty, and, survi^ving only a fe^w days, died there on January 2, 1095. His remains were removed to Durham, where they were deposited in his cathedral. He is described as endowed -with the highest mental gifts, with wit, erudition, eloquence, and subtlety, and as second to none in the conduct of business ; but with unbridled ambition, and wanting faith and integiity. (Dugdale's Monast. i. 224, &c, ; Godroin, 731 ; AngL Sac. i. 704.) CARLETON, William de, associated in 14 Edward I, with Henry de Bray in the custody of the vacant abbey of Ramsay, is CAEE inserted by Dugdale in his list of barons of the Exchequer in the same year, but he was only at that time one of the justices of the Jews. He is introduced in that cha- Tacter by Madox (i. 236) in the next and three foUowing years, till which time the Jews were in the kingdom. The justices of the Jews seem always to have sat with the barons of the Exchequer ; but their duties of course terminated after the expul sion of that people, William de Carleton ¦and Peter de Leicester, who then held the office, were thereupon appointed regular liarons, and the former continued to act from that time till the end of the reign. In 25 Edward I. he was employed by the king with two others to collect a sum of ten thousand pounds from the merchante at Antwerp, (Rot. ParL i. 169, 194.) Dugdale says that he was constituted chief baron on July 26, 1308, 31 Edward L ; but the liberate, on the authority of which this statement is made, contains no such -designation. (Madox, ii. 62,) The title of chief baron indeed was not adopted till some years afterwards ; but William de Carleton was at that time the senior baron, and was at the head of those reappointed on the accession of Edward IL, 1807. On October 24, 1308, he had special licence from the king, on account of his long ser vice, to retire to his o-wn house as often and as long as his health or private affairs should require, and to attend at the Exche quer in his place when he should think flt (Ibid. ii. 67), and he does not appear among the justices who were summoned to parUa ment beyond the foUowing March. CARR, William, in his admission to Gray's Inn in December 1656, is described •of Ne-wington, Middlesex. He was called to the bar in May 1668, and succeeded Sir Richard May as cursitor baron between 1685 and 1688, retaining his office at the Revolution, He died in 1689, (Luttrell, i, 657.) CARTER, Lawrence, was bom at Lei cester about 1672, of a family which origi naUy came from Hitchin in Hertfordshire. His father, who bore the same names, having projected the scheme of supplying Leicester -with water, was chosen the repre sentative of the borough in several parlia ments of WilUam IIL, of whom he was a firm supporter. His mother was Mary, the daughter of Thomas Wadland, Esq., of the Neworke at Leicester, an eminent solicitor, in whose office her husband had been articled. Their son, after being called to the bar by Lincoln's Inn, was elected recorder of his native town on September I, 1697, and entering the House of Commons as ite representative in the next year, sat there tiU the death of WiUiam III. In 1710, and in the two following paxUaments •of 1714 and I7I5, he was retiu-ned for GARY 157 Beeralston, and at the dissolution of the latter in 1722 he was again elected for Leicester; but history has preserved no record of his senatorial eloquence. His professional career was distinguished by his being appointed in 1717 solicitor-general to the Prmee of Wales, afterwards George II., by receiving in 1724 the degree of the coif and by being made soon after one of the king's Serjeants, when he was knighted. On September 7, 1726, he succeeded Mr. Baron Price as a baron of the Exchequer, retaining his recordership for the next three years. He continued on the bench till his death on March 14, 1745, with the reputa tion of an upright judge. He was buried in the church of St Mary de Castro, Leicester, where his monument is still to be seen. (Nichol's Leicester, i, 318.) CARUS, Thomas, was of a Lancashire famUy, and his descendante in 1684 were seated at Horton in that county. His legal school was the Middle Temple, where he became reader in Lent 1566. At the end of Mary's reign he was summoned to take the coif, v/hich he received soon after the accession of Elizabeth, on April 19, 1569. From that time till Trinity 1665 his name occurs in Dyer's and Plowden's Reports. The date of his elevation as a judge of the Queen's Bench is not given, but fi-om the latter author (Plowden, 376) it may be coUected that he succeeded Mr. Justice Corbet, who sat in the court as late as Trinity Term 1566. Cams remained there tUl his death, the date of which has not been discovered ; but no successor seems to have been appointed for him till May, 14 Elizabeth, 1572, although his name does not appear in the Reports after Easter in the twelfth year. He married Catherine, daughter of Sir Thomas Preston of Furness Abbey, a lineal descendant of .lohn de Preston, a judo;e of the Common Pleas in the reigns of Henry V. and VL CAEY, John, of an ancient and opulent family, seated in Devonshire, was the son of Sir John Cary, knight, bailiff of the forest of Selwood, and Jane, daughter of Sir Guy de Brien. He was appointed a captain of the Devonshire coast, and a com missioner of array in the same county, soon after his father's death in 1371. (Neio Foe dera, Ui. 976, 1046.) His name does not occur in the Year Books, and there is no proof of his ever having acted as an advocate. According to the practice of that period, neither the chief nor the puisne barons of the Exchequer were necessarily selected from the Serjeants or pleaders, nor indeed otherwise connected with the law than as officers of that par ticular department. It is true that he was called by the king's writ to take upon him self the degree of a serjeant-at-law in 6 158 GASSY Richard H. ; but it is equally true that he disobeyed the summons (Manning, 201), and it may not be unreasonably supposed that he refused the honour because he was not a regular pleader in the courte. Whatever was his previous position, he was raised to the office of chief baron of the Exchequer on November 6, 1886, 10 Richard II. ; but it turned out an unfortu nate advancement for him. Within a fort night after his appointment the parliament passed an ordinance placing the government of the kingdom under eleven commissioners, and in effect depriving, not only the king's favourites, but the king himself, of all power in the state. In the efforts made to regain the ascendency, the plan of ob taining the declaration of the judges that the ordinance was illegal was adopted. The chief baron was one of those who concurred in that declaration, being pre sent -with the others on the discussion at Shrewsbury. He, therefore, was included in the impeachment, and was condemned to death -with his colleagues, but, like them, had his sentence commuted to banishment. The place of his exile was the city of Waterford and a circle of two miles round it; and for his support he had an allow ance of 20/. per annum. As his name was not among those of his banished brethren who received permission to return to Eng land in 20 Richard IL, he probably died in Ireland, apparently in the previous year (Cal. Inquis. p, m, iii. 196) ; but his pro perty, including Torrington and Cockington in Devonshire, was restored in 3 Henry IV,, 1402, (Rot. ParL Ui, 484.) He married Margaret, daughter and heir of Robert HoUoway, by whom he had two sons, Robert and John. The latter was Bishop of Exeter for a short space, and died in 1419. The former was a renowned knight, many of whose descendants were honoured with various titles in the peerage, all of which have become extinct, except that of Viscount Falkland and Baron Hunsdon, CASSY, John, was probably born at the manor of Wightfield, in the parish of Deer- hurst in Gloucestershire, which had been held by the family from the time of Edward IIL, and continued in their pos session certainly till the end of Elizabeth's reign. His name occurs among the counsel in Richard Bellewe's Reports of the time of Richard II, ; and he was raised to the office of chief baron of the Exchequer on May 12, 1889, in the twelfth year of that reign. He received a new patent on the acces sion of Henry IV., but 'died very shortly . afterwards. His tomb affords an example of the practice of placing the royal arms on the monuments of persons holding office under the crown, the three lions of Eng land occurring on the brass over his re- CATLIN mains. (Atkyns's Gloucestersh. 202; Gent^ Mag. Feb, 1840, p, 141.) CATESBY, John, of a famUy settled in Northamptonshire, was apparently the uncle of WiUiam Catesby, esquire of the- household of Edward IV. and Richard IIL, who was attainted for his adherence to the- latter in the field of Bosworth, (Rot. ParL vi. 276, 278.) He was a member of the Inner Temple,. or the ' Inner Inne,' as it was then called, and first appears among the advocates in the Year Books in Michaelmas 1468. He was honoured with the coif in 1463, and made king's serjeant on AprU 18, i469> He was promoted to the bench of the Common Pleas on November 20, 1481, 21 Edward IV., and was knighted in the fol lowing year. The three subsequent changes in the sovereignty of the kingdom made no- alteration in his judicial position, though Henry VII. delayed his reappointment for nearly a month after his brethren, probably on account of doubts arising from his rela-^ tionship to William Catesby, so closely connected with the late king. The exceUence of his character may be- inferred from his being the first-named executor in the -wiU of Bishop Waynflete (Chandler, 382), whom he survived but a short time, dying in 1486. He married EUzabeth, the daughter of WiUiam Green, of Heese in Middlesex, Esq., and had by her seven sons and two- daughters. He was buried in the abbey of St. James, in Northampton, and apparently was seated at his manor of Whiston in that county. (Test. Vetust. 277, 389.) The conspirator in the gunpowder plot was one of his descendante. CATLIN, Robert. There were two con temporary la-wyers of the name of Catlin, Richard and Robert, of different branches of the same family. (Fuller, i. 568 ; Blome field's Norfolk, i. 682.) Richard Catlm, of Lincoln's Inn, was made a serjeant in 1552, and queen's serieant in 1656, He was connected -with the county of Norfolk, and was steward of Norwich, which he also- represented in parUament, The branch fi-om which Robert Catlin was descended was anciently seated at Raunds in Northamptonshire. He was- born at Thrapstone in that county (Plow den, 342), and was elected reader of the Middle Temple in 1547. In 1566 he was admitted to the degree of the coif; and on November 4, in the following year, Phifip and Mary appointed him one of their Ser jeants. He was raised to the bench as a judge of the Common Pleas on October 10, 1658, five weeks before the death of Queen, Mary, and received a new patent the day after the accession of Queen EUzabeth. Previous to the following term, on the re moval of the two Catholic chief justices, he CAUX was on January 22 promoted to the head of the Court of Queens Bench, and knighted. He continued to preside as chief justice for the next sixteen years, with a high reputa tion for wisdom and gravity. That he was bold and independent also is apparent from a letter to Lord Burleigh, who had con veyed a message from the queen, complain ing of his judgment in a suit in which the Earl of Leicester was a party, wherein he says he ' dares not alter the ancient forms of court.' (CaL State Papers [I47I], 416,) However high the character of a judge may be, it is not to be expected that those against whom he decides will always join in his praises. In 1666 one Thomas Welsh of London was indicted in the Queen's Bench for saying, ' My Lord Chief Justice Catlin is incensed against me ; I cannot have justice, nor can be heard; for that court now is made a court of conscience,' and was flned accordingly. The chief justice died at his seat at New- enham in Bedfordshire in 1574. He married Ann, the daughter of John Boles, of Wal- lington in Hertfordshire, and relict of John Burgoyne, (Chauncy, 48,) By her he left an only daughter, Mary, who married first Sir John Spencer, and their son Robert was created Baron Spencer of Wormleighton in 160.3, whose grandson was advanced to the earldom of Sunderland in 1648. The fifth earl succeeded under the act of parliament as Duke of Marlborough, his mother being second daughter of the great duke. The earldom of Spencer of Althorp is derived from the same stock, the first earl having been a younger son of the third Earl of Sunderland, The barony of Churchill of Whichcote also was granted iu I8I6 to a younger son of the third Duke of Marl borough, and all these titles still grace the English peerage. CAUX, See J. DE Caleto. CA'VE, John de, acted as a justicier from 1264 to 1261, 45 Henry III. (Dugdale's Orig. 48 ; Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. u. 331-336.) If H, Phillipps (Grandeur of the Law [1684], 53) is right in stating that the baro nets of that name of Stanford in Northamp tonshire, a title still existing, are descended from him, his ancestor was Jordan de Cave, the brother of Wyamarus de Cave, who re ceived lands in North and South Cave, in Yorkshire, from William the Conqueror, and transferred them to Jordan. CAVE, Hugh db, in 6 Edward I, was clerk to Ralph de Hengham, chief justice of the King's Bench, (Dugdale's Orig. 94.) In 21 Edward I., 1293, he was the last named of four justices itinerant assigned for the county of Surrey; and he was among the justices summoned to the parliament of August, 23 Edward I. (ParL Writs, i. 29.) He and his brother, probably the imder named John, in 15 Edward I., had a grant CAVENDISH 159 of land at Cokefrueddinge in Staffordshire from Alwyn de Norton and his wife. (Abb Placit. 213.) CA'VE, John de, is inserted by Dugdale as haying been appointed a justice of the King's Bench in 1283, II Edward L Al though there is no absolute impossibility that he may have been the same person as the above John de Cave, the lapse of time from 1261 to 1288 renders it very impro bable. There is, however, no subsequent record of his name in connection with the courte. He appears to have been the brother of the last-mentioned Hugh de Cave, and to have had grants of land made to him till 2 Edward H. (Ahh. Placit. 213, 216, 276, 306.) CAVENDISH, John de. Notwith-stand- ing the high legal rank which John de Cavendish attained, and the tragical tei-mi- nation of his life, and although his family was afterwards illustrated by two duke doms, no account remains of his early career except that which may be collected from the 'Year Books. Nor can the want of any other memorials of him be wondered at, when we advert to the fact that nearly 250 years elapsed after the death of the chief justice before the family was ennobled. John de Cavendish was the son of Roger de Gemum, the grandson of Ralph de Gemum, an after-mentioned justice itine rant in the reign of Henry III. 'The name of Cavendish was first assumed by either his father or himself, each being said to have acquired it by marriage with the heiress of the lord of the manor so called in the county of Suffolk, John de Caven dish appears in the Year Books as an advo cate as early as 21 Edward III,, and as late as 45 Edward HI., and was made a serjeant in 40 Edward III, Yet Dugdale intro duces him iu his ' Chronica Series ' as chief justice of the King's Bench in 39 Edward III,, 1365. This is evidently founded on mis'take, for Dugdale, six years afterwards, gives a patent appointing him a puisne judge of the Common Pleas on November 27, 1371, besides shovring that Sir Henry Green was chief justice till October 29, 1865, on which day he was succeeded by Sir John Knyvet, who kept the place till he was made chanceUor, when Cavendish is again inserted in the list as raised to the chief justiceship of the King's Bench on .Tilly 15,_ 1372, _ From 40 to 44 Edward IIL he was joined in the commissions as a judge of assize, his salary for which was 20/. a year (Devon's Issue Roll, 360) ; and fines were levied before him as a judge of the Common Pleas at the commencement of 46 Edward IIL, in the term next after his appointment to that court. (Dugdale's Orig. 45.) He was a trier of petitions in every parliament from 1872, and not before, which he undoubtedly 160 CAVENDISH would have been had he been then chief justice. He continued to fulfil his high duties with great credit till the end of the reig-n, when he was immediately reappointed, -with the grant of 100 marks per annum, which had been for some years made to his predecessors. He seems to haye been a bit of a humourist. A case being heard before him in which a question arose upon a lady's age, her counsel pressed the court to have her before them, and judge by in spection whether she was within age or not. But 'Candish, Justice,' sho-wing great knowledge of female character, says, ' U n' ad mil home en Engleterre que puy adjudge a droit deins age ou de plein age ; car ascun femes que sont de age de xxx ans voilent apperer d'age de xvm ans.' (Year Book, 50 Edw, IIL fo. 6, pi, 12.) The chief justice met with an untimely end. The insurrection of Wat Tyler in 1381 extended itself from Kent over va rious parts of England. In the county of Suffolk the rebels assembled to the number of 50,000, destioying the property and ill- treating the persons of all who would not join them. The principal objects of their vengeance seemed to be all those who had any sort of learning. They attacked Sir John Cavendish's house, and plundered and burned it; and having unfortunately got hold of the venerable man, they dragged him into the market-place of Bury St. Ed munds, and there, after a mock trial, ruth lessly beheaded him and insulted his remains. Thus perished this amiable judge, after gracing the judicial bench for ten years, without an imputation of having perverted the course of justice, or of deviating from the path of rectitude and integrity, to justify or to palliate the brutal fate which overtook him. Shortly before his murder he was honoured by being elected chan cellor of the University of Cambridge. By his wife Alice, who died before him, he left two sons, the descendant of one of whom, William, became the biographer of Cardinal Wolsey, to whom he was gentle man usher. He was afterwards admitted into the service of the king, by whom his fortunes were greatly enriched by various profitable offices and valuable grants of lands belonging to the dissolved abbeys and priories. One of his sons, William, was ennobled by James I. with the title of Baron Cavendish of Hardwicke in 1604, to which that of Earl of Devonshire was ¦added in 1618. The fourth earl was created Duke of Devonshire in 1694. A younger son of the fourth duke was created Earl of Burlington in 1831, a title which is now held by his grandson, the present Duke of Devonshire. Another son of Wolsey 's biographer. CECIL named Charles, was father of Sir WiUiam Cavendish, who was raised to the peerage by being created Viscount Mansfield in 1620, to which were successively added the earldom, marquisate, and dukedom of New castle, all of which titles became extinct in 1691. CAXTON, Jeremiah de, although omit ted in Dugdale's list, was undoubtedly a justicier, being expressly called so in 30 Henry IH., as being present at the execu tion of a final concord 'before the king himself ' at Westminster (Harleian MSS. 371, fo. 71Ia), and also payments being made for assizes to be taken before him in 28 and 31 Henry IH. (Excerpt e Rot. Fin. i. 424, ii. 9.) In the foUo-wing year he is mentioned as one of the custodes of the archbishopric of Canterbury during its vacancy (Madox, i. 595), after which his name occurs in 37 Henry HI., 1253, as holding pleas before the king -with Henry de Bretton. CECIL, William (Earl op Saxisbuey), was one of the parUamentery commissioners of the Great Seal for less than four months. His grandfather was the renowned Lord Burleigh, and his father was Robert CecU, the wi.se minister of Queen EUzabeth and James I., who, after serving both sove reigns, and after passing through the two lower gTades of the peerage, was created Earl of Salisbury in 1605. On his death, in 1612, this WiUiam succeeded, but did not do much credit to his Uneage. At first the obsequious servant of his sovereign, he con curred in every act proposed by the court, and attended King Charles when he re tired in his troubles to York, joining the peers in signing the declaration that the king had no intention to teke warlike measures. Soon after, without any appa rent reason, he fled from court, deserting the king's party for that of the parUament, and forming one of the small knot of lords who legislated at Westminster. He had the efirontery to appear before the king at Oxford as a commissioner to ti'eat for peace, and was named in the same capacity in the proposed treaty at Uxbridge. Though totally -without credit -with either party, he was appointed a commissioner of the Great Seal on July 3, 1646. The parliament, however, withdrew theU confidence from him and the other commissioners on Oc tober 30, and placed the Seal in the custody of the speakers of the two houses. On the decapitation of the king he al lowed himself to be nominated one of the Council of State, and, as if this was not a sufficient degradation, he got himself, on the abolition of the House of Lords, returned as a member of the House of Commons for Lynn in Norfolk, in September 1649, After beiug expelled with the rest by Cromwell in 1653, he joined the Rump at its meeting. CESTEETON in 1659, to be again expelled, and again re stored. His insignificance probably saved him on the restoration of Charles IL, who no doubt thought that the contempt which all men felt for the degraded earl was a sufficient punishment. He died on December 3, 1668. His de scendante have wiped out his disgrace, and, at the end of two centuries, flourish with the additional title of marquis, granted in 1789. (Clarendon: Whiteloeke; ParL Hist.) CESTEETON, Adam de. King Henry IH. before the seventeenth year of his reign founded a house for the maintenance of converted Jews, in the street then called ' New Street,' but now known as Chancery Lane, endowing it with many houses and lands, and bestowing on it the church of St, Dunstan, in Fleet Street. Over this ' Domus Conversorum' a custos was appointed, some times during the king's pleasure and some times for life, who was generally an eccle siastic, and connected with the legal pro fession. In the reign of Edward I. this office was first united with that of master of the Rolls ; and when, by the banishment of the .Tews from England, the object of its foundation gradually ceased, the house was eventually annexed to the office of master of the Rolls, and thenceforward received the name by which it is now distinguished. Adam de Cestreton, both an ecclesiastic and an officer of the court, received in 50 Hemy IH., 1266, a grant of the custody of this house for his life ; and during the whole of 62 Henry III. he was performing the functions of a justicier, (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. ii. 466-478.) The short time that he remained on the bench may account for his non-appearance in Dugdale's ' Chronica Se ries,' inasmuch as his death occurred at the beginning of the foUowing year. CHACEPORC, Peter. A grant of 30 marks per annum was made in 81 Henry HI, to Hugh de Chaceporc and his wife Guidonea, who in the patent is called 'cognates regis,' (CaL Rot Pat 22.) Whatever was their relationship to Peter Chaceporc, it wiU account for his being constituted king's treasurer in 26 Henry IIL, and for his being keeper of the king's ward robe from 29 to 37 Henry III, (Ibid. 19 ; Mado.v, i. 609, &c.) The wardrobe appears to have been used as one of the royal trea suries, and a certain class of fines was commonly paid into it. On May 16, 1253, WiUiam de KiUcenny being iU, the Great Seal was delivered to Peter Chaceporc and John de Lexinton, and there is little doubt that the former merely received it in one or other of the above characters, probably in the former, to be deposited in the wardrobe for safe custody. In that sameyear Peter Chace porc received the archdeaconry of WeUs, and in the foUowing the treasurership of Lincoln (Le Neve, 43, 151), after which no CHAMBEELAYNE 161 mention is made of his name, except that he is one of the executors named in King Henry's will. (Rymer, 496.) He is some times called Chaceport. CHAMBEELAYNE, Thomas, claims a de scent from WiUiam, Count Tankerville, who was one of the Norman followers of Wil liam the Conqueror, and whose son John became lord chamberlain to Henry I. ; the same office being held by several of his de scendante, ite name thus became attached to them. One of the branches of the fa mily, WilUam Chamberlayne, brother of Sir Thomas Chamberlayne, who was em ployed in diplomacy by Henry VIII. and his three successors, settled in Ireland, and was the father of the subject of the present article. Thomas Chamberlayne was called to the bar by Gray's Inn in 1585, and became reader in 1607. He was raised to the degree of the coif in 1614, was made a Welsh judge in 1615, and in I6I6 was advanced to the office of chief justice of Chester, and knighted, (Cal State Papers [16II],289,363,) From this position he was selected to be one of the judges of the King's Bench on October 8, 1620. In that court he remained only four years ; for, whether from feeUng the duties too onerous, or from some other cause, he retired from it on October 18, 1624, and resumed his judicial seat at Chester, with a grant of the same precedency hi the Court of Common Pleas, to be held without fee or charge, which was made to him within a week Mter the accession of Charles I. (Croke, Jac. 690; CaL State Papers [1625-6], 5.) In a com mission dated May 12, 1625, he is described not only as chief justice of Chester, but also as a judge of the Common Pleas, (Rymer, xviii, 673.) He is like-wise mentioned by Sir William Jones (Reports, 70), under Easter Term, I Car., as one of the judges before whom the case of Lord Sheffield v. RatcUffe was argued in the Exchequer Chamber, in which it appears that after various hearings, extending over two years, the judges were equaUy divided. Lord Bacon, in his address to Sir James Whitelock on succeeding to the chief jus ticeship of Chester, recommends him to follow the example of his predecessor Chamberlayne, who, he says, ' for reUgion, for lerning, for stoutnesse in course of justice, for watchfulnesse over the peace of the people, and for relation of matters of state to the counsell heer, I have not knowen (no disprayse to any) a better servant to the kmg in his place.' (Liher Famelicus, 80.) He died on September 17 or 27, 1625, having married, first, Elizabeth, daughter of Sir George Termor, knight, of Easton Nestor in Northamptonshire, and wido-sv of Sir WilUam Stafford, knight, of Blather- 162 CHAMBRB •wick in the same county; and, secondly. Lady EUzabeth Berkeley, only daughter of Lord Chamberlain Hunsdon, and widow of Sir Thomas Berkeley. (Cal. St. Papers [1619], 346,) His eldest son, Thomas, of Wickham in Oxfordshire, was a loyal ad herent to King Charles in his misfortunes, and was by him created a baronet in 1642, a title which lasted 134 years, and expired in 1776, ( Wotton, U, 374,) CHAMBRi!, Alan. The family of De la Chambre, De Camera, or Chaumberay was of Norman origin, and the name of one of its members occurs on the RoU of Battle Abbey. They settled in Westmoreland, where their descendants have fiourished in au uninterrupted lineal succession till the present time. Alan Chambre was the son of Walter Chambre, of Halhead Hall in the parish of Kendal, and recorder of Kendal, by his marriage -with Mary, daughter of Jacob Morland, of Capplethwaite Hall in the same county. He was bom in 1739, and, being des tined to the law, he, reviving an ancient custom which had been long discontinued, first resorted to an inn of Chancery, and paid the customary dozen of claret on ad mission into the society of Staple Inn, and his arms are emblazoned on a window in the hall. From this inn he removed to the Middle Temple in February 1758, but transferred himself to Gray's Inn in No vember 1764, and was called to the bar in May 1767. The diligence -with which he had devoted himself to his studies was proved by the success which he achieved, and his independent and upright conduct and amiable disposition may be estimated by his popularity among his colleagues. He selected the Northem Circuit, and soon became one of its leaders. In 1783 he was chosen treasurer of his inn, and in 1796 he was elected recorder of Lan caster. On the resignation of Mr. Baron Perryn in 1799 he was named as his suc cessor, the announcement of which was received by the circuit bar -vrith ' acclama tions quite unprecedented.' A short act of parliament was passed on July 1, 1799, authorising, for the first time, a serjeant to receive his degree in the vacation, so that the vacant office might be immediatelj' granted to him. In June of the folio-wing year he was removed from the Court of Exchequer to the Common Pleas, in which ie remained till his resignation in Mi chaelmas vacation 1815, In the exercise of his functions he merited ,and received universal praise both for his learning and urbanity. So extremely care ful wag he of doing anything that could by ¦possibility be misinterpreted that on one •occasion he declined the invitation to a house, at which the judges had been accus tomed to be entertained during the circuit. CHAELETON because the proprietor was defendant in a cause at that assize. Sir Alan Uved seven years after his re tirement, and, dying at 'Harrogate on Sep tember 20, 1823, was buried in the family vault at Kendal. CHANNELL, William Frv, is one of the present barons of the Exchequer. He is the son of Pike Channell, Esq., of Peckham in Surrey. He was caUed to the bar by the Inner Temple in May 1827, and was one of the five gentlemen who, in 1840, on the warrant for opening the Court of Common Pleas to all barristers being de clared null and void, were the first who were called to the degree of seqeant-at- law ¦with all its former privileges. On Februaiy 12, 1857, he was appointed to his present office, and knighted. He married in 1884 a daughter of Richard Moseley, Esq., of Champion HiU, Camber- well. CHANVILL, William de (Archdeacon OP Richmond), was one of the justiciers at Westminster before whom fines were levied. (Hunter's Preface.) That dignity he had enjoyed since II89. He probably died in 1 196, as his successor was then appointed. (Le Neve, 323.) CHAPPLE, William, belonging to a Dorsetshire famUy, and residing at Waybay House in the parish of Upway, was born in 1677. In 1722 he entered parUament as member for Dorchester, which he continued to represent till he was raised to the bench. History is silent as to his talents as a senator, but as a lawyer his reputation was high. CaUed serjeant in 1724, he was made a judge on the North Wales Circuit in 1728, and on his appointment as king's Serjeant in 1729 he was knighted. On June 16, 1737, he was constituted ajudge of the King's Bench, and occupied the seat for nearly eight years -with credit and distinction, fie died on March 15, 1745, leaving, by his ¦wife Trehane Clifton, of Green Place, Wonersh, Surrey, four sons and two daughters, one of whom married Sir Fletcher Norton, afterwards Lord Grantley. (Hutchins' s Dorset, i. 373, 596; Strange, 1075,) CHAELETON, Robeet de (to which branch of the family of Charleton of Shrop shire he belongs there is no account), was raised to the office of chief justice of the Court of Common Pleas on January 30, 1388, II Richard IL, and the fines levied before him extend to Midsummer 1894. As his attendance in parUament is not noticed at a later period, he probably died soon after that date. He received the order of knighthood as a banneret in 1888. (Dugdale's Orig. 46, 103.) Some of his de cisions are in Richard Bellewe's Reporte. CHAELETON, Job, descended from the ancient Shropshire family of Charleton, CHAELETON sand directly from Sir Alan Charleton, of .Appley Castle near Wellington, the brother •of^ John, the first Lord Powis. He was the •eldest son of Robert Charleton, of Whitton, by his first wife, Emma, daughter of Thomas .Harby, of Aditon, Northamptonshire ; from whose brother. Sir Job Harby (both emi- ,nent jewellers who had suffered much in ¦the royal cause), he received his baptismal .name. Bom in London in I6I4, and edu cated at Magdalen Hall, Oxford, he was -called to the bar by Lincoln's Inn, but does not appear to have practised in the courts during the interregnum, but was ¦elected to Protector Richard's only parlia- .nient in 1659, and also to the first two parUaments of Charies II. in 1660 and 1661, as member for Ludlow. His reputation for loyalty may be inferred -from his being included on the Restoration ' in the first bateh of new serjeante, and being ^nade one of his majesty's council at Ludlow for the Marches of Wales. In 1662 he ' While he held the sheriffalty he was ap pointed governor of Dover Castle and warden of the Cinque Ports. (Baronage,. U. 65.') COBBEHAM, William de, the third. son of the above Henry de Cobbeham,, 172 COBBEHAM inherited the manor of East Shelve, or Shelve Cobham, in Lenham, in Kent. En trusted, as well as his two brothers, John and Reginald, with judicial duties, he was in three successive years, 39, 40, and 41 Henry IIL, 1255-7, employed as a justice itinerant into a variety of counties. Hasted ¦dates his death in 14 Edward IL, 1320; but it seems scarcely possible that this was the same person. (Hasted, iii. 407, V, 435, 526,) COBBEHAM, John de, the grandson of the above Henry de Cobbeham, and eldest .son of the above John de CobJoeham, was made constable of Rochester Castle so early in life that he was called the young ¦constable, and was entrusted with the sheriffalty of Kent for four years from 44 Henry III. His seat was at Monkton in the Isle of Thanet. In 52 Henry 111, 1268, he acted as a justice itinerant for Surrey and Kent, and was advanced to the bench at Westminster in February 1270, 54 Henry IIL, but in which court is un certain, as the mode of designating them was then scarcely fixed. In 4 Edward I, he was certainly constituted a baron of the Exchequer, the mandate for which is dated June 6, 1276, with a salary of forty marks per annum, and there are several records showing that he continued in that office during the remainder of his life. By an •entry in the Year Book of Hilary, 28 Ed ward I., 1300, it appears that he was autho rised to stay at home at his pleasure, and to come to the Exchequer and remain there when he would. This licence was no doubt granted to hiin in consequence of bodily infirmity, as he died in the same year, (Cal. Inquis. p. m. i. 156.) He was twice married. His first wife was Joane, daughter and heir of Sir Robert de Septvans, by whom he left two sons — ¦ Henry and Reginald. His second wife was named Methania. (Hasted, iii. 408.) COCKBTTEN, Alexandee Jambs Ed- jsiiTND, the present lord chief justice of the Court of Queen's Bench, is the son of Alex- .ander Cockburn, Esq., formerly envoy ex traordinary and minister plenipotentiary to Columbia, by the daughter of the Visoomte de Vignier of St. Domingo, and the grand son of Sir James Cockburn, the seventh baronet, of Nova Scotia, created in 1627 ; whose next brothers. Admiral Sir George, ¦and the Very Rev. Sir WUUam, dean of York, the eighth and ninth baronets, died -without male issue. He became a member of Trinity Hall, 'Cambridge, in 1822, and in his second year gained prizes for the best exercises in En- ¦g;li8h and Latin, and afterwards for the English essay. He graduated as B.C.L. in 1829, and was elected fellow of his college. He was called to the bar by the Middle Temple on February 6, 1829. Joining the COCKBUEN Western Circuit, and attending the Devon shire sessions, he quickly established for himself a considerable business. Soon after the Reform Bill was passed, he and and Mr. Rowe commenced the publication of re ports of decisions which arose out of that measure, and the volume in which they were collected is of great and substantial merit. He was consequently engaged in several conteste before election committees, in which he showed so much ability that in 1884 he was placed on the Municipal Cor poration Commission. His parUamentary employmente and the more regular business of the courts became of such magnitude that he felt warranted in 1841 in obtaining the precedence of a silk gown. ' Of his powers of advocacy,' one of his most dis tinguished contemporaries and professional competitors says, ' it is impossible to speak too highly. He was not perhaps so weU fitted for the daily work of the profession, because he was always indisposed to bend his mind to it. But when any great occa sion called for extraordinary exertion, he excelled all the eloquent advocates who were amongst my contemporaries. Al though he soared to a high pitch, he never lost himself in the clouds, and he dealt with the facts of the case in a practical and at the same time in a masterly manner.' The same discriminating critic used to say to him in allu.sion to his powers, ' You fly better than you walk,' In the year of his obtaining rank he ably defended his uncle, and assisted in over turning the attempt to deprive him of the deanery of York, Among other cases in which he distinguished himself as a leader was his eloquent and impressive defence in 1843 of M'Naughten, who had shot Mr. Drummond, in which he satisfied the jmy that his client was not a responsible being. In the meantime he had been appointed recorder of Southampton, and in 1847 was elected member for that borough, which he continued to represent till he was elevated to the bench. His speeches m Parliament were less professional than those for which the members of the bar are generally noted, and he was of great assistance in supporting the liberal party, with whom he acted. In July 1850 he was made solicitor- general and knighted, and in the following March he became attorney-general. He held this office till November 1856, with the ex ception of ten months between February 27 and December 28, 1852, during which the Earl of Derby conducted the government. His next promotion was that of recorder of Bristol in 1854, and on November 21, 1856, he was constituted chief justice of the Common Pleas, He presided in that court for nearly three years, during which, his uncle the dean of York dying, he succeeded to the baronetcy in 1868. On the elevation ¦ COKAYNE of Ijord Campbell to the office of lord chancellor. Sir Alexander was raised to his present position of lord chief justice of the Queen's Bench on June 24, 1869. The restriction under which I placed myself of not giving an opinion of my own on the judicial merite of the existing mem bers of the bench ought not to prevent me from recording the estimation in which they are regarded by their eminent contempo raries. It is but justice therefore to quote a portion of the eloquent eulogy of Mr. Serjeant (afterwards Sir, Justice) Shee, in proposing the health of the chief justice, w^hen presiding as chairman of the anniver sary festival of the United Law Clerks' Society in 1863, After a few words intro ducing his name, he proceeded thus : ' He is the successor in, if not the highest, the second post in the law of England — of men than whom, as great magistrates, in no country of the world -will men be found their equals, or at least their superiors To say of him that he surpasses in the great and highest quality of a chief justice — the high legal attainmente of some of his pre decessors — would be flattery, of which I will not be guilty ; but this I will venture to say, that he possesses qualities which have endeared him to us all, in which none of them have suipassed him, , . , We Uke him because we know that his distinction was achieved by no back-stairs influence, by no political intrigue, by no political sub servience. We like him because we know that he did not arrive at the high position which he now occupies without having first obteined, solely by his own endowmente and superior talents, the highest position at the bar We like him because we know that not merely the honour of the profession, but the honour and character of every man who comes before him, are safe in his hands. We Uke and admire him be cause we observe every day that the com mand which he possesses of all the treasures and all the beauties of our noble language enables him, whenever there is occasion for it, to refute whatever faUacies and sophis tries are put forward before him at the bar, and to vindicate at the close of every cause the innocence that belongs to those that are tried. But most of all we like him, we re spect him, we love him, for this, because, whenever he has occasion to reprove or to rebuke — and no man in his position can be without having some occasion to reprove and to rebuke — he takes care always to temper authority ¦with gentleness, and to lebuke without giving pain,' COKAYNE, John, was the second son of John Cokayne, of Ashboum in Derbyshire, M.P. for that county in several parliaments of Edward IIL, by his wife CeciUa Vernon. His name is men'tioned as an advocate in the Reports of the time of Richard IL, COKE 173 collected by Richard Bellewe; and from 18 to 22 Richard II. he was recorder of London. In addition to the office of chief baron of the Exchequer, to which he was raised on November 15, 1400, 2 Henry IV,, a puisne judgeship in the Common Pleas was granted to him on June 17, 1406, and he performed the duties of both offices during the remaining seven years of the reign. On the accession of Henry V. his two offices were again divided, and a new pa tent was gi-anted to him as a judge of the Common Pleas only. This was renewed by Henry VL, and he continued to per form his judicial fimctions during the first seven years of that reign. Having then sat on the bench nearly thirty year.s, he retired to private life, and died about nine years afterwards, in 1438. (Cal. Inquis. p. m. iv. 182.) He was buried in Ashboum Church. (Dugdale's Orig. 100.) By his -wife Edith, sister of Lord Grey de Ruthyn, he had four sons and two daughters. A descendant from his elder brother Edmund, in 1642, was created 'Vis count CuUen, a title which became extinct in 1810. (Lodge's Irish Peerage, iv. 323.) _« COKE, William, was bom at Chesterton in Cambridgeshire, and was educated at the university of Cambridge, From Barnard's Inn he removed to Gray's Inn in 1528, and was called to the bar in 1630, He became reader there in Lent 1644, and again in autumn 1546. On February 3, 1547, he was called serjeant, and was presented by Gray's Inn with eight pounds in gold on the occasion, nomine regardi. On Cctober 22, 1550, he was made one of the king's Serjeants, and on November 16, 1662, he was nominated a judge of the Common Pleas. He had previously been appointed steward of no less than four houses in his university, and in January 1546 had been elected recorder of Cambridge. (Cooper's Ath. Cantab, i. 114.) The story told by Machyn (Diary, 26, 38), that he was, on July 27, 1568, sent to the Tower for signing King Edward's ¦will settling the cro^wn on Lady Jane Grey, is evidently a mistake, as Coke's name does not appear among the signatures to that document; and as his death occurred on the 24th of the foUo^wing mouth, it is clear that Machyn mistook the name of (Sir Thomas) 'Wroth for Coke, On Coke's monumental brass at Milton both he and his -wife AUce, together -with two sons and three daughters, are repre sented — he in his judicial robes, and they in the costume of the period. Above his head is a label, the inscription on which — ' Plebs sine lege ruit ' — was the motto on the rings of the serjeante who were called in the same term in which he was raised to the bench, (Boutell, 45 ; Dyer, 71.) ¦a 74 COKE COKEj Edwaed, The ancestors of Sir Edward Coke are traced as far back as the "twelfth century, Henry Coke, of Dodding- ton in Norfolk, bearing arms and being mentioned in a deed dated 8 John. (Has hed, ii. 479.) In direct descent came Ro bert Coke, Sir Edward's father, of Mileham in the same county, who was a la-wyer and Q bencher of Lincoln's Inn. He married Winifred, daughter and coheiress of Wil Uam Knightley, of Morgrave Knightleyin Norfolk, and dying at his chambers in Lin- ¦coln's Inn on November 15, 1561, he was "buried in St. Andrew's Church, Holbom, There Sir Edward erected a monument to his memory, as he did also in the church of Tittleshall to that of his mother, who, after marrying Robert Bosanne and having by Jiim a son named John, died in January 1569, Edward Coke, who was the only son out of eight children, was born at Mileham on February I, 1551-2 ; so that he was ten years old when his father died, and near eighteen at the decease of his mother. He received the rudimente of his education at the grammar school at Norwich, and was thence removed in September 1567 to Tri- -nity College, Cambridge, where he remained three years and a half. On the 21st of Ja- ^luary 1571 he was admitted a student of Clifford's Inn, and was in the following year, on April 24, entered of the Inner Temple. On April 20, 1678, he was called to the bar ; and in the very next term he held his first brief in the Court of King's Bench, and was successful in defending Mr. Denny, a clergyman of his native county, in an action brought against him by Lord ¦CromweU for seandalum magnatum. (4 Re ports, 14.) His reputation for learning was already so great that within a year after his call the benchers of his house selected him as reader at Lyon's Inn — an honour usually -conferred on ,an older barrister — where his lectures fully conflrmed the character he had acquired. On August 1-8, 1582, he married his first wife,'Bridget, the daughter and heir of John Paston, Esq., deceased, of Huntingfield in Suffolk, a descendant of Judge Paston. At this time his name was pronoimced Cooke, iind is so spelled in the registry of his mar riage, as also in a special commission ten years later, when soUcitor-general. His acquisition of a fortune of .30,000/. with liis wife, in addition to his paternal inheri tance, did not diminish his industry; for from this date he seems to have been en gaged in almost every prominent case no ticed by the different reporters. About 1585 he was chosen recorder of Coventry ; in the next year the same office was given to him by the citi-zens of Norwich ; and in January 1591-2 the corporation of London -called him to the distinguished post of re- COKE corder of the metropolis. The latter office he retained for six months only, resigning it on being selected by Lord Burleigh as solicitor-general on June 16, 1592. On his being nominated autumn reader of the Inner Temple in 1592, he composed seven lectures on the Statute of Uses, five of which he delivered to 160 auditors in August, when, on the appearance of the plague, he was compelled to withdraw from London. In his progress to his seat at Huntingfield, he says that ' nine of the benchers, forty of the bar, and other fellows of the Inner Temple,' accompanied him as far as Romford. In 1596 he was elected treasurer of his inn. Hitherto he had confined himself to his legal avocations : he was now to enter on his political career. Before the parUament of 1593 was assembled, and even before Coke had been elected a member of it, the queen and council, on January 28, named him as the speaker. On the 6th of Fe bruary he was retumed as representetive of his native county, ' nuUo contradicente ; ' and he proudly adds that it was a fi-ee election, 'sine ambitu, seu aUqua requisi- tione, ex parte mea.' On the meeting of the house he was elected speaker, as had been previously arranged. The parUament lasted only seven weeks, and his speeches in it have the same ponderous verbosity for which they were ever remarkable, and too much of sycophantic subserviency, UI ac cording with the boldness of his later years. But he was then a seeker after advance ment, and he felt he had a mistress ¦with whose power no one dared to trifle. Ex actly one year after his speakership termi nated, on April 10, 1594, he became attor ney-general. Coke had lived happily -with his first ¦wife for sixteen years, when he lost her on June 27, 1598, Within five months after this event he entered into another matri monial speculation, which began inauspi- ciously, and was fatel to his future peace. His second wife was Elizabeth, relict of Sir William Hatton, and daughter of Thomas Cecil, who had just succeeded his father as Lord Burleigh, and the marriage took place at her house in Holbom on November 6, 1698, without either bans or Ucence, but is recorded iu the register of that paiish without remark. Even his friend Arch bishop Whitgift could not overlook this irregularity, and it was only by a humble submission, and the extraordinary plea of ignorance of the law, that Coke and all the parties concerned escaped excommunica tion. The powerful connections and the large fortune of the lady had also attracted Bacon, who had previously become a suitor for her hand, and the success of his great rival did not tend to diminish the hostile feelings between the parties. COKE Coke continued attorney-general during tte remainder of Elizabeth's reign, no va cancy having occurred in the chief seats of 'the common law courte during the nine vears that it lasted. The only important ¦ state trial which is reported in the interval was that of the Earls of Essex and South ampton in February 1601. Here he gave the first specimen of that objurgatory and ¦coarse style which makes his oratory so painfully remembered. He designates the prisoners as ' a Catiline, popish, dissolute, and desperate company ; ' he caUs the Earl of Essex 'treason-bird,' and uses these harsh and indecent expressions : — ' But now, in God's judgment, he of his earldom shall be Robert the last, that of the kingdom ¦thought to be Robert the first.' (Jardine's Crim. Trials, i. 318-329.) His airogance and iU-temper were displayed in 1601, ¦when Bacon, in the Court of Exchequer, made some motion which Coke thought trenched upon his duties. Bacon was not biickward in reply, and after many dis graceful words on both sides, the scene •ended'by Coke's threatening to ' clap a cap. utlegatum ' on his back. On the commencement of the new reign. Coke, who had cordially co-operated in the ¦arrangements for the peaceable accession of James, was not only confirmed in his office, but received the honour of knighthood. He soon had ample opportunity of exhi- l)iting his zeal in the prosecution of state -offenders. On Sir Walter Raleigh's trial his heartless and unmanly beha-yiour forms an appropriate introduction to the shameful mode in which the proceedings were con- •ducted, and the disgraceful verdict given by the jury ; and his fulsome adulation of the king's -wisdom and innocence has an -awkward illustration in the absurd farce which the monarch caused to be performed at the intended execution of the lords im plicated in the same treason, and in the cruel tragedy which, thirteen years after, he peipetrated in Raleigh's death on that condemnation. To Raleigh, a prisoner on trial for his life, he brutaUy says, 'Thou art a monster ; thou hast an English face, but a Spanish heart ; ' ' Thou viper, for I thou thee, thou traitor! ' 'Thou art thyself a spider of hell ! ' ' Oh, damnable atheist ! ' &c. Even Chief Justice Popham felt it necessary to apologise : ' Sir Walter,' said he, 'Mr. Attorney speaks out of the zeal of his duty for the service of the king, and you for yoflr life ; be patient on both «ides.' Arid Secretary Cecil endeavoured to soften him : ' Be not so impatient, good Mr. Attorney, give him leave to speak,' On which Coke angrily exclaimed, ' I am the king's swom servant, and must speak ; if I may not be patiently heard, you dis courage the king's counsel, and encourage traitors ; ' and sat do-wn in a chafe, A COKE no more disgusting scene had never been wit nessed in court. During the trials of the conspirators in the gunpowder plot. Coke repeated his gross flattery of the king, and his cruel language to the prisoners. Soon after their termination he was elevated to the bench as chief justice of the Common Pleas, on June 30, 1606, On ascending the judicial seat he dis carded all appearance of subserviency, and boldly asserted the independence of the j udge. He did not hesitate to oppose James in his attempts to extend his prerogative ; and in the very next year after his appoint ment he told the king, in the case of pro hibitions, that his ma.jesty had not power to adjudge any case, either criminal or be tween party and party, but that it ought to be determined in some court of justice ; and upon the king's saying that he thought the law was founded on reason, and that he and others had reason as well as the judges. Coke answered that 'true it was that God had endowed his majesty -with excellent science and great endo-wments of nature, but his majesty was not learned in the laws of the realm of England ; ' -with which the king was greatly offended. In another case, in 1608, when he and the other judges were summoned before the council to account for a judgment they had given, he said to the lords, ' We do hope that where[as] the judges of this realm have been more often called before your lordships than in former times they have been, which is much observed, and gives much emboldening to the vulgar, that after this day we shall not be so often, upon such complaints, your lordships being truly in formed of our proceedings, hereafter called before you,' In 1610 he gave an opinion in opposition to the council, that the king could not, by his proclamation, create any offence which was not an offence before. In the next year he and the other judges of the Common Pleas discharged Sir Wil Uam Chancey, brought before them by Habeas Corpus, who had been imprisoned by warrant from the High Commission in Causes Ecclesiastical, and aftei-wards justi fied their decision before the council. "VVhen a new commission was issued, in which he was named, he refused to sit upon it. (12 Reports, 51, 64, 74, 82, 84, 88.) His old enemy, Bacon, did not fail to take advantage of Coke's resistance. On the death of Sir Thomas Fleming, he re commended the king to remove Coke from the Common Pleas to the King's Bench ; and, among others, he gave the foUow ing reasons for this measure : — ' It wiU strengthen the king's causes amongst the judges, for my Lord Coke -will think himself near a privy counsellor's place, and there upon turn obsequious.' ' The remove of 176 COKE m}' Lord Coke to a place of less profit . , , will be thought abroad a kind of discipline to him for oppcsing himself in the king's causes, the example whereof will contain others in more awe.' (Bacon's Works [Moitagu], vii. 340.) His craft succeeded ; Coke was promoted to the office of chief justice of the King's Bench on October 26, 1618, and was sworn of the privy council on November 4, He received a sincerer and more welcome compliment in the fol lowing June, by his unanimous and un sought election as steward of the University of Cambridge, At the beginning of the reign he had obtained for the university the privilege of sending two members to parliament, (Seward's Anecdotes, iii. 396.) Coke was not more ' obsequious ' in his new office than he had been in his old. Some portion of his uncomplying conduct may perhaps be attributable to his being brought frequently into colUsion with Bacon, now attomey-general, whom he despised, and whom he could not but con sider as a watchful spy on his conduct, and a delighted talebearer of his supposed lapses. In Bacon's letters to the king his offences are carefully reported. The in famous case of Peacham was the first of these. The king having desired to have the private opinion of the judges whether Peacham could be convicted of treason, Bacon undertook to procure it. Coke, however, told him ' that this auricular taking of opinions, single and apait, was new and dangerous ; ' but on being pressed that the other judges had given theirs, he consented ; and, to Bacon's disappointment, it was in writing, and was apparently against the prosecution. (Johnson's Life, i. 246.) Notwithstanding the infinite pains he took in regard to the murderers of Sir Thomas Overbury, he offended also on those trials by some mysterious and indiscreet expressions he used in the course of them. In their progress he not only repeated his flattery of the king, but resumed the coarse invectives in which he had formerly in dulged, degrading the seat of justice by telling Mrs. Turner before the verdict was given that 'she had the seven deadly sins — viz., a whore, a bawd, a sorcerer, a -witch, a papist, a felon, and a murderer.' Guilty as the parties undoubtedly were. Coke conducted the trials most unfairly, and the daily letters that passed between James and him on the subject of them are in strong contrast with his former protest against giving auricular opinions. (Great Case of Poisoning, 860-420.) But the immediate causes that appeared to determine the court to remove him were Ms independent refusal to submit to its interference in the case of Commendams, and his more doubtful denial of the power of the Court of Chancery. In the first case. COKE the legality of Commendams having beeni incidentally disputed by a counsel in his argument in a private cause, the king's pleasure was signified to the judges that they should not go on -with the case tiU they had first consulted his majesty. But the judges thought it their duty, this being- only a dispute between party and party, to- proceed notwithstanding the king's man date ; and all the twelve signed a letter to the king, stating their reasons and justify ing their conduct. They were immediately summoned before the council, and, being reprimanded by the king, they all fell down on their knees, and acknowledged their error, except Coke, who defended the letter; and upon further interrogation, whether they would stay their proceedings on a future command. Coke said, 'When the case should be, he would do that which should be fit for a judge to do.' (Bacon's Works, vii. 307-338.) In the other case. Coke had not only resisted the power of the Court of Chan cery to touch any cause which had been decided in the courte of common law, but had encouraged indictmente being pre sented against all who had been concerned in a case where relief in equity had been applied for, including the counsel and so licitor to the parties, and even the master in Chancery to whom it had been referred. The question was taken up by the king, whose decision, confirming the Court of Chancery in all the powers which it claimed, is acted on to tMs day. On both of these occasions Bacon's hand is visible. In the case of the Commendams he enlarges, in his letter to the king, on Coke's contempt; and in the Chancery question he dwells on the time chosen for pressing the indictmente, 'that which all men condemn — the supposed last day of my lord chanceUor's Ufe,' as if that was in the power of the chief justice to select. The result of aU this ' turbulent carriage,' as the king called it, was, that on June 30, 1616, he was sequestered from the council table, and ordered to 'forbear to ridffthe summer circuit.' This was soon followed by his removal from office, his discharge from which, on November l5, he is stated by one con^temporary letter- writer to have ' received with dejection and tears,' while another describes him as bearing ' his mis fortunes well,' and as retiring ' with general applause.' On Coke's receiving a hint that his com pliance with a private job of Buckingham's would prevent his dismissal, he refused the temptation, saying, 'A judge must not pay a bribe or take a bribe.' His successor. Sir Henry Montagu, sent him an offer to purchase the collar of SS ; but Coke an swered that 'he would not part with it, but leave it to his posterity, that they COKE might one day know that they had a chief justice to their ancestor.' Bacon, while this was in agitation, had the meanness to address a letter to Coke, in which, -with an ungenerous and mali cious pen, he describes the character of the chief justice. Whatever truth there is in this deUneation, who must not -wish it painted by another hand, and at another time? _An epigram, by Ben Jonson (Gifford, viu. 430), -written about the same time, is a better proof of the estimation in which Coke was then held by his contemporaries as a lawyer and a judge, and affords some evidence that players were not inimical to him, nor he to them. And Milton (Works, ii. 218), years after, thus speaks of him, in a sonnet addi'essed to his grandson, Cyriac Skinner : — Cyriac, -whose grandsire ou the royal bench Of British Themis, -with no mean applause, Pronounc'd and in his volumes taught our laws, -Which others at their bar so often ¦wrench. Coke, at the time of his dismissal, was commanded to expunge and retract ' such novelties and errors and offensive conceits as were dispersed in his " Reports." ' Bat he showed that there were no more errors in his 500 cases than in a few cases of Plowden, and delivered in a paper explain ing other points. This frivolous enquiiy, however, soon ceased, and, though he was not replaced in his judicial seat, he was received into a certain degree of favour. Bacon also, who had become lord keeper, was sharply rebuked by the king on Coke's account, and was nearly losing the friend ship of Buckingham for opposing the mar riage of Coke's daughter by Lady Hatton with the earl's brother. Sir John Villiers, afterwards Lord Purbeck. This marriage Coke had evidently negotiated for the pur pose of securing the interest of Bucking ham, and thus furthering his return to court. In this he was partiaUy successful, being restored to the council table in September 1617, and appointed, on July 21, 1618, one of the commissioners for exe cuting the office of lord high treasurer. (Pell Records, 211.) During three years he was employed in various commissions, and his assistance was required in the Star Chamber in all cases of difficulty ; but he received no substantial proof of the renewal of the royal confidence. He had not been in parliament since 1693, the oflice of attorney-general dis- quaUfying him fi-om sitting in the House of Commons m 1597, 1601, and 1604, and during the short parliament of 1614 he was chief justice. But when James summoned that of 1621 Coke was again eUgible, and was accordingly retumed for the borough of Liskeard in Comwall. His parliament ary career may be truly said to have then COKE 177 commenced, his mouth being no longer stopped by the silence imposed upon Mm by his former office of speaker. He at once distinguished himself by taking a prominent part against monopolies, patente, and other grievances, and was one of the principal movers against Sir Giles Mom pesson. In the impeachment of his old enemy Bacon, he did not, though one of the managers, actively interf'ere, nor in the other trials which then took place ; but on the adjoumment in June he is said to have stood up 'with tears in his eyes,' and to have ' recited the coUect for the king and his issue, adding only to it, " and defend them from their cruel enemies." ' When the house met again in November it im mediately proceeded on the Spamsh match and the supply for the palatinate, and Coke was made chairman of a committee to con sider these and other subjects. A remon strance and petition to the king being resolved on. Coke spoke strongly in their support. He made a bold stand also for the pri-yileges of the house, aud the pro testation, which was then carried, so offended the king that with his own hand he tore it out of the journals. The par Uament was again adjourned on December 18, and on January 6, 1621-2, was dis solved by a proclamation enlarging on the ' cunning diversions ' of ' some ill-tempered spirite who sowed tares among the corn.' In the interim between the adjournment and the dissolution several of these 'iU- tempered spirits' were visited -with the vengeance of the court. Coke had made himself a special mark for the royal indig nation. The council debated on the means of excluding him from the general pardon at the end of the year ; he was sent to the Tower on December 27; his papers were seized, and prosecutions were commenced against him on trumped-up and frivolous charges. His incarceration lasted seven months, at first without intercourse ¦with his family or friends, and even when he obtained Ms discharge in August 1622, the king said 'he was the fittest instrument for a tyrant that ever was in the realm of England,' and ordered him to confine him self to his mansion at Stoke Pogis. Yonge, in his Diary (p. 62), records that 'the great cause concerning the Lord Coke, for 60,000/., foUowed in the king's behalf in the Court of Wards, is adjudged for my Lord Coke by the three chief judges and Justice Doderidge.' In the new parUament which neces sity compeUed James to caU in February 1623-4 Coke took his seat as member for Coventry. The questions on which he seemed mostly to interest himself were the Spanish match, the means of recovering the palatinate, and the impeachment of the Earl of Middlesex, on each of which he N 178 COKE managed the conferences with the House of Lords. The session closed on May 29, and King James died on the 27th of the following March. . In the first parliament of Charles, Coke, who was chosen by his native county, at first dissuaded the house from renewing the committee for grievances, advising a peti tion for the king's answer to the former appUcation; but afterwards he opposed the grant of a supply without a redress of grievances. This demand, and an e^vident Preparation to bring charges against the )uke of Buckingham, led to a hasty dis solution on August 12, 1625, and to an endeavour to prevent the most unruly mem bers from sitting in the next parliament, wMch Charles was necessitated to call in the month of February following, by nomina^ ting them sheriffs of the counties in which they resided. Coke was made sheriff of Buckinghamshire, but was elected member for Norfolk ; and, not^withstanding a message from the king, no new writ was issued, though, in consequence of the parliament being dissolved before his sheriffalty ex pired, he did not take his seat. Two years elapsed before the third parUament was Called, when Coke was returned for two counties, Buckingham and Suffolk, choosing the former because he resided there. It met on March 17, 1628, and in the first session, which ended on June 26, and was the last in which he took any part in public affairs, he advocated the liberty of the subject with an energy that was surprising in a man who had attained the age of seventy-eight. He suggested, and succeeded in carrying, the famous Petition of Right, in the conferences ¦with the Lords being one of the principal managers, and overcoming, by his argu- menfa and perseverance, all the objections and impedimente raised against it. In the violent proceedings of the second session of tMs parliament he took no part; but, re tiring to his seat at Stoke Pogis, he occupied the five remaining years of his life in pub Ushing that celebrated work on which his fame is permanently established — ' The First Institute, or Commentary on Little ton,' — and in preparing for the press the three other volumes of the Institutes, treat ing respectively on Magna Charta, on Cri minal Law, and on the Jurisdiction of the Courte. These, with his will and fifty-one other manuscripts, were seized while he was on his death-bed, by an order of the pri-vy council, made by the peremptory direction of King Charles nearly three years before (CaL St Papers [1629], 490), under the pretence of searching for seditious papers, and were not published till seven years afterwards, when, by a vote of parliament, they were delivered up to his son. Four years before his decease, one Nicholas Jeoffes was indicted and fined in the Bang's COKE Bench for -writing a petition wherein he said that Lord Chief Justice Coke was a traitor. (State Trials, iii. 1375.) He died on September 3, 163.3, being then nearly eighty-two years of age, and was buried in the church of Tittleshall, in Norfolk, in which a marble monument, bearing his effigy at fuU length, is erected to his memory. Besides the four books of Institutes, he published eleven volumes of Reports, to which two other volumes were added many years after his death, but not finished or prepared by him for publication. The first part came out in 1600, when he was in the height of Ms professional fame, and attorney-general to Queen EUzabeth, The others foUowed in quick succession tiU the eleventh, pubUshed in 1615, about a year before he was deprived of his office of chief justice of the King's Bench by James — an example of perseverance and indefatigable industry which no one occupied as he was with judicial and poUtical duties, and harassed by domestic broils, could have exhibited, had not a cold-blooded tempera ment made Mm indift'erent to the one, and a habit of early rising enabled bim to over come the other. They are distinguished in Westminster HaU by the name of 'The Reports,' and his jealous enemy. Bacon, is obliged to say of them, ' Had it not been for Sir Edward Coke's reports . . . the law by this time had been almost like a ship without baUast, for that the cases of modem experience are fied from those that are adjudged and ruled in former time.' For some law ti-acts, also, of minor impor tance, but of great learning, the profession was indebted to him. They were not pub lished tUl after his death, and are now, from the alterations in practice, become obsolete. The early portion of Coke's life was not distinguished from that of any other ad vocate, except by his deeper studies and a more extensive and successful practice. The reputation he attained for legal knowledge pointed him out -without a rival for the office of solicitor-general, which he fiUed at the age of forty. In less than two years he succeeded as attorney-general, and during the twelve years that he held that office he raised it to an importance it had never before acquired, and which it has ever since preserved. The coarseness and brutality of his language, both at the bar and on the bench, -will ever leave a stigma on his me mory ; but it may be observed that no such ebullitions occurred till his rivalry with Bacon began, whose underhand endeavours to supplant and annoy him evidently tended to exacerbate his temper, which was not naturally good ; and some of Ms violent and indecent exhibitions — towards Essex, for instance, who was supposed to be Bacon's. COKE friend — ^may, perhaps, be traced to that influence. His pride and arrogance, how ever, cannot be doubted, and to them it may be attributed, together with the cold ness of his nature and his retired habits, that his biographers record no friendly intimacies, and that fewer sayings of his are repeated than of any person who held so prominent a position in public Ufe. In his station as a judge, which he occupied for ten years, he shone with the brightest lustre ; and, making some aUowance for his equivocal conduct with regard to Over- bury's murderers, he deserves great praise for his resistance of royal interference, and for upholding the independence of the bench. Judge WMtelocke (Liber Famelicus) gives testimony of his freedom from the prevailing vice of the time. 'Never was man,' he says, ' so just, so upright, so fr-ee from corrupt solioitetions of great men and friends, as he was. Never put counseUors that practised before him to annual pen sions of money or plate to have his favour. In all causes before him the counsel might assure his client from the danger of bribery.' By his subsequent career in par liament, and his energetic advocacy of liberal measm-es, he would have gained the admiration and applause of the world, were it not for the opimon, by some entertained, that his opposition to the court savoured too much of personal discontent and dis appointed ambition. This mixed feeling has prevented him from being a popular character, and has led men to doubt his judgment and to deny his authority in matters unconnected with his profession ; so that many, who aUow his merit as a great lawyer and an incorrupt judge, refuse to acknowledge his claims as a disinter ested patriot, or as an estimable man. Against his private character even his -enemies could bring no charge ; but the -contentions with his second wife, which did not terminate till his death, do not speak -well for the temper of either. If his divi sion of the hours of the day, 'Quatuor orabis,' was the rule of his Ufe, he must be allowed to have been a pious man. Of his friendsMp to the Church he gave many proofs in his settlement of ecclesiastical property, and in his careful selection in the aistribution of the patronage attached to his estetes. With regard to the first, he threatened a nobleman, who was applying for some lands belonging to the see of Nor wich, to put on his cap and go-wn again and plead in support of its righte ; and as to the last he was wont to say that 'he would have Church Uvings pass by Uvery and seisin, not by bargain and sale,' He was liberal in his entertainmente, but moderate in his household ; and when a great man • came to dinner without previously inform ing him, his common saying was, ' Sir, since COKEFIELD 179 you have sent me no notice of your comino-, you must dine with me ; but if I had kno-nTi it in due time, I would have dined -with you.' Sir Edward, by his first -wife, Bridget Paston, had seven sons and three daughters. The succession to the family estates feU finaUy on Robert, the grandson of Henry, his fifth son. Robert's grandson, Thomas, was created Baron Level in 1728, and Vis count Coke and Earl of Leicester in 1744 ; but, the earl lea-ying no smviving issue, the titles became extinct in 1759. The estates then devolving on Wenman Roberte, Esq., the son of the earl's sister, Anne, that gen tleman assumed the name of Coke, and his son, Thomas WilUam Coke, for many years the representative of Norfolk in parUament, was at last, in 1837, created Viscount Coke and Earl of Leicester, titles which are now borne by his eldest son. Clement, the sixth son of the chief jus tice, was the father of Edward Coke of Longford, who obtained a baronetcy in 1641, which became extinct in 1727. (Many of these dates and facts are taken from Coke's ' Vade Mecum,' as he calls the interleaved copy of Littleton's 'Tenures,' written by himself, and extracted in the 'Collectanea Topographica et Genealogica,' by the late John Bruce, Esq^ COKEFIELD, John de, so caUed from a place of that name in Suffolk, and probably connected with a powerful family seated there, is flrst recorded on a fine levied at Michaelmas 1256, 40 Henry IIL, and on others till the foUowing Michaelmas, in which latter year he was added to the jus tices itinerant into the county of Suffolk. After that time payments were made for assizes to be taken before Mm, commencing in August 1258, 42 Henry iH,, and ending in June 1269. A long interval of eleven years then occurs, no paymente being- made for assizes before him till May 1270, 54 Henry IIL, after which they are frequent till May 1272, During this latter period he had a gr.int of 40/. a year for his support, according to Dugdale, as a justice of the King's Bench. His death is recorded on the Close RoU of 66 Hemy IH, (Excerpt e Rot Fin. U, 286-573.) COKEFIELD,RoBEEl DE, or KOKEFIELD, holding a high position in Yorkshire, was selected in 9 Henry IH. as one of the jus tices itinerant for that county. He was constable of the castles of Scarborough and Pickering, for the custody of which he had a salary of two hundred marks per annum. (Rot Claus. ii. 77, 107, 117.) From 1226, 10 Henry IH,, to 1229, the sheriffalty of the county was entrusted to hini, and he was excused 160/, which remained due from him for the profits of the county. He mar ried Nichole, the daughter of Jordan de Sancta-Maria, by Alice, the daughter, or N 2 180 COLEPEPEE sister, of Geofirey Haget. (Archceol. xxx. 485.) COLEPEPEE, John. The Colepepers were of a very ancient Kentish family, which in the reign of Edward IH. sepa rated into two branches, one settled at Bay Hall, near Pepenbury, from which descen ded Baron Colepeper, master of the Rolls in the time of Charles I. ; and the other seated at Preston Hall, near Aylesford, to which John Colepeper this judge belonged. His grandfather was Sir_ Jeffrey Cole peper, who was sheriff of Kent in 40 Ed ward IIL, and his father's name was WilUam. John is first reported in 4 Henry IV., as being appointed a king's serjeant, and as one of that degree who advanced 100/. each on loan to the king. (Acts Privy Council, i. 202.) On June 7, 1406, 7 Henry IV., he was made a judge of the Common Pleas, and received a new patent on the accession of Henry V, He died in 1414, and was buried in the church of West Peckham, which manor, together with those of Oxenhoath and of Swanton Court, he gave to the EJiighte Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem, By his wife Catherine he left a son, WilUam, to whose lineal descendant a baro netcy was granted in 1627, which became extinct in 1723. COLEPEPEE, John (Loed Colbpepek), was of the same family from one branch of which the preceding judge descended. He was the son of a knight of the same name, living at Wigsell in Sussex; and he spent some years iu foreign parts, doing good service as a soldier, and reputed to be of great courage, but of a rough nature, his hot temper leading him too frequently into quarrels and duels. When he married he settled in the county of his ancestors, where he soon became popular among his neigh bours, and, in consequence of the know ledge of business which he exhibited, and the ability with which he conducted it, he was frequently deputed by them to the council board, and at length was knighted, and elected member for Kent in the Long Parliament. Within a week after its meeting he summed up in an eloquent speech the grievances of his country, concluding thus : ' One grievance more, which compriseth many ; it is a nest of wasps, or swarm of vermin, which have overcrept the land ; I mean the monopolies and polers of the people. These, like the frogs of Egypt, have gotten possession of our dwellings, and we scarce have a room free from them. They sup in our cup. They dip in our dish. They sit by our fire. We find them in the dye-vat, wash-bowl, and powdering-tub. They share -with the butler in his box. They have marked and sealed us from head to foot. Mr. Speaker, they wiU not bate COLEPEPER us a pin. We may not buy our o-mr clothes without their brokage. These are the leeches that have sucked the common wealth so hard that it is almost become- hectical.' (Rushworth, ii. 917.) The Hng, sensible of his value, admitted him of his privy councU, and on Januai-y 6, 1642, made him chancellor of the Ex chequer. (Rymer, xx. 516.) During that eventful year he, -with the assistance of Lord Falkland and Edward Hyde, though sometimes disconcerted by the king's hasty measures, did what he could to serve his majesty. He acquired great influence, but his counsels were not always very -wise or temperate. To his advice is attributed the Hug's consent to pass the biU for removing the bishops from the House of Peers, the transference of the court from Windsor to- York, and the attempt to obtain possession of HuU. After the royal standard had been set up at Nottingham, Colepeper was one of the bearers of the king's message to the Commons, -with an offer to treat, so as to prevent the effusion of blood and the mise ries of civil war. He must have anticipated the answer, from the manner in wMch he was received by the house. They would not permit him to teke Ms seat as a mem ber, but obliged him to deUver his message at the bar, and then withdraw. (White loeke, 61.) On January 28, 1643, he was promoted to the mastei-ship of the RoUs, an office for which his previous education had in no degree prepared him. He took it as adding- to his dignity and profit, without regard to its accustomed duties, for in those troubled times there was less need of lawyers than of counsellors and soldiers. As a counsellor,. he was used on the most private occasions, and was added to the junto which, as a cabinet council, manag-ed the king's affairs ; as a soldier, he was ever by the long's side, and took part in all his battles with the most distinguished bravery. In reward for these services, the king, on October 14, 1644, created him a peer, by the title of Lord Colepeper, of Thoresway in Lin colnshire, and named him of the coimcil of the Duke of York. At the beginning of the next year he was one of the commissioners- 011 the pait of the king in the proposed treaty of Uxbridge. A very unpromisiag commencement was made by the parlia ment's refusing to recognise the peerage of Colepeper, or the titles of any of the others- which had passed the Great Seal since Lord Lyttelton had sent it to the king. The commissioners wasted their time prin cipally in religious discussions, and the treaty was ultimately broken off. In the calamitous events which followed. Lord Colepeper was zealously and actively en gaged in serving the king and Prince Charles, the latter of whom, iu 1646, he- COLERIDGE ¦accompanied to Paris to join the queen. From this time he was the constent com panion of the prince in Ms wanderings; -and while at the Hague, in 1648, he had a serious quarrel with Prince Rupert, who was sti-ongly prejudiced against Mm, which, but for Hyde's interference, might have led to a fatal result. When Prince Charles became king by the tragic death of his father, he sent Lord Colepeper to Russia, to obtain money to supply his necessities ; and the mission resulted in the czar granting -60,000/, in rich commodities. At the Restoration he accompanied the king to England, and resumed his place of master of the Rolls ; but he was not des tined long to enjoy it, for witMn little more than a month after his landing in England he was seized with an iUness, of which he died on July II, 1660. He was buried in the church of HoUingbourn in Kent, in which and the neighbouring parish the family property, including Leeds Castle, •was situate. Lord Clarendon, though evidently jealous of his ascendency over Charles I., and •certainly not prepossessed in his favour, gives Mm full credit as well for his great parts, ready -wit, and universal understand ing, as for his sufficiency in council, his courage iu the field, and his devoted fidelity. His letter to the chancellor, just after ¦Cromwell's death, as to the counsels to be pursued, and the probable course of General Monk, confirms the opinion of his -wisdom, and seems to be dictated by prophetic in spiration, (Seward, iy. 388.) By Ms first -wife, Philippa, daughter of — Snelling, Esq., he had one son, who died young. His second wife, who was his cousin, Judith, daughter of Sir Thomas Colepepej, of HoUingbourn, knight, brought him four sons, the three elder of whom enjoyed the title in succession, which then, for want of male issue, became extinct in 1725. (Baronage, ii. 472.) COLERIDGE, John Tatloe (a lately retired judge), belongs to a family the name of which never occurs without as sociations of intellectual eminence — whe ther as poet, philosopher, biographer, scho lar, ecclesiastic, or jurist. In the foremost rank of these, as a scholar and a lawyer, must be placed this retired jud^e. John "Taylor Coleridge was born at Ti verton on July 9, 1790. His grandfather was vicar of the parish of Ottery St. Mary in Devonshire, and master of the grammar school there. His father was Captain James Coleridge, who retired from the army soon after his marriage with Frances Duke Taylor, the daughter of one of the coheiresses of the family of Duke of Otterton and Power Hayes, one of the most ancient in the county of Devon. After receiving an exceUent training from COLERIDGE 181 his imcle, the Rev. George Coleridge, then master of the school at Ottery St. Mary, young Coleridge, in June 1803, went to Eton, where he acquired a considerable reputation. In AprU 1809 he was elected to a scho larship at Corpus Christi College, Oxford, where his career was most triumphant. In I8I0 he won the chanceUor's Latin verse prize, the subject beiug 'Pyramides .iEgyptiacse,' In I8I2 he was placed alone in the first class tor classics, and in the same year he was elected feUow of Exeter College and Vinerian law scholar. In 1813 he won the chancellor's prizes for prose composition, both in English and Latin, the former having for its subject 'Etymology,' and the latter 'The Moral Effects of the Censor's Office in Rome.' Since the foundation of these prizes it has only happened three times that they both have been gained by one man in the same year, the three conquerors being Mr. Cole ridge, Mr. Keble, and Dr, Milman ; and on each occasion the chancellor (Lord Gren- ville) testified his pleasure and approbation by adding to the prizes the gift of a costly and valuable classic. In 1852 the univer sity presented to him the honorary degree of D.CL. In the same year in which he was elected Vinerian law scholar he entered the Mid dle Temple; and, after practising for a short time as a certificated .special pleader, he was called to the bar on June 26, 1819, hav ing in the preceding year married Mary, daughter of the Rev. Dr. Buchanan, rector of Woodmanstone in Surrey. For more than fifteen years he was a regular atten dant on the Western Circuit, and, though he had for his competitors such eminent men as Serjeant Wilde (afterwards Lord Truro), Sir WUliam FoUett, Chief Justice Erie, Mr. Justice Erskine, and Mr. Justice Crowder, he obtained considerable success. As he expresses himself in one of his future lectm-es, ' The law was not a hard mistress to him, and did not allow him long to lan guish without business, nor suffer him to be ¦without hope.' During this period he had been appointed, in 1827, a commissioner of bankruptcy; and in 1832 the corporation of Exeter elected him their recorder ; the offer of a similar honour from both the boroughs of Southmolton and Bamstaple ha-ying been declined by him. In February 1832 he was raised to the digmty of the coif, and when, in April 1834, the attempt was made, under the warrant of King WiUiam IV., to open the Court of Com mon Pleas to all barristers, he, with the other seijeante-at-law, was supposed to be compensated by receiving a patent of pre cedence, giving him rank after the existing king's counsel. Engaged as he was in his legal occupa- 182 COLERIDGE tions, Mr. Coleridge never deserted his Uterary pursuits. He contributed occa sionally to the ' Quarterly Review,' and on the retirement of its editor, William Gifford, he for one year (1824) undertook the post, but at the end of it, finding that its labours interfered too much with his professional practice, he resigned it into the able management of the late Mr. Lockhart. . To professional literature he supplied an excellent edition of ' Blackstone's Commen taries ' in 1825. Mr, Coleridge was soon caUed upon to take the position which aU allowed he was the most competent to fill. On January 27, 1835, he was appointed a judge of the King's Bench, by the recommendation of Lord Ljmdhurst, and knighted. For more than three-and-twenty yearshe administered jus tice on that bench and on the different cir cuits in a manner which was most eloquently and truthfully described in the affectionate language of the bar, as expressed by their spokesman, the attomey-general (Sir Fitz- roy Kelly, now chief baron of the Exche quer), on June 28, 1858, the day of his retirement. He was immediately admitted to a seat iu the privy council, and to be a member of its judicial committee. On the sittings of that tribunal he has ever since regularly attended. That his character and merits were ap preciated most highly by those in power has been fully proved by the varied services that have been required of him. He was selected as a member of many important commissions. Among them was that in 1834, to enquire into the arrangements of the inns of court and Chancery for pro moting the study of the law and j mis- prudence ; that in 1858, to enquire into the expediency of bringing into one neigh bourhood the different courts of justice; besides the Oxford University Commission, which sat for four years, and the Educa tion Commission, which sat for three. In the devotion of Ms services to the public he has not'j been unmindful of private and local calls. On his resignation he retired to Heath's Court, Ottery St. Mary, the house in which his father re sided, and devoted a good portion of his leisure to the charitable and educational establishments of the county, and by several interesting and amusing lectures (none of them more so than his 'Recol lections of the Circuit ') delivered to various literary societies, encouraged the efforts to promote rational enjoyment among all classes. The internal restora tion of the beautiful priory church in his neighbourhood has been completely effected by Ms liberality and exertions. Of Sir John Coleridge's six children, four still survive, the eldest of whom. Sir John Duke Coleridge, is following his COLTMAN father's footsteps in the law, and is now solicitor-general and M.P. for Exeter. COLE-VILL, GiLBBET DE, appears on one occasion only in a fine of 28 Henry II. as being present in the King's Court at Westminster when it was acknowledged. (Madox, i. 113 ; Hunter's Preface, p. xxi.) As he is not again mentioned in a judicial character, it is possible that he merely held some official post there which re-. quired his attendance. COLE-riLLE, Hbnet db, was employed in 18 Henry HI. to assess the tallage in Cambridge and Huntingdon, and was twice appointed sheriff for those counties — in 21 Henry HI,, when he held the office for six years ; and again in 34 Henry IH., when he held it for two. (Madox, i. 735, U. 169.) In 1252 he acted as justice itinerant for Berkshire, Oxford, and Northampton, and in the following year for Cambndge, Huntingdon, Essex, and Hertford. (Abb. Placit. 141.) Whether either of the two belonged to the noble famUy of ColeviUe in Yorkshire is uncertain. COLNEYE, William de, represented Robert de Tateshal in a suit the subject of a petition to the parliament in 18 Ed ward I., and on the accession of Edward II. he was summoned to the coronation, and to the next two parUamente, his place in the liste being low among those of the legal profession. He was retumed as member for Norfolk, and when the jus tices of assize were appointed for that and the four neighbouring counties in 1810 he was the last of the three who were then nominated. His name does not appear after the next year, but that of his son Ralph is mentioned in 8 Edward H,, in which he certified that he was one of the lords of Scottow and Lammas with Little Hautboys, (Rot ParL i. 37 ; ParL Writs, U, p, U, 708; Abb. Rot Orig. i.', 212, 246,) COLTMAN, Thomas, was descended from an old and respectable family in the county of Lincoln, where they enjoyed consider able possessions. He was the youngest son of John Coltman, Esq., then resident at Beverley, and was bom on July 9, 1781, but ultimately succeeded to the paternal estate. His education was com menced at the Chai'terhouse in London, from which he proceeded to Rugby, where he obtained an exhibition, and in 1798 was removed to Trinity College, Cambridge, where he took his degree of B.A. in Ja nuary 1803, and in 1805 he gained the 'blue ribbon ' of the university by being elected a fellow of his college. Entering the Inner Temple, he acquired, under the tuition of that eminent special pleader Mr. Tidd, that mastery of the law which enabled so many of that gentleman's pupils to rise to high distinction. Called COLUMBIERS to the bar in 1808, he attended the sessions at Manchester, and joined the Northern Circuit, in which he secured so considerable a share of business that even tuaUy in 1832 he was appointed a king's counsel. On February 24, 1837, he was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas, receiving the customary honour of knighthood. In that court he remained for the last twelve years of his Ufe, performing Ms duties in that quiet and calm manner which does not attract the 'mUlion,' but which greatly assisted and was highly appreciated by his colleagues, who, in the language of a grace ful tribute to his memory published by one of them (Lord Wensleydale) soon after Ms death, ' knew and admired his dispassionate, candid, and just mind ; his clear, acute, and strong imderstanding ; his sound and accu rate knowledge of the law ; his even temper, patience, aud firmness ; his care and sMll in investigating cases ; his excellent judg ment in deciding them.' Though some what slow in forming his opinions, they were always to be relied on, and, though not briUiant or dashing, he was essentiaUy a just and right-minded judge. He feU a victim to the Asiatic cholera at Ms house in Hyde Park Gardens on July II, 1849, leaving four children by his wife, Anna, sister of Samuel Duckworth, Esq., master in Chancery. COLfMBIESS, GiLBEET DE, or COLUM- BAEIIS, was of a Norman family. He is mentioned only once by Madox (i. 131) as a justice itinerant into "Wiltshire on the roll of 23 Henry IL, II77. 'He held a fourth part of a knight's fee in England of WilUam de Roiimare; and Philip de Columbiers, probably his son, was termor of the forest of Rcumare, in Normandy, in 1180. (Rot Scacc. Normannice, ii. clx.) COLTJMBIEES, Matthew de, is con founded by Dugdale (Baronage, i. 633) -with three others of the same name and family flourishing about the same time. It seems probable that he was the son of Michael, the brother of another Matthew, by Ms wife Avicia, daughter of Elias Croc, In 44 Henry III, he was constituted go- vemor of the castle of SaUsbury, and soon after joined the rebellious barons, by whom, after the battle of Lewes, he was made governor of Rockingham Castle. He availed himself of the Dictum de Kenilworth to make Ms peace, and was appointed warden of the forests south of the Trent. Although Dugdale introduces him as an ordinary jus tice itinerant in 53 Henry HI., 1268, it seems more probable that his duties on that occasion were confined to the trial of pleas of the forest, as well on account of Ms above- mentioned appointment as because the com mission was headed by Roger de Clifford, the cMef justice of the forests. If Dug- COMYNS 183 dale's statement, that this Matthe-w died in I Edward I., be correct, which is not im probable (Cal. Inquis. p.m. i. 53), there must have been still another Matthew, who was chief assessor in Hampshire of the fif teenth granted in 3 Edward I. (ParL Writs, i. 3), and one of the king's butlers in the following year, to whom was committed in the sixth year the office of one of the king's chamberlains, and of ganger of the -wines sold in England. (Devon's Issues Exch. iu. 92 ; Abb. Rot Orig. i. 31.) He was a jus tice itinerant of the forests in 8 Edward I., 1280, and his death is recorded in 10 Ed ward I., when his brother Michael did homage for the lands he held in capite. (^66. Rot Orig. i. 41.) To make the diffi culty still greater, there is among the re cords a roll entitled ' Compotus Mathtei de Columbariis Camerarii vinorum,' from Mi chaelmas at the end of the ninth year to the same feast in the thirteenth ; and a Matthew is again mentioned as king's butler in 18 Edward I. (2 Report, Public Records, App. U, 55 ; CaL RoL Pat 54.) COUTNS, John, was bom about the year 1667. His father, WiUiam Comyns, a bar-- rister of Lincoln's Inn, was descended from a family of that name seated at Dagenham in Essex; and his mother was Elizabeth, daughter and coheir of Matthew Rudd, of Little Baddow in the same county. Their son was educated in Queens' College, Cam bridge, and became a student in his father's inn in May 1683, where he took his degree of barrister in May 1690, Elected member of the House of Commons in the last par liament of William III. for Maiden, he re presented that borough (except from 1708 to I7I0) till 1726, when he was promoted to the bench. As a lawyer he early laid the foundation of that character for learning and industry which he ultimately attained. The first case in his Reporte is dated so soon as Hilary Term 1695. His reputetiou was soon established, and in 1706 he was summoned to the degree of serjeant. He traveUed the Home Circiut, and in I7I9 he was counsel for the defence in the absurd pro secution for vagrancy instituted against a clergyman for preaching a charity sermon at Ohislehurst in behalf of the poor children of a parish in London, four or five of them being present. Notwithstanding his high repute as a lawyer, it was not till twenty years after he assumed the coif that he was promoted to the 'bench. On November 7, 1726, he was appointed a baron of the Exchequer, where he remained upwards of nine years, when he removed to the Common Pleas in January 1736. Two years and a half after this he was promoted, on July 7, 1738, to the head of the Court of Exchequer, where his presidency lasted Uttle more than two 184 CONINGSBY years, his death occurring, at the age of seventy-three, on November 13, 1740. He was buried at Writtle, near Chelmsford, where is a monumental inscription to Mm, surmounted by his bust. (State Trials, xv. 1412; Lord Raymond,1420; Comyns' Re ports, 587.) The two works, the labour of his life, on which his fame as one of the greatest lawyers of Ms time is permanently esta blished, did not see the light till some years after his death. His Reports, which ter minate in his last year, were first published in 1744, and Ms ' Digest of the 'Laws of England ' was delayed tiU 1762._ By the unanimous assent of the most eminent men in the profession, the latter is acknowledged to be the most accurate, methodical, and comprehensive abridgment of the law, pro found in its learning and easy of reference to the authorities cited. Sir John married three times. His first -wife was Anne, daughter and coheir of Dr, Nathaniel Gurdon, rector of Chelmsford ; Ms second was Elizabeth, daughter of — Courthope, of Kent; and his thUd was Anne, daughter of — WUbraham. Neither brought him any issue. (Morant's Essex, U. 60 ; Gent Mag. x. 571, Ix. 390.) CONINGSBY, HuMPHEEY, whose ancestor was lord of the manor of Coningsby in Lin colnshire as early as the reign of King John, was the son of Thomas Coningsby, of None Solers in Shropshire, by his wife, the daughter and heir of — Waldyffe. After pursuing his legal studies at the Inner Temple, he is mentioned as an advo cate in the Year Books in 1480, and as being called to the degree of the coif at the end of Trinity Term '1494, 9 Henry VII. During the whole of that reign he had a considerable share of practice, and on Oc tober 30, 1500, was made one of the king's Serjeants. 'Within a month after the accession of Henry VIIL— viz., on May 21, 1509— he was placed in the King's Bench as sole puisne judge and was Imighted. The num ber of judges was afterwards increased, and Sir Humphrey retained his place among them for a very extended period, his seat not appearing to be supplied tUl the middle of 1632. _ He resided, aud according to Clutterbuck (i. 444) was buried, at Aldenham in Hert fordshire, but that author evidently errs in dating his death in 1551. By his wife, who was a daughter of — Ferebie, of Lin colnshire, he left three sons and four daughters. WilUam, his second son, -was the next-mentioned judge ; and oue of the descendants of Thomas, his eldest son, was raised to the earldom of Coningsby in 1719 which is now extinct, (Chauncy 461 • Blomefields Norfolk, vii. 413.) CONINGSBY, Wn.T.nv, tho srcond son CONSTANTIIS of the above-named Humphrey, was edu cated at Eton, and King's College, Cam bridge, whither he went in 1497. He then became a member of the Inner Temple, where he was reader in Lent 1519, and again in Lent 1526. In 1616 he was m the commission for gaol delivery at King's Lynn, and was named in June 1529 a commissioner to assist Cardinal Wolsey in hearing causes in Chancery. He was recorder of Lynn, for which he sat in par Uament in 1637, one of the prothonotaries of the Common Pleas, and attorney of the duchy of Lancaster, from the latter of which he was removed on February 1640 on being charged with counselUng Sir John Shelton to make a fraudulent wUl of Ms lands, and committed to the Tower. That this charge was -without foundation may be presumed from Ms being released in ten days, and being selected within five months to be ajudge of the King's Bench, to which he was appointed on July 5, 1540. It would seem that he sat Uttle more than four months, and that Edward Mervin succeeded him on November 20. (Dugdale's Orig. 163, 172 ; Rymer, xiv. 788.) He resided in the Woollen Market in Lynn, and at Eston Hall, Wallington, Norfolk, By his wife, a daughter of — Thursby, of that county, he had an only son, Christopher, who was killed at Mussel burgh in Scotland. (Atli. Cantab. 76.) CONSTANTIIS, W-VLTEK DE (Aech bishop OE Rotjen), was a canon of Rouen, and held a responsible post in the Cmia Regis under Henry II. , but whether as chanceUor or -vice-chancellor it would be difficult to define. In 1175 he was raised to the archdea conry of Oxford ; in 1176 he had an aUow ance of fifty marks for providing for the ambassadors of the King of Sicily, when they came to demand Henry's second daughter, Jane, in marriage ; and in 1180 he accounted for the proceeds of the abbeys of Wilton and Ramsay, and of the honor of Arundel, then in the king's hands, of which he had been appointed custos. (Madox, i. 201, 367, u. 252.) On none of these occasions is an^' official title afiixed to his name. He held the living of Woolpit, belonging to the abbey of St. Edmunds, untU June 1183, when he was elected Bishop of Lin coln (Chron. Jose. Brakchmda, 35, 126), from which see he was promoted in the following yeai' to the archbishopric of Rouen, In 1186 he was one of Henry's ambassadors to King Philip of France, and succeeded in obtaining a truce with that monarch; and in 1189 he and Baldwin, Archbishop of Canterbury, were appointed umpires to decide the disputes between them. CONSTANTIIS On Henry's death he invested Richard, in the cathedral of Rouen, with the sword of Normandy; and attending Mm into England, assisted at his coronation, and was present at the council held at the abbey of PipeweU. He accompanied that king on Ms progress to the Holy Land, but re tumed to England in February 1191, es corting Queen Eleanor on her departure from Sicily. He brought with Mm a letter from King Richard, appointing Mm the head di the council for the rule of the king dom ; but a doubt has been raised as to its authenticity, from its not having been pro duced till some months after his arrival in England. Longchamp, however, was dis missed in October ll9I, and the Arch bishop of Rouen, by virtue not only of this letter, but of the appointment of Prince John and the barons, was constituted chief justiciary. Warned, perhaps, by the example of his predecessor, he was moderate in the exer cise of Ms office, and cautious to avoid undertaking any important act without the advice of the barons and the consent of his associated council. (Madox, i. 220.) When Richard's place of confinement was discovered, and the terms of his enlarge ment were settied, Walter de Constantiis was summoned to attend him in Germany, and his place of chief justiciary was, in September 119.3, conferred on Hubert Walter, the new Archbishop of Canter bury, He accompanied Queen Eleanor with the king's ransom, paid it to the em peror at Mentz, aftid procured Richard's liberation. In 1196 a contest arose between Walter and King Richard, in consequence of the latter interfering with some of the property of the church of Rouen. The archbishop thereupon placed Normandy under an inter dict, -which produced such horrible con fusion in the country that Richard, unable to relieve the inhabitants by a6y other means, was compelled to appeal to Rome. By the pope's interposition the interdict was removed, and a convention was made between the king and the archbishop, exchanging the land in dispute for certain other property and privileges, no doubt greatly to the advantage of the Church. (Nicolas's Chronology, 303.) On the accession of King John he per formed the ceremony of investiture to the dukedom of Normandy in the church of Rouen, as he had previously done to his royal brother; and in the course of that reign his active Ufe was terminated, Richard of Devizes (27, 31, 45) wrote too near his time, and was too much of a partisan, to warrant his readers in placing entire credence on- the hypocritical character which he ascribes to the archbishop. On the contrary, his conduct seems to have COOPER 185 been guided by prudence and discretion, and not to have been deficient in firmness and courage. A strong proof of the latter would be shown by the admonition which, according to Brompton, he gave to King Richard against the indulgence of his tMee ¦vices — pride, avarice, and lust ; which produced the monarch's jesting reply, that he would give the first to the Templars, the second to the monks, and the third to the bishops. Other writers, however, attribute the rebuke to another divine. (Godwin, 286; Wendover, ii. 435, iii. 2-138; Loi-d Lifttelton's Henry II. Ui, 441 ; Lingard, U. 335.) COOPEE, An'xhont Ashley (Eael oe Shaeiesbtjet). The ancestors of this sa gacious but versatile statesman were of a class of opulent gentry ; but, from the fre quent occurrence of the surname, his direct Uneage cannot with certainty be traced beyond the reign of Henry VII. His great- great-grandfather, John Cooper, possessed estates in Sussex and Hants, and died in 1495. His great-grandfather Richard, de signated Solutarius under Henry VIIL, pur chased Paulett in Somersetshire, and died in 1506. His grandfather John represented Whitchurch in parliament, and was loUghted by Queen Elizabeth. On his death in 1610 he was succeeded bj' his son, also John, who was created a baronet in 1622, was member for Poole in 1628, and by his first marriage, with Anne, daughter and heir of Sir An thony Ashley, of Wimborne St. Giles, Bart., became the father of two sons, the eldest of whom was the future lord chancellor. Anthony Ashley Cooper was born at Wimborne St. Giles, on July 22, 1621, and, having lost his father in 1631, he in herited a large estate before he was ten years of age. From Puritan private tutors he received his early instruction, till, in Lent Term 1636, he was entered a fellow- commoner at Exeter CoUege, Oxford. Under the tuition of Dr. Prideaux, the rector, afterwards Bishop of Worcester, he made such progress as to be accounted, according to the description of his eulogist, ' the most prodigious youth in the whole university.' By his O'wn account he was more famous for putting an end to the ' ill custom of tucking freshmen,' and for preventing an alteration in 'the size of the beer.' (Shaftesbury Papers, 17.) Re maining at college about two years, he then, in consequence of lawsuits "in which he was involved with some near relatives, caused himself to be admitted into the society of LincoM's Inn, on February 18, 1638. His legal studies there were not interrupted till the commencement of the Great Rebellion, for though he was elected member for Tewkesbury in the pai-iiament of April 1640, when he was not yet nine teen, his senatorial duties, during the short 186 COOPER time it lasted, could not have been very onerous ; and he was not admitted a mem ber of the Long Parliament, which began ite eventful sittings in the following No vember, although elected for Downton in Wiltehire by a double return, decided in his favour by the committee of privileges, that body having omitted, purposely, to report their decision to the house. At the commencement of the contest between the king and the parliament Sir Anthony was a professed loyalist. In 1642 he acknowledges that he was with the king at Nottingham and Derby, adding eva sively, ' but only as a spectator ; ' yet soon after he accepted a commission from the Marquis of Hertford, the king's general, to treat for the surrender of Dorchester and Weymouth. This he effected, and was thereupon made governor of the latter place, colonel of a regiment of foot, and captain of a troop of horse, both of which he raised at his own charge. And after Hertford's dismissal he received the king's confirmation in his government, and the appointments of high sheriff of Dorset and president of the council of war in those parts. But the baronet's loyalty was not very deeply rooted. According to Clarendon, when it was thought necessary to substi tute Colonel Ashbumham in his place as governor of Weymouth, he took such offence that he deserted his colours, and, immediately joining the other side, gave himself up ' body and soul to the service of the parliament, with an implacable animo sity against the royal interest.' He himself says in his autobiography that, notwith standing a flattering letter from the king, he resigned his government and came away to the parliament, ' resolving to cast him self on God, and to follow the dictates of a good conscience.' Mr. Locke gives a somewhat different account of the cause of his defection ; but the uncontradicted fact remains that he went oyer to the malcon tents and was hailed by them as a great acquisition. He was at once entrusted with a command as field-marshal-general of the army in Dorsetshire, and -with his forces he besieged and took Wareham, and com manded in chief at the taking of Blandford and Abbotsbury, and in the relief of Taun ton, besieged by the royalists. His mili tary career seems to have terminated with the year 1645, in the September of which he was probably rene-vring his attempt to have his right to his seat for Downton acknowledged. Though he did not succeed in this, he was in such favour and trust with the parliament that in November he was made sheriff of Norfolk, and in January 1647 sheriff" of Wiltshire, with the addi tional favour of permission to live out of the county. During the two months pre- COOPEE vious to 'the king's execution he was at Ms house in Dorsetshire, and that event is not even noticed in his diary, which merely records his arrival at Bagshot in his journey to London, where he arrived on the foUowing day. He subscribed the en gagement in 1650, and in January 1652 he was appointed one of the committee on the abuses and delays of the law, and the, remedies to be adopted. For his former connection -vsith the Mng he had been per mitted in 1644 to compound by the payment of 500/., which was afterwards remitted by Cromwell ; but he was not entirely cleared, of Ms delinquency till March 1653, when the Commons passed the folio-wing resolu tion : ' That Sir A. A. Cooper, Bart,, be and is hereby pardoned of all delinquency, and be and is hereby made capable of aU other privileges as any other of the people of this nation are.' On the forcible expulsion of that body. Sir Anthony was summoned to Barebone's Parliament in July 1660, as one of Crom- weU's nominees for Wiltshire, and was elected for the same county, and also for Poole and Tewkesbury, in the subsequent. parUament, which met in September l654, and which was dissolved in the following January. In both these assemblies he was in Cromwell's confidence, acting in Ms in terest in each, and being one of his council of state, both as general and protector. Dryden, in his ' Medal,' -with much malice, but with some apparent truth, describes him at this time as A vermin, -wriggliDg in th' usurper's ear: Bart'ring his venal ¦wit for sums of gold. He cast himself into the saint-like mould, Groan'd, sigh'd, and pray'd, ¦while godliness ¦was gain, The loudest bagpipe of the squeaking train. But soon another change took place. From the supporter, he became the enemy of Cromwell, who, according to Anthony Wood and Ludlow, understanding his cha racter, refused to receive him as his son- in-law. '\Miatever was the cause, it is certain that in the parliament of September 1656, to which he was returned again for Wiltshfre, he did not receive the requisite certificate of approval from the council; and he was consequently, with above ninety other members in the same predicament, partly Presbyterians and partly Repub licans, excluded from sitting, notwithstand ing the bold remonstrance against this tyrannous proceeding addressed by them to the house. Those who remained, having confirmed Cromwell's power, and enabled him to appoint a certain number of peers, the excluded members, taking the oath of fideUty to the protector, were admitted to sit in the session that foUowed in January 1658, and by their numbernearly overturned all that had preceded. A controversy was COOPER immediately raised, in which Sir Anthony actively joined, as to the title and pri vileges of the ' other house,' as it was caUed, which was carried on with so much violence that the protector hurriedly dis solved the parliament after a fortnight's sitting. He never caUed another during his life, which terminated seven months afterwards. The short session of Protector Richard's parUament, to which Sir Anthony was re tumed both for his old county and for Poole, was wasted in tiresome and insidious debates, renewing the old question about the ,' other house,' and discussing various points in the new form of government. In these Sir Anthony took a prominent part ; and in a published speech of great satirical power he had the bad taste to blacken the character of the protector who had fostered him, and ¦with whose administra tion he had been intimately connected. (Burton's Diary, iv, 286.) The dissolution of this parliament on April 22, 1659, was Richard's fall ; and the Rump Parliament, which then resumed its sittings, appointed a council of state, of which Sir Anthony was elected as a member. His fidelity to the Commonwealth began, however, to be doubted. In May he was publicly charged with holding correspondence -with the king, and so loud were his professions of in nocence, and his imprecations on himself if he were guilty, that they only added weight to the suspicions against him. Whether he was imprisoned on this charge seems uncertain, but it was some months before he got rid of it. Though there can be little doubt that he was engaged in the plots that were then contriving in behalf of the king, he managed so artfully that he procured his acquittal by the parliament in the following September. On the second expulsion of the Rump by the army, in October, the government was carried on by a council of safety, whose powers lasted only two months, when the Rump was again restored. To this last event Sir An thony mainly contributed, and was admitted upon his former election to teke his seat for Do-wnton on January 7, 1660. Besides resuming his position as a member of the council of state, he was made colonel of the regiment of horse lately commanded by Fleetwood, with which he joined Monk, and continued to act in conjunction with that general till the restoration of the king. The Long Parliament dissolved itself in March 1660, and to the convention, or Healing Parliament, that met in the follow ing month, Sir Anthony was returned by his old constituents. He was one of the deputation sent by the two houses to the Hague to invite the king to return, and was among the first who were swom of the privy council ; ' the rather,' says Clarendon, COOPEE 187 ' because, having lately married a niece of the Earl of Southampton, it was believed that his slippery humour would be easily restrained and fixed by the uncle.' When that earl was made lord high treasurer, in September 1660, Lord Clarendon states that Sir Anthony was appointed chanceUor of the Exchequer. Other authorities delay his entrance into the office till May 1667 ; but Clarendon's account is confirmed, not only by several documents addressed to him in that character in the State Paper Office, but by Sir Anthony himself, in his speech in 1672 on Mr, Serjeant Thurland's being constituted a baron, in which he aUudes to Ms ' eleven years' experience in that court.' He has been blamed, though without much reason, for allowing himself to be named on the commission for the trial of the regicides, in the proceedings of which, however, he does not appear to have taken any part. On April 20, 1661, he was called up to the House of Peers by the title of Baron Ashley of Wimborne St. Giles, the introduction to his patent, while it records his loyalty ' in many respects ' to King Charles I., and his assistance in re storing King Charles IL, carefully abstain ing from all allusion to his conduct in the interval, in deserting the former king, in aiding his rebellious subjects, and in joining in the counsels of the usurper. TiU the death of his uncle Southampton in 1667 Lord Ashley took comparatively little ostensible interest in party politics, but showed himself an adept in the busi ness of the state. At the same time he was preparing his way by making himself agreeable to the king, and by encouraging, or at least countenancing, the scandalous intrigues of the court. Ever ready in re partee, in which the king delighted, he once, when his majesty, in reference to his amours, said railingly to him, ' I believe thou art the ¦wickedest fellow in my domi nions,' repUed with a low bow and grave face, ' Of a snbject, may it please your ma jesty, I believe I am.' On the dismissal of Lord Chancellor Clarendon in that year a new career was opened to Ashley's ambition. He had already been appointed lord lieutenant of Dorsetshire, and president of the new coun cil of trade and plantations ; and, gradually ingratiating himself with his easy sovereign, as well by his pliancy and -wit as by his faciUty in the invention of expedients, he soon became one of a secret cabinet with BucMngham, Clifford, Arlington, and Lau derdale, by which every measure was de termined before it was brought pubUcly forward, and which, from the initials of the names of its members, acquired the desig nation of the Cabal. Their ministry was rendered conspicuous by the shutting up of the Exchequer, the rupture of the triple 188 COOPEE alliance, and the mismanagement of the religious questions which then agitated the country ; but though the discredit of these measures has been generally fathered upon Lord Ashley, Mr, Christie, in the ' Shafte.5- buiy Papers' (ii. 77, 90), has sho-wn sa tisfactorily that he objected to and op posed the two former. Whether he were the opponent or supporter of them, the king, regarding him with personal affection, and appreciating his abilities, raised him to the earldom of Shaftesbury on April 23, 1672, Not satisfied with this elevation, the new earl aspired to a still higher posi tion, for the attainment of which the re moval of Lord Keeper Bridgeman was necessarj'. His intrigue for that purpose was successful. An opportunity soon was taken, on the lord keeper's resistance to some of the ministerial measures, to repre sent him as weak find incapable, and the Great Seal, being consequently taken from Mm, was given to Shaftesbury on the I7th of the following November, with the title of lord chancellor. While he held that office he resided at Exeter House, Though educated at Lincoln's Inn, he had never practised as a lawyer, Ms time during the rebeUion having been employed in active service, and since the Restoration in court attendance. The consequence was that he had so little respect for the profes sion for which he had been intended that he despised the forms by which its proceed ings were regulated, and even refused to assume the decent habit of ajudge, 'He sat on the bench in au ash-coloured go^wn, silver-laced, and full-ribboned pantaloons displayed, without any black at aU in his garb ; ' and at first, setting all rules at defiance, he was frequently obliged on rehearing to reverse his own orders, so that at last he became more reasonable, and submissive to the formulee of the court. Without regarding the extravagant praises of his eulogists on the one side, or the ad verse insinuations of his detractors on the other, his decrees in Chancery would appear to have met with general approbation ; for in Dryden's severe description of him under the name of Achitophel he gives him full credit for j udicial integrity. King Charles, too, is reported to have said of him, on de ciding a very difficult case, that ' he had a chancellor that was master of more law than aU his judges, and was possessed of more divinity than all his bishops,' It was not in Shafte.sbury's nature to be steady; even the high position which he enjoyed could not fix him. Finding the opposition more strong than he expected, and fearing the personal consequences which the leaders threatened, he deter mined to avert the danger by joining their ranks. Even while chanceUor he showed his wavering disposition by gra- COOPER dually deserting the measures he had originated, and endeavouring to thwart the objects of the king. But his imme diate hopes were disappointed: his plans being discovered, the parliament was pro rogued, and the Seal taken from him on November 9, 1678, after a tenure of less than a year. Immediately on his disgrace he was the chosen leader of the discontented party, and, without entering into the question as to the poUcy pursued on either side, for which this is not the place, we can only look to the repeated treachery of the man. From an arbitrary minister he was con verted into the head of a popular faction, and from a royal favourite he became the king's enemy, ungratefully repayiilg the honours and favours he had received by continual attempts to injure and ruin the family of his benefactor. It bears too strong a resemblance to his former de fections, and exhibits, if not the perfidy, at least the fickleness of his character. The remainder of his life was spent in factious opposition, his chief object appa rently being to exclude the Duke of "fork from the succession. For this pm'pose he entered into all sorts of intrigues and con spiracies, exciting the cry of ' No Popery,' and pretending first that his own life was in danger from the Roman Catholics, and next that the murder of the king was their object. Foremost in opposing aU the mea sures proposed by the court, his manoeuvres at one time subjected Mm to an imprison^ ment in the Tower for nearly a year, and at another they were so far successful that he forced himself again into the ministry as president of the new council of thirty. This event was eff'ected in April 1679, on the fall of the Earl of Danby, and during the excitement produced by the pretended Popish Plot, which had been openly nur tured by Shaftesbury, and aided by him through all ite ramifications, encouraging its inventor, the infamous Titus Oates, and explaining away his various contradictions, and those of Ms perjured coadjutors. Even diuing his presidency he continued to coun teract the wishes of his royal master ; and, opposing a bill offered by the king, limiting the powers of a Catholic successor to the throne, supported one to exclude the duke from the throne itself On this the king, who had never trusted his mutable minis ter, designating him (from his stature and Ms falsehood) as ' Little Sincerity,' dis missed him from his councils in the follow ing October, He then became more ¦violent and less cautious iu his endeavours to ha rass the court. He made an attempt to present -the Duke of York as a recusant, which was defeated by the judges suddenly discharging the grand jury; he advocated, if he did not originate, another bill of COOPER exclusion, which, though it passed the House of Commons, was triumphantly re jected by the Lords; and he even pro posed a bill divorcing the queen, that the king might many again and have a Pro testant heir. The violence of his agitation at length caused its own defeat. The people began to open their eyes, and the court ulti mately regained the ascendency. From the popular and patriotic leader, Shaftes bury became the suspected and trembling traitor. He was arrested and committed to the Tower in July 1681 ; and, though an indictment against him for compassing and imagining the death of the king was thrown out in the foUo'wing November by a gi'and jury packed by sheriffs of his own party (a medal to commemorate this event is the subject of Dryden's bitter poem called 'The Medal'), the discovery of a treasonable association, in which he pro bably was engaged, and the fear lest his connection with other desperate projecte should be betrayed, made it advisable for Mm to fly the country. By various dis guises and concealmente he eluded a war rant issued against Mm, and at last suc ceeded in escaping to Amsterdam, where, two months after, he died on January 21, 1683, of the gout in his stomach. His remains were conveyed to England, and buried at Wimborne St. Giles, where his great-grandson in 1732 erected a noble monument, with just such an encomiastic inscription as might be expected from an admiring descendant. WhUe on Ms mission to King Charles in Holland in 1660 he received an injury from the overtuming of his carriage, which caused him great inconvenience in his after-life, and obliged him to have continued recourse to medical advice. Among those who attended him was the celebrated philosopher John Locke, then a young man, ¦with whom his lordship was so much pleased that he took him into his household, entrusted to Mm the education of both hia son and grandson, and, when in office, placed him in some responsible and pi'ofltable positions. Shaftesbury's publi cations are conflned to speeches and poli tical pamphlets at different periods of his life, and contain abundant evidence, were all else wanting, of his unprincipled muta bility and his restless turbulence. Shaftesbury is charged with participating in all the vices of the time except that of being tempted by pecuniary bribes ; and, though aU must acknowledge his talents, his eloquence, and his ¦wit, his memory must be regarded with repugnance by all who remember the various desertions and intrigues of his career, and the factious fickleness of his character. His only claim for the respect and gratitiide of posterity is COPLEY 189 the Habeas Corpus Act, which was passed by his instrumentality. The earl married three times — flrst so early as 1639, to Margaret, daughter of Thomas Lord Coventry, lord keeper, ¦who died in July 1649 ; secondly, in April 1660, to Frances, daughter of David Cecil, Eari of Exeter, who died in 1654 ; and lastly, in 1656, to Margaret, daughter of WiUiam Lord Spencer of Wormleighton, and niece to the Earl of Southampton, who sui"yived him. He had issue by his second wife only, two sons, of whom one survived him. Of his descendants the third earl was the cele brated author of the ' Characteristics ; ' and the present, the seventh earl, has already acquired a high reputation for his charitable exertions for the good of mankind. COPLEY, John Singleton (Loed Ltiid- huest), was born at Boston in America on May 2i, 1772, before the war of indepen dence had commenced, and he lived to see the disseverance of those .states, the union of which was the result of that war. His father, John Singleton Copley, of Irish ex traction, was then practising in that city the art in which he became afterwards dis tinguished in England, whither he brought his family when Ms son was two years old. His fame was soon estabUshed as a painter, both in portraitm-e and history; and the high value at which his works are now esti mated is proved by the large prices they produced in the recent sale of the late lord chancellor's collection. The artist died in 1816, aged seventy-four, when his son had already taken the flrst steps in his success ful career ; and his wife, who was a daugljter of Richard Clarke, Esq., survived till 1836, happy in witnessing the highest honours by which her son was graced. Young Copley was originally destined for his father's profes.sion, in the elemente of which he made some progress, but the plan was happily set aside in consequence of the mental powers he early exhibited. At the age of nineteen he was sent to Trinity College, Cambridge, where he pursued his studies so energeticaUy that he took his degree of B.A. in 1794, with the honours of second wrangler and Smith's prizeman, and of M.A. in 1797, having in the interim been elected a fellow of his college. His deUght in mathematical studies, and also in practical chemistry and mechanics, he retained throughout his long life, and his attainments in them were of infinite service to him in his professional career. This he comrnenced by entering himself as a member of Lincoln's Jnn, and by becoming a pupU of Mr. Tidd, from whose instructions so many men have risen to eminence. He spent part of the foUo'wing years in visiting the land of his birth. On June 8, 1804, he was called to the bar, and selected the Midland Circuit. One 190 COPLEY of his earliest clienfa was Lord Palmerston, the late prime minister, then first entering into political life, for whom he appeared before a committee of the House of Com mons on a double return for the borough of Horsham in 1806, but faUed in securing the seat. The only book which Mr. Copley ever pubUshed with his name was a report of that case. Both on the circuit and in Westminster Hall he gradually acquired a sufficient practice to induce him to accept the degree of serjeant-at-law in 1813. En tering now in some measure into public Ufe, he avowed tory, or what would now be called conservative, principles, to the sur prise of some of his contemporaries, who charged him -with having been notorious in the early part of his life for the ultra-libe rality of his professions. Whatever were his youthfuL notions, and however un guardedly he may have expressed them among his private associates, it is hardly fair to refuse a man the exercise of more mature reflection, and to bind him down to the rash phrases of a juvenile imagination, especially when he had never joined any whig society, nor connected himself -with any pubUc measure of that party. But the subject of the charge ever denied ite truth ; and the best proof of the sincerity of his convictions is his steady adherence to them, through good report and bad report, for the long period of fifty subsequent years. As a leading advocate, by the beautiful simplicity of his style, by the logical ar rangement of his arguments, and by the apt ness of his illustrations, his speeches were wonderfully effective both on juries and judges. The government were so struck with the talent which he exhibited that in October I8I7 he was specially retained for the crown in the indictments against Brand- reth and others for high treason tried at Derby. In the next year, besides being made Mug's serjeant and chief justice of Chester, he was introduced into parliament for the ministerial borough of Yarmouth in the Isle of Wight, which he soon after ex changed for Ashburton; and in 1826 he had the honour of being elected as repre sentative of his o-wn university. In the senate his great capacity for debate was so efficiently displayed that in July 1819 he was appointed solicitor- general, and received the usual accolade of knighthood. During his tenure of this oifice the spirit of sedition was prevalent throughout England, and in the legislative remedies that were then introduced, as well •as in the prosecution of Thistlewood and the other Cato Street conspirators. Sir John Cop ley exhibited his extraordinary talent. In the unfortunate trial also of Queen Caroline it was his duty to take an active part, in the performance of which he tempered the conviction he felt of the guilt of the ac- COPLEY cused lady -with the decorum due to her exalted rank, satisfying his employers by his admirable performance, without in curring the obloquy to which they were subjected. At this time Lord Tenterden, in a letter to Sir Egerton Bridges, gives this opinion of him : ' The soUcitor-general has less learning than the attomey-general (Gifford), but a much better person, coun tenance, and manner ; a good head and a kind heart, and not deficient in learning. I suppose he will soon fill one of our high offices in the law.' (Lord CampbeWs Ch, Just. iii. 296.) In Januai-y 1824 he was promoted to the attorney-generalship, and on September 14, 1826, he received the patent of master of the Rolls. He held the latter office only eight months. On Mr. Canning becoming prime minister Lord Eldon resigned the Great Seal, which was deUvered to Sfr John Copley on AprU 30, 1827, as lord chan cellor, he having been created Baron Lyndhurst a few days before. This his first chancellorship lasted three years and seven months, during the successive admi nistrations of Mr. Canning, Lord Goderich, and the Duke of Wellington, On the ac cession of the whigs to power in I WiUiam IV., he resigned the Seal on November 22, 1830, but did not remain unemployed quite two months. He accepted the ap pointment of lord chief baron of the Ex chequer on January 18, I83I, in the place of Sir William Alexander, with the perfect understanding that he retained his poUtical opinions. His independence of ministerial influence was sho-wn by his resistance, -with all his energy and sti-ength, of the biUs for reform in parUament, and of various other measures proposed by the party whUe it remained in power. When the conservatives regained the administration he was at once replaced at the head of the Court of Chancery, on November 21, 1834, retaining the office of lord chief baron for the next month. His presidency of the Exchequer had exhibited his high judicial capacity, and had been prmcipaUy distinguished by the luminous judgment which he pronounced in the great case of Small r. Attwood, which, though it was reversed on appeal in the House of Lords by a close majority of a single vote, was by most people considered to be well founded, and by aU, whether supporters or opposers, greatly adnured. After a short term of flve months he again, on April 23, 1835, resigned the Seal to his poUtical opponents, who retained power for the next six years. During that interval he maintained the ascen dency he had gained in the House of Lords, by his powerful opposition to the various innovations introduced by the whig ministers, and by submitting to CORBET the house useful amendments of the law ; and stiU more by the annual comprehensive ¦exposure of the ineffective legislation at the end of each session, in which he visited the successive failures 'with alternate rebuke and sarcasm. These regular attacks in creasing the general unpopularity of the party, the ministers were at length obliged to resign, and Lord Lyndhurst was in stalled in his tMrd and last chancellorship on September 3, 1841. His merits had been recognised and rewarded in the pre vious year by his university electing him their lord high steward. For nearly five years he devoted himself to his judicial duties, till the retirement of Sir Robert Peel, when he resigned the Seal on July 4, 1846, When the conservative party regained power for short periods in 1852 and 1858, Lord Lyndhurst felt him self too old to undertake the responsible labours of the chancellorship, or to accept the offered seat in the cabinet, being in his eightieth year at the first of these periods ; but during nearly the whole time since Ms resignation to almost the last year of his life, when he had attained his ninetieth year, he entered 'with Ms accustomed spirit into most of the constitutional questions that arose, and surprised the house by his intellectual vigour. No statesman maintained for so long a succession of years a name so unsuUied as Lord Lyndhurst, and few have died in pos session of more veneration and regard. His death occurred from natural decay on Oc tober 18, 1863, in the ninety-third year of his age, at his house in George Street, Hanover Square, where his father had lived and died. He manied, first, Sarah Geary, th'e ¦daughter of Charles Brunsden, Esq., and widow of Colonel Charles Thomas, of the First Foot-guards, who feU at Waterloo, By her he had three daughters. His se cond wife was Georgiana, daughter of Lewis Goldsmith, Esq., by whom he had one daughter. COEBET, Reginald, was descended from an honourable family seated iu ShropsMre ever since the Conquest, some members of which were barons of the realm from the reign of Henry II, to that of Edward IL, and others were ancestors of baronetcies, all of which are extinct except that of Corbet of Moreton Corbet, created in 1808, Reginald was the second son of Sir Robert Corbet of Moreton Corbet, by EUzabeth, the daughter of Sir Henry Ver non of Haddon. He pursued his legal studies at the Middle Temple, and was elected reader there in autumn 1651, but his reading was deferred till the following Lent. On October 27, 1558, he received a summons to teke upon him the degree of the coif in the following Easter, but Queen COEDELL 191 Mary's death intervening, a new writ be came necessary, and the solemnity of his inauguration took place on April 19, 1659. On the I6th of the next October he was constituted a judge of the Queen's Bench, where he sat till his death in 1566. (Plowden's Reports, 356.) He married Alice, daughter of John Gratewood, Esq., and by her he had a son Richard, who was father of John Corbet, of Stoke in Shropshire, created a baronet in 1627, This title became extinct in 1750 by the death of its sixth possessor -without issue ; but Ms nephew, Corbet d'Avenant, succeeding to Ms estates and assuming his name, had a new creation in 1786, which also became extinct at his death in 1828. (Wotton's Baronet, U. 74, 272, 274, 312,) COEDELL, William, the son of .lohn Cordell, Esq., and Eva, daughter of Henry Webb, of Kimbolton, was bom at Edmon ton in Middlesex, and, having become pos sessed of the manor of Long Melford in Suffolk, he fixed his residence there, his family having been long seated in that county. From a branch of it descended Sir Robert Cordell, who received the dig nity of baronet in 1660, which became extinct in 1704 by the death of his grand son without issue. After being educated at Cambridge, he was admitted a member of Lincoln's Inn, and was called to the bar in 1643. He sat iu the parliament of March 1558 as mem ber for Steyning, and on September 30, two months after Queen Mary came to the crown, he was made her solicitor-general. On the 1st of the foUowing November the benchers of the society of Lincoln's Inn appointed him their butler, and on February 2, 1654, he was fined in the sum of ' xxvjs. viijf/.' ' for not exercysing the office.' (Black Book, iv. 270, 272.) TMs curious entry seems to show that the junior mem bers of the bench had this duty imposed upon them, for in the Lent of that year he was nominated to the post of reader. As soUcitor-general he took a part in the pro secution of Sir .Thomas Wyat for his at tempt against the queen ; and on November 5, 1567, he was promoted to the office of master of the Rolls and knighted. In the last parliament of Queen Mary, being then member for Essex, he was chosen speaker ; but her death at the close of it made no diff'erence in his judicial position, which he retained for nearly twenty-fom- years. (Dugdale's Orig. 231.) Troubling himself apparently very little with politics, though successively member for Middlesex and Westminster, he was regarded ¦with favour by the court, and Queen Elizabeth paid him the compliment of commencing her progress in Suffolk, iu 1578, by visiting him at Long Melford 192 COENHILL Hall, where he gloriously feasted her. He died on May 17, 1581. He married Mary, the daughter of Richard Clopton, Esq., but left no chil dren. COENHILL, Geevase db, was so called from the ward of that name in London, where probably he resided, and was clearly a man of high note and authority there, holding in 2, 3, 6, and 7 Henry IL the post of sheriff (Madox, i. 204, 602), an officer in whom the temporal govemment of the city was then vested. After the latter year he is not noticed in connection with the metropolis ; but his next residence being in Surrey, he was appointed sheriff of that county in 10 Henry IL, 1164, and remained in that office, with the exception of one year, until 1183. In 15 Henry IL, and for the seven suc ceeding years, he held the same responsible office in Kent, where he had a seat at Ijuke- dale, in the parish of Littleboume ; and in the contest -with Becket he sided strongly -with the king. Among the justices itinerant in the 15, 16, 20, and 23 Henry IL, I169-II77, his name appears as acting in various counties. It does not clearly appear whether at that time he performed the same duties in the Cm-ia Regis, but it is certain that he attended there in 28 Henry IL, 1182, as his name is inserted as one of the barons and justiciers before whom fines of that year were taken. (Madox, i. 113, 123, 132, 143, 144.) From the termination of his sheriffalty in Surrey, it may be presumed that his death occurred in 29 or 80 Henry II. He left three sons, Henry, Reginald, and Ralph, the two former of whom held the office of sheriff of Kent for several years. Henry was bailiff of London, and also sheriff of Surrey. He was chaucellor of St. Paul's, and had the management of the Mint (Cambium) of England in 3 Richard 1. Reginald was the next named justice itinerant. (Hasted, i, 178 ; Lord Lyttelton's Henry II. 6830 COENHILL, Reginald de, was the second son of the above Gervase de CornhiU, and after the death of his elder brother Henry, in 4 or 5 Richard I., he, or his son of the same name, held the sheriffalty of Kent, with some short interval, until 5 Henry HI, His seat at Minster, in the Isle of Thanet, acquired the name of 'Sheriff's Court,' which it still retains ; and he him self, discontinuing his own name, was styled Reginald le Viscount, even his widow being designated Vicecomitessa Oantii. (Hasted, i. 178-9.) He succeeded his brother also in the management of the Mint of England, and continued in con nection with it and with the Treasm-y till late in the reign of John. (Mado.v, i. 459.) COENHILL That he acted in a judicial capacity in 1 John appears from the Rotulus de Oblatis (p. 47), where certain persons are summoned before him and John de GestUng and WU liam de Wrotham, also justiciers. In the fines of that reign his name occurs as being present in court till 10 John. Various other employments show that he was high in the king's confidence. In 5 John he was one of the custodes of the ports of England and the quinzime of mer chants ; and in the next year he and Wil liam de Wrotham were appointed ' supe- riores custodes,' when the king made an assize ' de moneta custodienda, et retonsori- bus et falsonarUs monete nostre destmen- dis.' He was a staunch adherent of that king- in all Ms earlier troubles, and received many substantial marks of his favom-. The Reginald de CornhiU who, in the latter conteste of Ms reign, joined the barons, and who was one of those taken prisoner in Rochester Castle in December 1216, was probably Ms son, to whom, and to William de ComMU, the ' Cameraria' was- granted in 14 John, His -wife, IsabeUa, paid a fine of five thousand marks for his liberation, (Rot, Claus. i. 241 ; Rot. Pat, 189.) COENHILL, William: de (Bishop of Licheield and Co^veniet), either the son or the nephew of the above Reginald de CornhiU, was an officer of the Exchequer, and connected with the Mint of England. (Madox, i, 338.) Some houses in London were granted to him by the Mng in 5 John ; and in that year Geofl&ey Fitz-Peter was ordered to make a provision for him of twenty marks o^ut of the first ecclesiastical benefice of the king's patronage that should drop. In 6 John he had a grant of twenty acres of the wood of Tilgholt in Kent ; in 7 John he was made rector of Maidstone by the Mng's col lation; in the same year he was appointed custos of the abbey of Malmesbury; in the next year he had the same office in the bishopric of LincoM, and in 9 John he was raised to the archdeaconry of Huntingdon. (Rot de Liberate, 69, 80 ; Chart 137, 157; Pfl/. 57, 65, 73.) His name occurs as a justicier in fines levied in 10 John, 1208, but not in any other year. In the two next years, and in 14 John, Ms personal attendance on the king is noticed ou the rolls, and in the latter year he was presented to the churches of Somerton in Somersetehire, and of Fereby in Yorkshire, and, in conjunction ¦with Regi nald, the son of Reginald de Comhill, re ceived a grant of ' Cameraria nostra ' from the king. (Rot Pat. 95, 96.) On January 25, 1215, 17 John, he was consecrated Bishop of Coventry and Lich field, and dying on June 19, 1223. he was COEM'WALL 'buried in Lichfield Cathedral. (Godwin, 315.) COENWALL, Eael oe. See Robeet, COSSALE, William de, so caUed from his manor of Cossale in Nottinghamshire, was a benefactor of Newstead Abbey in that county. He was appointed a baron of the Exchequer in 3 Edward HL, but is not mentioned after the I4th year. (CaL Rot. Pat 106 ; Rot Orig. U. 78, 81 ; Inquis. p, m, U, 97.) COTESMOBE, John, resided at Baldwin Brightwell in Oxfordshire. He married Florence, the dai^hter of Sir Simon Har court, ancestor of Lord ChanceUor Harcourt. He appears among the advocates in the Year Book tiU 8 Henry V., and was made a serjeant-at-law in 5 Henry V. In 9 Henry V. he was sent as a justice of assize to Norwich and other places with Justice WUliam Babington, (CaL Exch. iu. 380.) He afterwards became one of the king's Serjeants, and was elevated to the bench as a judge of the Common Pleas on October 15, 1429, 8 Henry VI. After sitting in that court for nearly ten years, he succeeded as chief justice there on January 20, 1439, 17 Henry 'VI., but presided Uttle more than eight months, the executors of Ms wiUbeing on October 14 following commanded to give up the records to his successor. He was buried at Brightwell, where there is a monumental brass to his memory. (Notes and Queries, 1st S, x. 620.) COTTENHAM, Eael of. See C. C. Pepts. COTYNGHAM, Thomas de, was one of the clerks in Chancery for nearly thirty years, from 14 to 43 Edward HI., 1340-1369, but only on one occasion is mentioned as keeper of the Great Seal — viz., on the death of the chancellor, John de Offord, when it was placed in the custody of him and others from May 28 tiU June 16, 1349. (Rot Claus. 23 Edw. HI. p. 1, m. 8, 10.) During part of this period, however, he went to Ireland as master of the RoUs there, to which office he was appointed in 30 Edward HI., 1356. (Cal Rot Pat 166.) He was no doubt brought up in the Chancery, as he was presented by the king so early as 13 Edward IL, 1319, with the church of Wygeton, and acted as the attomey of WiUiam de Herlaston, a clerk in the Chancery, m 1325. (N, Fcedera, U. 401, 606.) ^ K > > COVENTEY, Thomas. With John Co ventry, lord mayor of London in the reign of Henry VL, and one of the executors of the reno-wned Richard Whittingtouj began the prosperity of this family, which derived its surname from the city of Coventry, where it was originaUy estabUshed. One of Ms descendants, Richard Coventiy, was settled at Cassington in Oxfordshire, and by his ¦wife, a daughter of — Turner, had two COVENTEY 19,3 sons, the younger of whom was Thomas the future judge. He was bom in 1647, and educated at Oxford, where he took the de gree of M.A. on June 2, 1565, and afterwards was elected fellow of BalUol CoUege. He entered the _ Inner Temple, and became reader there in autiimn 1593, He was one of those named on Sir Edward Coke's pre ferment to succeed him in the solicitor's place, and Bacon (Woj-ks, xu. 157) tells Su- Robert CecU, though with a profession of disbelief, that it was asserted that Coventry had bought his interest for 2000 angels. Neither of them obtained the promotion, and it was not tiU two months before the queen's death that Coventry received a ¦writ to take upon him the degree of the coif in the foUowing Easter. On January 13, 1606, he was appointed a judge of the Common Pleas, and knighted. He enjoyed his place less than a year. Dying on December 12, 1606, he was buried at Croome d'Abitot in Worcestershire, His estate, called Earles Croome, he had acquired by his marriage with Margaret, the daughter and heir of — ¦ Jeffreys, of that place, and it stiU is the chief seat of his family. The judge left three sons, of whom Tho mas was the lord keeper. COVENTEY, Thomas (Loed Coventet), was the eldest son of the above-noticed judge. He was bom in 1578, and, having passed the flrst fourteen years of his life under the tmtion of Ms parents, he was placed as a gentleman commoner at BalUol College, Orford, at Michaelmas 1592, At the end of three years he was admitted a member of the Inner Temple, and, ha'ving been called to the bar, he is mentioned in Coke's Reporte as an advocate so early as I6I1 ; he was elected reader in autumn 1616, By the respect he showed to Sir Edward Coke he entailed upon himself the enmity of Bacon, who sought to impede his pro fessional advance by prejudicing the Mng against him. When Coventry was a candi date for the recordership of London, Bacon suggested to the king that 'it is very material, as these times are, that your majesty have some care that the recorder succeeding be a temperate and discreet man, , , , The man upon whom the choice is like to faU, wMch is Coventry, I hold doubtful for your service ; not but that he is well learned and an honest man, but he hath been, as it were, bred by Lord Coke and seasoned in his ways,' The shaft fell harmless, and Coventry was not only elected recorder on November 16, I6I6, but on March 14, 1617, was taken into the king's own service as soUcitor-general, and kmghted. Four years after, also, when Sir Henry Yelverton, the attomey-general, was condemned by the Star Chamber, Coventry received the appointment, on January II, 0 194 COVENTRY 1621. One of the flrst duties he had to perform in his new office was to take a message from the Lords to Bacon, requiring Mm to send speciflc answers to the charges against him. Soon after he had to pro secute Edward Floyde for his presumption in calling the king's daughter and her hus band 'Goodman Palsgrave and Goodwife Palsgrave ; ' but he was not answerable for the brutel sentence which the Lords pro nounced upon the silly speaker. (Pari, Hist. i. 1239, 1260.) On King James's death he was retained in his office by King Charles, and before the end of the year was called upon to supply the place of Bishop Williams, re ceiving the Great Seal as lord keeper on November I, 1625. His letter to Bucking ham forms a strong contrast with Bacon's on a similar occasion. It is a manly and modest doubt of his o-wn capacity for the place, a dutiful submission, after fuU con sideration, to the royal -will, and a courtly acknowledgment of the duke's favour. But there is nothing in it that shows any previous application, nor any undue reUance on the interference of the favourite. He had to open the second parUament of the reign, and soon after to deliver the Mng's reprimand to the Commons for their negUgence in completing the supply, and their encouragement of seditious speeches. He had Uttle to do in reference to the imprisonment of the Earl of Arundel and the demand of the Peers for his release, except as the messenger of the king and the organ of the house. The angry disso lution of this parliament, notwithstanding his earnest endeavours to prevent such a termination, soon after taking place, the king endeavoured to supply his necessities by forced loans ; but, not succeeding to his ¦wish, he caUed a third parUament in March 1628, Sir Thomas Coventry opened this in an eloquent speech, which would have been more effective had it not conteined an intimation that, if there were not a readi ness in voting suppUes, the king might resort to other means by the use of Ms prerogatives. But before the end of the session he had to pray of the king a more explicit answer to the Petition of Right, which was accordingly given on June 7, 1628, in the well-known formula, ' Soit droit fait comme il est desire.' (ParL Hist, ii. 218, 409.) On April 10 the lord keeper was created a baron by the title of Lord Coventry of Aylesborou^h in the county of Worcester. When Buckingham appUed for the dormant office, and almost unlimited powers of loi-d high constable. Lord Coventry showed a patriotic spirit in opposing the grant, and thus incurring the hatred of the favourite. Peremptorily accosting him, the duke said, ' "Who made you lord keeper ? ' ' The king,' COVENTEY said Coventry boldly. 'It's false,' said Buckingham ; ' 'tw»s I did make you, and you shaU flnd that I who made you can and will unmake you.' Coventry retorted, ' Did I conceive I held my place by your favour, I would presently unmake myself, by rendering the Seal to his majesty,' Buckingham would have put his threat into execution, and probably have obtained the Seal for Sir Henry Yelverton, had he not been assassinated in the foUo^wing August, This parUament, after another session, was hastily dissolved like the former, the close of it being distinguished by the forcible detention of the speaker (Sir John Finch) in the chair while the protestetion of the Commons against tonnage and poundage was passed. No other parUament met for the eleven remaining years of Coventry's life — a cir- cumstence which, however impoUtic, could not be distasteful to Ms personal disposi tion. He was more of a lawyer than a poUtician, and would no doubt be glad to be relieved from defending measures which he could not honestiy justify. The holder of the Great Seal was no longer, as in Wolsey's time, the director of the stete; other and more active spirite acquired the ascendency, and their opinions prevaUed. No one can read the history of the time ¦without seeing that Coventry had but Uttle influence in ¦the councils of his sovereign, which were in a great measure directed personaUy by the Mng, under the guidance, first of a favourite, and then of unscru pulous and intemperate advisers. In times when all men's actions were open to cen sure, and none escaped who could be charged with too violent a support of the royal prerogative, or •with too manifest a ten dency to infringe on the Uberty of the subject, the very absence of the name of one who held so high an official position teUs strongly in Ms favour, as sho^wmgthat his personal demeanour and his imputed principles were not to any great extent obnoxious to those who were assuming the rule and punishing their opponents. In LUbum's case, though Coventry presided on the condemnation, Ms estete was not in the first instance attempted to be charged with the compensation awarded, and it vras not till the estates upon which the repara tion was voted were disposed of in another manner, nor till eight years after the lord keeper's death, that the pertinacious suf ferer conceived the idea of coming on Lord Coventi-y's heir. The attempt was frus trated, even in the strong excitement of that period, by a large majority ; and the vote, though perhaps infiuenced by some personal motives, was no doubt dictated principaUy by the conviction that the cruelty and illegality of the sentence against LUburn could not be justly imputed to the COVENTEY lord keeper. At the same time it is diffi cult altogether to excuse his lordship from participation in the iniquitous punishments which were too often awarded in the Star Chamber, except on the presumption that, though presiding, he had but a single voice, and that, by the course of the court, he gave his opinion last, and was compelled to pronounce the censure of the majority. That his inclinations were on the side of mercy the judgment in Chambers's case proves. In Henrj' Sherfield's case, for breaking a painted glass window, he was, after giving a lenient sentence, actually outvoted ; and in the case of Dr. Leighton, for pubUshing ' A Plea against Prelacy,' and in other similar accusations, it reqmres not much discrimination to decide to whom the severity of the punishment is to be attributed. (State Trials, Ui. 374, 883, 519, 1315.) In April 1635 James MaxweU and Alice his wife were brought before the Star Chamber, for asserting in a petition to the Mng that the lord keeper disobeyed his majesty and oppressed the subject, and were fined 3000/. to the king and the same sum to the lord keeper, the female narrowly escaping a whipping moved for by one of the members. (Cal. St. Papers [1685], At the introduction of the imposition of sMp-money, in the speeches which he ad dressed to the judges previously to the commencement of the circuits both in June 1685 and Lent 1636, he enjoined them, in their charges to the grand jury, to urge the people to pay their contributions with iilacrity and cheerfulness ; but from his position as lord keeper he was precluded ftom giving any legal opinion on the case of Hampden, who resisted the levy, the judgment being pronounced by the twelve judges alone, and he was not a party to, nor a witness of, the consequences that resulted from these proceedings ; for before the next parliament met his death occurred at Durham House in the Strand (where the Adelphi now stands), on January 14, 1640, and his remains were removed for in terment in the famUy vault at Croome d'Abitot. His last message to the Mng was a request ' that his majesty would take aU distastes from the parliament summoned against April -with patience, and suffer it to sit ¦without an unkind dissolution.' (Hacket's Bp. Williams, ii, 137.) He had held the Seal for above fourteen years, and every writer of any authority has refrained from making any specific charge against him. Even 'Whiteloeke, who had evidentiy no goodwiU towards him, can say no more than he was ' of no transcen dent parte or fame.' His other contempo raries differ from this judgment, and unite va. praising Mm. Croke calls him ' a pious, prudent, and learned man, and strict in his COURTENEYE 195 practice, ... he died in great honour, and much lamented by all the people.' Claren don says he discharged all his earlier offices ' with great abUity and singular reputation for integrity,' and that in his place of lord keeper 'he enjoyed it with an universal reputation (and sure justice was never better admimstered).' Of his ' parts' the same author says, ' He was a man of won derful gravity and ¦wisdom, and understood not only the whole science and mystery of the law, at least equally with any man who had ever sate in that place, but had a clear conception of the whole poUcy of the government, both of Church and state, which by the unskilfulness of some well- meaning men justled each the other too much. He knew the temper, disposition, and genius of the kingdom most exactly; saw their spirits grow every day more sturdy, inquisitive, and impatient; and therefore naturaUy abhorred all innovar tions.' Anthony "Wood, Fuller, and David Lloyd are equally encomiastic; and Lord Clarendon says, in recording his death, that he had 'the rare felicity in being looked upon generally throughout the Mng- dom with great aff'ection, and a singular esteem, when very few men in any high trust were so.' A charge of bribery was got up against him by a disappointed suitor, but was so palpably unfounded and malignant that the Star Chamber visited the contriver and aU his assistanfa with severe penalties of purse and person. (Rush- worth, ii. App, 30.) Lord Coventry was twice married. His first ¦wife was Sarah, daughter of Edward Sebright, of Besford in Worcestershire ; and his second was Elizabeth, daughter of John Aldersey, of Spurston in Cheshire, and widow of WiUiam Pitchford, Esq. By both of them he left issue. His grand son, Thomas, was advanced in 1697 to the titles of Viscount Deerhurst and Earl of Coventry, with a special limitation, under which they are now held, the original barony having become extinct in I7I9, by the death of the fourth earl without male issue. COTJETENEYE, Hugh de (Eael op Devon), was at the head of the commission of justices itinerant into Bedfordshire in 4 Edward IH., 1330, but he seems to have been placed there more as one of the prin cipal barons of that county than as in any other way connected with the law. He was also at the head of another commission, for the trial of offenders in the foreste, in the same year, (Abb, Rot. Orig. ii, 240 He was the eldest son of Hugh de Courte neye, Baron of Oakhampton, and Eleanor, daughter of Hugh Despencer the elder. Earl of Winchester. His father died in 1291, when he was sixteen years of age, o2 196 COUETENEYE He had no sooner attained his majority than he joined in various expeditions under Edward I., by whom he was knighted. He was summoned, also, to all the parliamen^ts as a baron, both imder that king and his two successors, until 8 Edward IIL, 1334 ; and on February 22, in the following year, he was created Earl of Devon, as the lineal descendant of Baldwin de RiparUs, the seventh earl. He died in 1340, 14 Ed ward IIL, and was buried at Cowick, near Exeter. By his wife Agnes, daughter of John, Lord St. John, of Basing, he had six chil dren. The title still remains in one of his descendants. The eighteenth earl was created Marquis of Exeter in 1563 ; but, dying without issue three years after wards, tMs additional honour became ex tinct. COUETENEYE, WlLLIAM DE (AECH BISHOP OE Cantebbuet), was the grandson of the last-mentioned Hugh de Courteneye, Earl of Devon, being the fourth son of Hugh, the second earl, by Blargaret, daugh ter of Humphrey de Bohun, Earl of Here ford, and Elizabeth, a daughter of Edward I. He was bom at Exminster about 1327, was educated at Oxford, where he took his degree of Doctor of Civil Law, and was afterwards chancellor of that university. With such connections he soon procured rich benefices, among which were prebends at Exeter, Wells, and York, He was elevated to the bishopric of Hereford in 1369, aud thence translated in 1375 to London. Among the followers of Wickliffe, whose opinions at this time gained so much ground as to alarm the Church, was John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster ; and when, towards the end of Edward's reign. Bishop Courteneye, in obedience to the pope's mandate, summoned the reformer to be examined, the duke attended him to St, Paul's Church, where the meeting was held. There some violent words passed between the duke and the bishop, which ended in an unseemly threat on the part of the former. The assembled people, who as yet cared little for the religious question, fancying their bishop in danger, prepared to defend him, and by their clamours com pelled the duke, who was no favourite with them, to retire. The populace, outside, excited by other reporte to his disadvantage, joined in the outcry; and the ferment was not appeased till they had broken open the Marshalsea prison, ransacked the duke's house in the Savoy, and contemptuously dragged his arms through the streets. On Edward's death, which occurred soon after, it was not likely that the council of the young king, the Duke of Lancaster being at its head, would allow the prosecu tion against Wickliffe to proceed. His CO"WPER doctrine, accordingly, spread widely through,- the kingdom; and though he died at his- living of Lutterworth in 1.384, his foUow ers, under the name of LoUards, rapidly increased. On the murder of Archbishop Sudbury, the king, on August 10, 1881, appointed Bishop Courteneye Chancellor of England, and assented to his election as Archbishop of Canterbury. Thus it would appear that the Duke of Lancaster no longer felt any animosity against him ; yet it is difficult to account for Courteneye's resigning the Seal three months after, on November 80. During the remainder of the archbishop's life, a period of nearly fifteen years, he was engaged in various contests -with his bishops as to the right of visitation, in aU of wMch he was triumphant ; but the demand which he made on his clergy, of a sixtieth part of their revenues, being resisted by the Bishop of London, was carried by appeal to the court of Rome, where it was not decided while he lived. He died at his palace at Maidstone, on July 81, 1896, and was buried in the church there. A monument was erected to his memory in his cathedral church, to which, besides contributing largely to the erection of the nave, he gave various rich pre sents. Walsingham declares that he was digni fied with a cardinal's hat ; but the doubts of others seem to be supported by the absence of all notice of the fact in the- epitaph inscribed on his gravestone in Maidstone Church. This edifice he had entirely rebuilt, and had restored the church of Mepham ; besides many Uberal donations, among others to the church of Exminster, his native to'wn. He is represented as haying a noble pre sence and courtly manners, -with the learn ing fit for his position, a clear and acute understanding, and a favourite ¦with the monks of his cathedral. ( Godwin, 120, 186 ; Weever, 225, 285.) CO'WPEE, William (Eael Cowpek), descended from that branch of the famUy which held a respectable position in Sussex in the reign of Edward IV., and then resided at Strode in the parish of Slingfield, His immediate ances^tor became an alderman of London in Elizabeth's time, and had a son, Sir WiUiam, who was created a baronet by Charles I., and suffered imprisonment for his loyalty to that unfortunate king. His gi'ond- son the second baronet represented Hertford in severalparliaments of Charles II. and WilUam IU,, adopting the whig side in poUtics, and -taking a prominent part in the proceedings against James H, when Duke of York. By his wife Sarah, daughter of Sir Samuel Hoiled, of London, he had two, sons, WiUiam and Spencer, William Co-wper was born at Hertford CO'WPEE ¦Castle about four or five years after the Restoration. He was some years at a school at St. Albans, and became a stu dent at the Middle Temple on March 8, I68I-2, His years of probation were di vided between his law-books and his plea^ sures, the latter it is reported claiming the greatest share, but the former evidently not neglected. 'Whatever were his ex cesses during that interval, it may be pre- ^sumed that before the end of it he termi nated them by Ms marriage about 1686 with Judith, daughter of Sir Robert Booth, a merchant of London living in Walbrook, He was called to the bar on May 25, 1688. Bred up in the principles of political li berty and ¦with a deep hatred of popery, his youthful ardour prompted him a few months later to offer his personal aid in resisting the obtuse tyranny of James II, He and his brother Spencer, with a band of men, joined the Prince of Orange in his march to London ; but on the peaceful establishment of William and Mary on the throne he returned to the stage of his profession, on which, whether on the Home Circuit or in the courte of Westminster, he soon became a favom-ite performer. He was chosen recorder of Colchester, and got into considerable practice within the first five years after his call. Before Easter 1694 he had been raised to the position of king's counsel, and by his assistance to the attorney and soUcitor general in the prose cutions arising out of the assassination plot in 1696 he conspicuously demonstrated his superiority as an advocate. In the only other state trial in which he appears — that of Lord Mohun for the murder of Richard ¦Coote — the peers paid him the compliment of naming him particularly to sum up the ¦evidence instead of Sir John Hawles, the solicitor-general, whom from his dulness and lowness of voice they could not under stand. But, as it was contrary to the eti quette of the bar, Sir John was allowed to proceed, (State Trials, xii. 1446, xiu. 128, 1055.) In 1695 he was returned with his father to parliament for Hertford, and tradition reports that on the day of Ms entrance into the house he spoke three times, and with such effect as to estabUsh his character as an orator. He represented the same con stituency in the parliament of 1698, but in the foUowing year the family interest in the borough was disturbed, and his own pro fessional success materiaUy endangered, by the unfounded charge brought against his brother Spencer of the murder of a young Quaker named Sarah Stout. Notwith- standmg the acquittal that followed, the influence of the Cowpers in Hertford was so damaged that they did not venture to stand in the election of I70I ; but WiUiam was returned for Beeralston m that and the CO'WPEE 197 last parUament of WilUam III. and in the flrst of Queen Anne, at the end of which he ceased to be a commoner. The parlia mentary history records oMy two important speeches delivered by him while in the House of Commons — one on the bill of attainder against Sir John Fenwick in 1696, and the other on the Aylesbury case in 1704, in support of the right of the subject to seek redress at law against a retuming officer for corruptly refusing to receive his legal vote. He also defended Lord Somers when impeached, and in 1704 he was censured by the house for pleading for Lord Halifax. (ParL Hist v. 1007, 1141, vi. 279; Burnet, iv. 480; LuttreU, V. 488,) When the tory ascendency began to be diminished, the removal of Lord Keeper Wright, the weakest and most inefficient man of the party, was determined on. Passing over the attomey and solicitor general, Co'wper, at the urgent instigation of the Duchess of Marlborough, was se lected fi-om the whig ranks to hold the Seal It was delivered to him as lord keeper on October 11, 1705. The com mencement of his judicial career was illus trated by a noble reform. It had been a custom of long standing for the officers of the court and the members of the bar to present new years' gifts to the chancellor or keeper, a practice which, if not actual bribery, he considered looked very like it. These he at once refused to receive ; and the extent of the sacriflce may be esti mated, if not by his -wife's calculation that they amounted to nearly 3000/., by Bur net's more probable computation of 1500/, With such a proof of his moderation and delicacy, it is curious that he did not abo lish the equally obnoxious custom of seUing the offices in the chancellor's gift. By the evidence on the trial of the Earl of Mac clesfield it appears that he received 500/. on the admission of a master in Chancery. Although it is difficult to perceive the dis tinction between the two customs, it is clear that he did not consider them as coming under the same category, and that he did not anticipate the evil consequences to which the latter might lead. At the same time he forbad the clerks to demand any extra fee for the performance of their duties. On the death of his father in November 1706 he succeeded to the ba ronetcy, and on the 9th of the same month he was ennobled with the title of Lord Co-wper of Wingham. (Evelyn, iii. 407; Bumet, y. 243; Luttrell, vi. Ill; State Trials, xvi. 1154.) His first wife having died six months before his elevation, he married, secondly, Mary, daughter of John Clavering, Esq., of ChopweU in the bishopric of Durham. Lord Cowper was one of the commis- 198 GOWPEE sioners for the Union with Scotland, and zealously assisted Lord Somers in the nego tiations. Upon its being completed the queen invested him, on May 4, 1707, with the title of lord high chancellor of Great Britain ; and from that time the designa tion of lord keeper fell into desuetude, only one other possessor of the Great Seal having been so distinguished up to the present day. For the next three years the whig party retained its infiuence ; but at last, by its own foUy in the impeachment of Dr. Sacheverell, the popularity it had acquired was trans ferred -to its poUtical opponents. The pro secution stirred up all the dormant feelings of the people, revived the cry of ' The Church in danger,' and so strengthened the efl'orts of the tory advisers of the queen that the whig members of the government were soon after dismissed. The Duke of Marlborough had during the contest am bitiously demanded to be made captain- general for life ; but Lord Cowper, though united with him in poUtics, represented to the queen that such an appointment would be highly unconstitutional, and by his advice the application was rejected. His lordship, though strongly pressed by the queen to keep the Seal, was firm in his resolve to follow the fate of his colleagues, and resigned on September 23, I7I0, He then entered at once into an avowed, and it must be acknowledged sometimes a factious, opposition to the new ministry; and, ac cording to the fashion then prevalent, occa sionally supported his views and answered the attacks of his opponents in the periodi cal publications of the day. He remained unemployed for the four remaining years of Queen Anne's reign ; but on her death he was found to be one of the lords justices nominated by the Elector of Hanover, who showed the tendency of his opinions by selecting them principally from the whig party. The queen died on August 1, 1714, and King George, arriving in England on September 18, immediately formed his mi nistry and reinstated Lord Co'wper in the office of lord chancellor on the 21st. _ On his appointment he presented to the king a long paper which he called 'An Im partial History of Parties,' but which is anything but what its title imports. In professing to describe the two parties, whig and tory, into which the people were di vided, he artfully depreciates all the acts and principles of the latter, and represente the former as the only one which it would be expedient or safe for his majesty to trust. The antipathy of one faction against the other was at its height, and was exhibited by the vindictive course which the new ministry pursued against the leaders of the party they had supplanted. Lord Cowper took too prominent a part in these proceed ings, and it may not be improbable that the CO'WPEE extremes to which their animosity was carried hurried on the rebelUon of I7I5. To his energetic representation to the Mng, may perhaps be attributed the speedy sup pression of that rebellion. His conduct on the trial of the rebel lords, when he acted as lord high steward, supported his pre- yious reputation. During his second chancellorship the Riot Act, the Septennial Bill, and the Mutiny Bill, after violent opposition, became law, and to the passing of them he gave his powerful aid. Intrigues were formed for his removal as early as October 1715, and continued in the two succeeding years, till at last, though his party remained in power, he resigned the Seal on April 15, 1718, having been on the I8th of the preceding month honoured, as a special mark of the royal approbation, with the additional title of Viscount Fordwich and Earl Cowper. He Uved more than four years afterwards, and continued to the last days of his life to take a prominent lead in the debates, and a deep and impartial interest in the various measures proposed on the one side or the other. He died after a few days' iUness at his seat at CoMe Green on October 10, 1723, and was buried m the parish church of Hertingfordbury. His 'wife foUowed him four months afterwards, UteraUy dying of a broken heart. Of Lord Cowper's character as a states man there 'wiU always be two opinions. The course of Ms conduct that would ex cite Burnet's or Wharton's applause would certainly be decried by S^wift and the tory writers. But all would aUow that he was a firm adherent to the principles he pro fessed, and that those principles tended to civil and reUgious liberty, and that the motives which guided Mm were pure and straightforward, though occasionaUy tainted with a littie too much of party prejudice. Of his extraordinary oratorical powers, of the singular gracefulness of his elocution, of the sweetness of his disposition, and of his integrity and impartiaUty as a judge there has never been any question. Of his urbanity and consideration for the feelings of others we have a striking instance in his repressing the harsh personal remarks made by a counsel against Richard Cromwell, in a cause to which he was a party, by imme diately addressing the old protector, and kindly begging him to take a seat beside him on the bench. Though not particularly eminent for clas sical learning, he was well versed in the literature of his country, and was a gene rous patron to its professors, among^whom were John Hughes and Ambrose Philips, who devoted some graceful verses to his memory. Among his prose eulogists were Burnet, Steele, Lords Chesterfield and Wharton, and a host of other minor authors. CO'WPEE Even Swift himself, in his 'Four Last Years of Queen Anne,' is compelled to speak of Mm with as much praise as his crabbed natm-e and party prejudices would allow. The earl's London residences were in EusseU Street and Powis House, LincoM's Inn Fields, and subsequently in Great George Street ; and his country one was at a spot called CoMe Green, in the parish of Hertingfordbury, the manor of which he had purchased. The house which he built there was pulled down in the beginnmg of this century, and replaced by the present stately mansion of Penshanger, where his successors flourish. CO'WPEE, Spencer, was the younger brother of the above WUliam Earl Cowper. Bom in 1669, he received his education at Westminster School, and having been called to the bar by the society of Lincoln's Inn, he was immediately appointed by the cor poration of London, in June 1690, comp troller of the Bridge House estates, a post of considerable responsibility, which en titled him to a residence at the Bridge House, in the parish of St. Olave, South wark. There he Uved for some years, and gained the respect of his neighbours by his exemplary conduct and social manners. There, too, he executed with great useful ness the duty of a magistrate, having been soon placed on the commission of the peace ; and there he filled many offices of trust con nected with the locality. In the midst of these prosperous circum- stences he was suddenly charged with a crime which threatened not only to blast the character he had acquired, but to con sign him to an ignominious end. In the course of the Home Circuit which he tra veUed he was in the habit of visiting Hert ford, of which both his father and his brother were representatives in parliament. Re siding with her mother in that town was a young woman named Sarah Stout, the daughter of a respectable Quaker deceased, who had been a firm friend of the Co^wpers ; and both tbe brothers and their wives had shown a kind interest in her welfare. At the spring assizes of 1699 Spencer had dined with her on March 18, and after supper had gone home to his lodgings about eleven o'clock. On the next morning she was found in the river, and an inquest ¦was immediately held on the body, at which Spencer Cowper was present and gave his evidence, which resulted in a verdict that the deceased drowned herself, being non compos mentis. About a month after this, ¦with no further evidence than was sub mitted to the coroner's jury, the mother and brother commenced a prosecution, charging not only Spencer Cowper, but two attomeys and a scrivener, who had been heard making some loose remarks at their lodgmgs about the girl, ¦with first strangling her and then CO'WPEE 199 throwing her into the water where she was found. The parties were summoned before Lord Chief Justice Holt, who at first dismissed them, but after two subsequent examinations was induced on May 19 to commit Mr. Cowper for trial to the King's Bench prison, where he remained tUl the next assizes. The prisoners were arraigned at Hertford on July 16, and after a long trial were acqmtted, as Luttrell remarks, ' to the satisfaction of the auditors.' Every one who reads the trial must join in this satisfaction, for a more unfounded charge could not be made. Judge Hatsel presided, and by his querulousness at the trial and the stupidity of his summmg up, the pri soners had certainly no cause to thank him for their acquittal. But Cowper's persecution was not yet over. Whether from a conviction of'his guilt and a thirst for revenge, which seems scarcely possible ; or from a desire to clear the Society of Friends from the imputation that one of their body could be affected by worldly passions, which no doubt in some measure operated ; or from the excitement of party spirit prompting the opponents of the Cowpers to endeavour to destroy the interest of the family in the borough, which is far more likely, as a new election was near at hand ; for one or the other of these reasons the question was kept alive, at first by pamphlets, and subsequently by much more unjustifiable means. The law allowed an appeal for murder to be instituted withm a year and a day after the death by the next heir of the deceased. Such an heir was immediately found, who was an infant ; but, instead of at once obtaining the necessary -wilt, the prosecutors purposely delayed is suing it till three or four days before the expiration of the term ; and this they did without the knowledge or consent of the infant heir, the nominal appellant, or of his mother, who were not even made acquainted with the proceeding for a month afterwards. Naturally disgusted at the prosecutors' con duct, they appUed for and obtamed from the sheriff the -writ and return, which they forthwith put into the fire. This the pro secutors endeavoured to remedy by apply ing to the lord keeper for a new -writ, which he, assisted by four learned judges, very properly refused, on the ground that the first writ had been clandestinely and frau dulently procured, that it was absolutely renounced by the pretended plaintiff, and the delay in ite issue showed that the pro secutors did not design justice, but to spin out a scandal as long as they could, mali ciously and vexatiously. Mr. Cowper during these discussions appeared in court, and de clared his readiness to answer. Thus this affair terminated ; but the principal object was answered, by the dissolution for the time of the Cowper interest in the town. 200 CRANWORTH (State Trials, xn. 1105 ; Luttrell, iv. 618- 660 ; Lord Raymond, 565.) Every impartial man acquitted Co-wper, whose professional success was only tem porarily impeded. He steadily advanced at the bar, and in 1705, when he resigned the office of comptroller, he succeeded his brother as member for Berealston, which he continued to represent in the two follow ing parliaments. During the last of them he was one of the managers in the im peachment of Dr. Sacheverell, and had to conduct the second article. (Luttrell, vi, 661, 655 ; State Trials, xv. 162.) This prosecution lost him his election for the next parUament ; and he did not sit again tiU the accession of George I., when he was returned for Truro. He then became, on October 22, 1714, attorney-general to the" Prince of Wales, and in 1717 chief jus tice of Chester. On George II. coming to the crown he at once promoted his old servant, raising him first to the attorney-generalship of the duchy of Lancaster, and then to the bench at Westminster. He was constituted a j udge of the Common Pleas on October 24, 1727, but died in the next year, on December 10, at his chambers in Lincoln's Inn. He was buried at Hertingfordbury, where there is a beautiful monument to his memory by Rou- biliac, erected by order of his second 'wife, Theodora, -widow of John Stepney, Esq. By her he had no issue, but by his first -wife, Pennington, daughter of John Goodeve, Esq., he left three sons, the second of whom, the Rev. John Cowper, D.D., was the father of the delightful poet, William Cowper. (Lord Raymond, 1318, 1510.) CEAN-WOETH, LoED, See R. M, Rolfe. CEASS'ffS, Richaed, had been prior of Henley in Buckinghamshire before he be came abbot of Evesham. On the expulsion of Simon the Norman in 24 Henry IIL, 1239, the Great Seal is said to have been placed in his custody, and to have continued in his possession tiU his election as Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry (or Chester, as it was then sometimes caUed) in 1242, when he resigned it. This election took place about N ovember, but before he had received the rite of consecration he died at Riola in Gascony, on December 8, 1242, (Godwin, 317 ; Le Neve, 124.) CEATJCOMBE, John de, was probably the son of Godfrey de Craucombe, who served King Henry III. as seneschal. (Madox, i. 63.) He was evidently a clerk in the Chan cery, and, Uke most of his feUows, an ec clesiastic, sharing in the dignities usually distributed among that class of officers, by being made archdeacon of the East Riding of Yorkshire. The Great Seal was deposited in his hands and in those of Master John de Caen and Willinm, de Ryrlay during the temporary CEA'WLEY absence of the chanceUor, John de Langton, in March 1298, and again in December. He continued to be summoned to the par liament among the clerks of the Chancery tiU February 1305, 83 Edward I. (ParL Writs, i. 188.) CEA'WLEY, Feancis, was of a Bedford shire family, residing at Someris,near Luton. He received Ms legal education at Staple Tun and Gray's Inn, to the latter of which he was admitted on May 26, 1598, and, having been called to the bar in the usual time, was elected autumn reader m 1623, on the occasion of Ms being summoned to take the degree of the coif. In 1626 he was one of the counsel whom the Earl of Bristol de- .sired to be assigned to him on Ms impeach ment, aud on October II, 1632, he was appointed a judge of the Common Pleas, and knighted. In the great case of sMp-money he not only joined the rest of the judges in their answer to the king's letter affirming its legality, but in an elaborate argument in the Exchequer Chamber, in February 1638, he gave a decided opimon m favour of the king against Hampden, which he repeated at the assizes, asserting in Ms charge to the grand jury ' that sMp-money was so in herent a right in the cro-wn that it would not be in the power of a parliament to take it away.' For these opinions, and particu larly the last, he was impeached by the Long Parliament. In August 1641 the house resolved that the impeached judges should have no commissions to go the circuite ; but it appears that they stiU continued to sit in Westminster HaU. Justice Crawleyjoined the king at Oxford in 1642, and in the fol io-wing January was made doctor of civU law. ( Wood's Fasti, ii. 44.) The stete of the kingdom probably prevented his trial from taking place, not-withstanding his ex treme unpopularity ; but on November 24, 1645, the Commons passed an ordinance disabling him and four others ' from being judges, as though they were dead.' (JJliite- locke, 181.) He died on February 13, 1649, and was buried at Luton. His wife was Elizabeth, daughter of Sir John Rotherham, knight, of that place, by whom he left two sons, the younger of whom was the undermen tioned Francis. CEA-WLEY, Feancis, second son of the above Sir Francis Crawley, was also of Gray's Inn, being admitted on August 7, 1623, and called to the bar in February 1688. His appointment to the office of cursitor baron of the Exchequer took place in 1679, when he must have been nearly seventy j'ears of age, and he held it for four years, till Ms death in 1683. He is described as having an estate of 1000/. a year in Bedfordshire in 1660, when named as one of the knighte of the contemplated order of the Royal Oak; but CEEPPINa he afterwards resided at Northaw in Hert fordshire. By his wife, Mary, daughter of Richard Clutterbuck, Esq., he had seven children, the descendants of whom now flourish at Stookwood Park in Hertford shire. CEEPPING, Waltee de, resided at Crepping, a manor in Essex which belonged to the Earls of Oxford, and was one of the justices itinerant who set the tallage on that county in 8 Richard I., 1186, He was soon after raised to the bench at Westminster, and his name appears on many fines levied during the first eleven years of the reign of King John, and he is named on a record of 13 John. (Madox, i. 704 ; Abb. Placit, 82.) CEEPPING, Richaed de, was of a Y'^ork- shire family, and it seems probable was the son of Robert de Crepping, who for several years in the reign of Henry III. was one of the king's escheators beyond the Trent, (Cal. Inquis. p. m, i, 69.) Richard can scarcely be considered to have been a regular justice itinerant (as Dugdale caUs him), as he only acted in reference to pleas of the forest in Lancashire and Notlanghamshire, in 14 Edward I., 1286. He was returned as knight of the sMre for York in 18 Edward I. (Pari Writs, i. 21.) CSESHELD, Richaed, is called three times by WMtelocke (269, 342, 378) ' Mr, Serjeant CresweU,' and in the propositions made by the parliament to the king in February 1643, of those whom they desire to be appointed justices of the Common -Pleas, his name is so inserted. (Clarendon, iU. 407.) But there was no serjeant of the name. The person intended is Richard Cresheld, who was summoned to take the coif in 1636 (Rymer, xx. 22), and who is recorded under that name in Dugdale's List of Ser jeante. By an abbreviated mispronuncia tion of the name it became corrupted to CresweU, for even in Sir W. Jones's Re ports (390) of the period he is called, when appointed, ' CresweU.' He was admitted into the society of Lincoln's Inn on June 18, 1608, under the description of 'Richard Cresheld, son of Edward Cresheld, of Mattishall-Burgh in the county of Norfolk,' and was called to the bar on October 17, 1616, and became bencher in 1633. He sat for the borough of Evesham in Worcestershire in King James's last parliament, and was returned member for the same place (of which he was recorder) in all the parliaments in King Charles's reign. (Notes and Queries, 2nd S, i. 460,) In 1628 he led) the van in the Committee of Grievances, in a speech sufficiently complimentaiy to the Mng, but arguing strongly against the legality of imprisonment without declaration of the cause (ParL Hist. ii. 240); but he does CRESSI 201 not appear to have often taken part in the debates. That he accommodated himself to the views of the popular party is apparent by his receiving the thanks of the Commons on November 2, 1642, for ' the good service done by Serjeant Cresweld in the country upon the matter of contributions and other ser-yices ' (Commons' Journals, ii. 831), by then- proposing him to be a judge in 1643, and by their appomting him one in 1648 ; but that he disapproved of their violen-t proceedings is equally apparent from his refusal to act under their usurped authority on the death of the Mng. He died in Ser jeants' Inn in 1652, and was buried in St. Andrew's, Holborn, in the register of which his name is properly spelled. CEESSI, Hugh db, was for six succes sive years of the reign of Henry IL, com mencing in 1176, employed as one of the justices itinerant, and in II77 his name appears among the Mng's regular justiciers at Westminster. (Madox, i. 94.) He was a Norman by birth, and had been some time previously attached to the king's service; and that he added military to his judicial services is sho^wn by his haying the custody of the tower of Rouen in II80, at a salary of 200/. a year, and by a grant which he received in 1184, 30 Hem'y IL, of 100/. on the Norman Roll, for the soldiers whom he led in the war of Poictou. (Rot. Scacc. Normannice, i. 70, 1160 He married Margaret, the daughter and heir of William de Cayneto, or Quesnay, who survived him, and afterwards became the wife of Robert Fitz-Roger, lord of Clavering in Essex. He left a son named Roger, who was in the wardsMp of this Robert Fitz-Roger tiU his majority in 1205, when he obtained possession of Ms father's lands in Suffolk, Sussex, aud Lincoln. The barony does not appear to have con tinued beyond the fifth generation, finish ing ¦with the after-named WilUam de Cressi, justice of trallbaston under Edward I. CEESSI, William de. His relationship with the above Hugh de Cressi is not known. Though he had a grant of forty Ubrates of the Norman lands m Norfolk in 6 John (Cal. Rot Pat. 8), he seems to have joined the barons in the last years of that reign, a safe-conduct having been given to him in December 1215 to go and speak to the king as to making his peace. (Rot Pat. 162.) In this he was no doubt suc cessful, being employed in the next year ¦with others to take a recognition as to the last presentation of the church of Mareseye in Nottinghamshfre. In that and the neigh bouring counties he was one of the justices itinerant in 8 Henry IH,, 1219, and again in 1225. . CEESSI, William de, was the lineal 202 CEESSING-HAM descendant of the above Hugh de Cressi, and the son of Stephen de Cressi, and Sibylla, the daughter and heir of John de Braytoft. He was summoned to attend the Mng on urgent affairs in 22 and 25 Edward I. He was returned as holding lands in Notting hamshire, Derbyshire, and Lincolnshire, and when the commission of trallbaston was issued for those counties, on November 23, 1804, 33 Edward I., he was the second of the three justices then assigned. (Pari. Writs, i. 407-8 ; Nicolas's Synopsis.) CEESSINGHAM, Hugh db, son of WU liam de Cressmgham, was an officer of the Exchequer, In 18 Edward I. he is called seneschal of the queen (Abh. Placit. i, 30, 33), and in 1292 he was appointed with two others to investigate and audit the debts due to Henry III. (Madox, ii, 291,) In that and the three following years he was at the head of the justices itinerant for the north ern counties, ( Year Book, i. 38.) He was a canon of St. Paul's, and held at least nine parsonages. Prynne calls him ' an insatiable pluralist;' and Hemingford gives a similar character, and ascribes to him an immode rate passion for hoarding money. (Archeeo logia, xxv. 608.) When the Mug defeated the Scotch, and Baliol renounced the throne, in 1296, Cres- singham was appomted treasurer of that country, and on the disorders which fol lowed Edward's departure was commanded not to scruple to spend the whole money in the exchequer to put them down. Proud, ignorant, and violent, he made himself hate ful to the Scots by his oppressions ; and on the rising of Wallace in the foUowing year, preferring the cuirass to the cassock, he joined the Earl of Surrey in leading the royal army to Stirling. Wallace left the siege of Dundee, in which he was engaged, and by a rapid march drew up his army on the other bank of the river Forth before the arrival of the EngUsh forces. By Cressing- ham's rashness the latter were led over the bridge, and were terribly defeated, he being among the first who fell. ' So deep was the detestation in which Ms character was regarded that his body was mangled, the skin torn from his limbs, and in savage tri umph cut to pieces.' It is said that Wal lace ordered as much of his skin to be taken off as would make a sword-belt, a story which has been absurdly extended to its naving been employed in making girths and saddles. (Tytler's Scotland, i. 123-143.) The Scots called him ' non thesaurarium sed trayturarium regis.' (Triveti Annates, 866, note.) He held the town of Hendon and land in Finchley in Middlesex, with the manor of Coulinge in Suffolk, (CaL Inquis. p. m. i, 184,) CEESS'WELL, Ceesswell. The family of CressweU, of Cresswell, near Morpeth, in Northumberland, dates from the earliest age CEE"WE of English history, a regular succession of male heirs having possessed the estate from the days of Richard I. tiU the death of John Cresswell in 1781. That gentleman left two daughters, one of whom, Frances Dorothea, married Francis Easterby, Esq., of Blackheath, who, purchasing the other sis ter's moiety, became possessed of the whole estate, and assumed the name of Cresswell. Of that union Sir CressweU Cresswell was the fourth son. He was bom in 1798, and, passing through the Charterhouse from 1806 to 1810, he went m the latter year to Emmanuel College, Cambridge, where he had for his tutor the future Justice Maule. He took his degree of B.A. in 1814, and of M.A. in 1818, and then, pursuing his legal studies in the Inner Temple, was called to the bar in 1819, and naturally joined the Northern Circuit. Here he soon showed that ability and power that ever after dis tinguished him, and long before he became by seniority the leader of the'circuit, scarcely any cause was tried in which he was not engaged on one side or the other. In 1830 he was appointed recorder of HuU, and in 1884 received a silk gown. In 1841 he defeated Mr. WilUam Ewart, the whig member, in a contest for Liverpool, and soon secured to himself that admiration in the house which it is not generaUy the fortune of lawyers to gain. Sir Robert Peel, on the very first vacancy that occurred, selected him as a judge of the Common Pleas, whereupon he was knighted. In that court, from January 1842 to January 1858, he discharged the duties in the most admirable manner; and at the latter date he consented to undertake the or ganisation of the new court then created for deciding testamentary and divorce causes. The manner in which he overcame the diffi culties attendant on the new judicature, and met the perpetually increasmg demands on its decisions, which unexpectedly accumu lated in overwhelming numbers, were elo quently and justly described by Sir Robert Phillimore, the queen's advocate, on the opening of the court after his lamented de cease, which occurred on July 29, 1863, from the effecte of a fall from his horse ten days before, CEE'WE, Ranhlphe, was a descendant from the younger branch of a family resi- dentat Crew, or Crue, a manor in Cheshire, iu the reign of Edward I, (CaL Inq. p. m. i. 119.) His father, John Crewe, was set tled at Nantwich, where he is said to have been a tanner. By his wife, Alice Main- waring, he left two sons, both of whom were the ancestors of noble families. This Ranulphe (as he himself spelled it) was the elder. Thomas, the younger, was a ser jeant-at-law, and speaker of the House of Commons in the reigns of both James I. and Charles I., and his son, John Crewe, in CREWE 1661 was created Baron Crewe, of Stene in Northamptonshire, which barony became extinct in 1721. - Ranulphe Crewe was bom about 1568. He was caUed to the bar of LincoM's Inn on November 8, 1584, and was elected reader in 1602. In 1597 he entered par liament as member for BracMey; and in 1598 he married Juliana, the daughter and heir of John Clipsby, of Clip.sby in Norfolk, -with whom he had a fairinheritance. (Fuller, i. 188.) He does not seem to have been much employed in the courts, yet it is evi dent that his reputation as a lawyer must have been considerable, as he was selected to defend the Mng's title to aMage in the House of Lords in 1606, for his ' travail and pams' in which he received 10/. (Pell Records, Jac. 64), and as his professional income was so considerable that he was enabled, two years afterwards, to gratify the great object of his ambition by the ac quisition of the ancestral property from which he derived his name ; and thus be coming repossessed of the estate which for nearly three hundred years had had no Crewe for its owner, he buUt the magnifi cent mansion there which has ever since been the seat of the family. He was selected as speaker of that par Uament which met on April 6, I6I4, and was so hastily dissolved on the 7th of the following June, to which he was retumed as representative of his native county, and was knighted the d.ay after the dissolution. Called to the degree of the coif and made king's serjeant in the following month, he sat in 1615 as a commissioner on the trial of Weston for tbe murder of Sir Thomas Overbury, and was one of the counsel for the crown against the Earl and Countess of Somerset, (State Trials, ii. 911, 952, 989,) He was also concerned in the shame ful trial of Edward Peacham for treason at Taunton, ( Walter Yonge' s Diary, 28,) He was not in the next parliament of 1620, but conducted the proceedings in the House of Lords against Sir Francis Michell, the monopolist. Sir Henry Yelverton, late attomey-general, and Sir John Bennet, judge of the Prerogative Court. (State Ti-ials, u. 1186, 1148, II46.) In the par Uament of 1624 he opened some of the charges agamst Cranfield, Earl of Middle sex (ParL Hist. i. 1447) ; and when Sir James Ley succeeded that nobleman as lord treasurer. Sir Ranulphe was selected to fill his place as chief justice of the King'sBench, to which he was promoted on January 26, 1625. King James died in the foUowing March. His successor, having angiily dissolved two parUamente in less than fifteen months, was compeUed to resort to unconstitutional means to replenish his exhausted exche quer. One of these was by forced loans CEE'WE 203 from his subjecte according to the amount they would have paid towards a subsidy. The judges, who among the rest were ap pUed to, paid the money demanded, but refusing to subscribe a paper recognising the legaUty of the coUection, Chief Justice Crewe was selected as an example, and was discharged from his office on November 9, 1626. In 1628 he wrote a manly and modest letter to the Duke of Bucking ham, pleading for his restoration to the king's favour. Whatever intentions the duke might have had of repairing the injury he had done to the chief justice, they were frustrated by his assassination by Felton, m the August of that year. After another appUcation to the king himself, which produced no result, Sir Ranulphe retired from public life. He sm-yived his dismissal more than nineteen years, witnessing the calamitous effects of those illegal measm-es to which he had refused his judicial sanction, and suffer ing much from the consequences of the civil war, his revenues being seized and his mansion ransacked by the soldiers of that parliament which had made those measures the o.stensible motive of the rebelUon. (Hinchcliffe' s Barthomley, 238.) He died at his house in Westmmster on January 13, 1646, and his remains were in terred in a chapel he had erected in the church of Barthomley, the parish in which Crewe Hall is situate. As a lawyer he was learned and pains taking ; as a judge he was assiduous and patient ; of his honesty, mdependence, and integrity he gave the 'best proof that man can offer ; and of his eloquence he has left a most favourable specimen, in his speech to the Lords on the titles of De Vere, After describing the 600 years of unbroken lineage m the family, he exclaimed : ' I have laboured to make a covenant with myself that affection may not press upon judgment; for 1 suppose there is no man that hath any apprehension of gentry or nobleness, but his aff'ection stands to the continuance of so noble a name and house, and would take hold of a twig or a twine- thread to uphold it. And yet Time has his revolutions; there must be a period and an end of aU temporal things— ^^wis rerum, — an end of names and dignites, and what soever is terrene ; and why not of De Vere ? For where is Bohun ? Where is Mowbray ? Where is Mortimer ? Nay, which is more and most of all, where is Plantagenet? They are entombed in the ums and se pulchres of mortaUty. And yet let the name and dignity of De Vere stand so long as it pleaseth God!' (W. Jones's Reports, 101.) By his flrst -wife he left a son, Clipsby Crewe, whose granddaughter (mairied to 204 CRIOL John Offiey, Esq., of Madeley in Stafford shire) ultimately succeeded to the inherit ance. Their son took the name of Crewe, whose grandson was in 1806 created Lord Crewe of Crewe in Cheshire. Sir Ra- nulphe's second -wife was another Juliana, daughter of Edward Fusey, of London, and relict of Sir Thomas Hesketh, Knt., by whom he had no children, (JBarthomley , 239.) CEIOL, Nicholas de, was the son of Bertram de Criol, who was apparently an officer in the Exchequer and sheriff' of Kent for many years, being then in such favour with Henry III. that part of the debt he owed to the crown was remitted. That his son Nicholas retained the influ ence his father had possessed is sho-wn by his receiving many favours from the king, and by his being entrusted -with the sheriffalty of Kent in 48 Henry III, (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. ii. 232), and by his being made go- •yernor of Rochester Castle and warden of the Cinque Ports. (Cal Rot Pat 34,) In 1266 he is mentioned as a baron of the Exchequer, and as such sued one of Ms debtors in that court. (Madox, ii. 13, 319.) He died in 1272. (Abb. Rot Orig. i. 20.) By Ms -wife Joan, daughter and heir of William de Auberville, he left a son Ni cholas, who was summoned to parliament by Edward I., but not afterwards. CEOKE, John. The original name of the Croke family was Le Blount, Two bro thers, Robert and William Le Blount, younger sons of the Count de Guisnes, held high military commands in the army of William of Normandy on his descent upon England. After the Conquest they were rewarded by extensive grants of lands. The elder branch failed by the death of the si.xth baron at the battle of .Lewes in 1264 ; and of the younger branch. Sir Robert Blount, who was deeply impli cated in the conspiracy to restore Richard IL, was beheaded in 1400. Nicholas, his kinsman, being engaged in the same con spiracy, was outlawed, and took service under the Duke of Milan ; but four years afterwards he ventured into England, and escaped observation by changing his name to Croke. On the death of Henry TV. he came out of his retirement, and bought lands in Buckinghamshire, where he re sided at Easington, in the parish of Chil ton. His great-grandson, John Croke, a master in Chancery in the reigns of Henry VIIL, Edward VL, and Mary, by Ms -wife, Prudentia Cave, left a son, who succeeded to his ample inheritance. His name was also John, and he was knighted by Queen Elizabeth when he was sheriff of Bucking hamshire, which county he also represented in parliament. Marrying Elizabeth, daugh ter of Sir Alexander Unton, of Chequers in that county, he had by her a numerous CEOKE family, of whom two, this John and the next-mentioned George, became judges. The flfth son, WiUiam, is the only one whose male representatives have con-finued to the present time. One of them, Sir Alexander Croke, judge of the Vice- Ad miralty Court in America, has commemo rated his family in an elaborate ' Genealo gical History,' of which fuU advantage has here been taken. John Croke, the eldest son, was bom in 1553, and entered the Inner Temple on April 13, 1570, and, having been in due course called to the bar, was appointed Lent reader in 1596, and treasurer in 1598. At a very early period he had ac quired so great a reputation for Ms pro fessional attainments that he was consulted by Sir Christopher Hatton, who gave Mm as his fee, ' for his counsell in lawe, a silver gilt bole and cover.' In 1696 he was elected recorder of London, and Ms bio grapher gives a copy of one of his speeches on presenting the lord mayor to the Court of Exchequer, which, in its elaboration, pufa to shame the curteiled addresses of the present day. The same city chose Mm for their representative in the parliaments of 1697 and 1601, he having before, in 1685, been retm-ned for the borough of Windsor. Of the parUament that met in October 1601 he was unanimously chosen speaker, and in his speech on presentetion he offered up Ms solemn prayers to heaven to conthiue the prosperous estete and peace of the kingdom, wMch, he said, had been defended by the mighty arm of our dread and sacred queen. EUzabeth, interrupting him, cried out, ' No ; but by the mighty hand of God, Mr. Speaker.' Early in the, session Serjeant Heale, on the question of a subsidy, marveUed much that the house should stand upon grantmg it, or the time of payment, when aU we had, he said, was her majesty's, and she may law fully at her pleasiu-e take it ; ' yea,' added he, ' she hath as much right to all om' lands and goods as to any revenue of the crown.' At -which all the house laughing and hem ming, the speaker was obUged to caU them to order, saying that ' he that is speaking should be suffered to deliver his mind with out interruption.' The grievance of mono polies occasioned great debates in this par liament, and the queen having politicaUy auticipated the decision of the Commons, the speaker had the gratiflcation of an- nouncmo- to the house her resolution to revoke the patente that existed, and not to grant any other. On the di-yision upon the bill for enforcing attendance at church, the ayes being 105, and the noes 106, it was contended that the speaker had a vote which woiUd make the votes even, but Croke said ' he was foreclosed of Ms voice CEOKE by taMng that place which it had pleased them to impose upon him, and that he was to be indifferent -to both parties.' At the close of the session, on December 19, the lord keeper concluded Ms speech by saying, 'For yom-self, Mr. Speaker, her majesty commanded me to say that you have pro ceeded with such ¦wisdom and discretion that it is much to your commendations, and that none before you have deserved more.' About a year after this Croke received a summons to take upon him the degree of the coif on a day which occurred after the queen's death. The writ in consequence abated, but a new one was issued returnable the same day. He was called serjeant in Easter Term 1603, and knighted by King James, one of the king's serjeante on May 29, and a Welsh judge, whereupon he re signed the recordsMp, In 1604 he was appointed deputy to Sir George Hume, chancellor of the Exchequer. (Cal. St. Papers [1603], 79.) On June 25, 1607, he was created a judge of the King's Bench, and ftUly sus tained the character he had acquired as an advocate. After performing his judicial duties for nearly thirteen years, he died at his bouse in Holbom on January 23, 1620, aged sixty-six, and was buried at Chilton, His wife was Catherine, daughter of Sir Michael Blount, of Maple Durham in Ox fordshire, Ueutenant of the Tower, by whom he had flve sons, of whom no descendants remain. CEOEE, Geoege, was seven years junior to his brother the above Sir John Croke. He was educated at the school at Thame, and at Christ Church CoUege, Oxford, Having been entered of the Inner Temple, he was called to the bar in 1584, and ap pointed autumn reader in 1699, and again in Lent 1618. He commenced Ms parlia mentary career in 1597 as member for Beeralston. Though not mentioned m his own Reports as an advocate till Michaelmas 1688, he had commenced his collections for them seven years before, showing an early devo tion to the practical part of his profession. He did not attain legal honours, however, tiU four years after his brother's death, in 1623, when he was made serjeant-at-law and Mng's serjeant nearly at the same time. King James knighted him on the occasion. Judge Whiteloeke, in his Diary, says that he did not receive the coif sooner because he refused to give money, and offence was taken at his saying be thought ' it was not for the kmg '—so common it was in those days to pay for honours, and so large a part of these unholy paymente were known to be appropriated by those about the court. CEOKE 205 He was raised to the bench on February 11, 1625, as a justice of the Common Pleas, and in six weeks the death of James I. occurred, when his patent was renewed by King Charles, who, on October 9, 1628, removed him to the Court of King's Bench on the death of Sir John Doderidge, He had no successor in the Common Pleas, the opportumty being taken to reduce the judges from five, to which they had been increased by James I., to the original num ber of four, (Croke, Car. 127.) The twelve years that he sat there were those that immediately preceded the Great RebeUion, which the courts of justice were greatly instrumental in hastening. They were used as tools to enforce the unconsti tutional behests of the crown, wMch by the subservient decisions of the judges were declared to have the force of law. This servile spirit did not extend over the whole bench, aud Sir George Croke was one of the mmority whom neither the tMeats of power nor the hopes of favour could mduce to swerve from the dictates of conscience. He was the only judge of the King's Bench excepted in the vote of the House of Com mons from responsibility for delaying jus tice towards Selden, Holies, and the other members of parliament who were com mitted to the Tower for their speeches there ; and in the great case of sMp-money, though he had been induced in the first instance to jom the rest of the judges, for the sake of confornuty, in signing an abstract opmion declaring its legality, yet when it came judicially before him in Hampden's case he, in opposition to the majority, gave judgment against the crown; and in this com-ageous conduct he was imitated by Sir Richard Hutton, Sir Humphrey Davenport, and Sir John Denham. About 1640 Sir George, being then eighty years old, had petitioned to be relieved from his duties, and had received from the king a dispensa tion from his attendance in court or on the circuit, his judicial title, salary, and al lowances bemg continued to him. Sir George retired to his estate at Water- stock, where he spent the remainder of his life. He died on February 16, I64I-2, in the 82nd year of Ms age, and was buried at Waterstock m Oxfordshire, under a monu ment on which he is represented in his judicial robes, with an mscription comme morative of his private -virtues and pubUc patriotism, which, unUke the usual lan guage of epitaphs, was aclmowledged both by contemporaries and posterity to be a faithful picture of his character. His learn ing as a lawyer and his bearing as a judge are well described by his son-in-law, Sir Harbottle Grimston, in the preface to his Reports, which|were not pubUshed tUl after his death. They were originaUy -written by Sir George in the Norman-French Ian- 206 CEOKEDAYK guage, but were translated by Sir Harbottle into English, and they consist of three volumes, one being appropriated to each of the reigns of EUzabeth, James, and Charles. The cases comprehend a period of sixty years, and afford an example of persevering industry not to be equalled. In the abbre viated language of the courts they are referred to as ' Cro. EUz,,' ' Cro, Jac.,' and ' Cro. Car.,' and are always quoted with re spect for their learning and accuracy. He married Mary, the daughter of Sir Thomas Bennet, who was lord mayor of London in I James I., and whose brother Richard was ancestor to the noble houses of Arlington and Tankerville. This lady is said to haye encouraged and confirmed her husband in his resolution not to be m- fluenced by the persuasions of the Mng's friends to give a judgment in the case of sMp-money contrary to conscience. She survived Mm flfteen years, and died on De cember 1, 1667. By her he had one son, who died early, and three daughters, one of whom married Sir Harbottle Grimston, the master of the RoUs. CEOKEDAYK, Adam de, was one of the two justices of assize appointed in 21 Ed ward I., 1293, for Lincoln and nme other counties, and was summoned among the j ustices to several parliaments. (Pari. Writs, i. 29-138.) He is mentioned in 25 Edward 1. as assigned to assess and collect the ninth imposed for the king's confirmation of Magna Charta in the northern counties. (Rot ParL i. 239-241.) Three years after wards he was appointed to perambulate the forests of the counties of York and Cumberland, and in 31 and 33 Edward I. there are writs in his name, showing he was still engaged m legal employmente. In the latter year he died, possessed of very considerable property in Cumberland. (ParL Writs, i. 398; Abb. Placit 249, 254; CaL Inq. ^.m.i. 198.) CEBKESLEY, John de, was one of the king's escheators of the forest of Rocking ham, and also custos of Skipton and other royal manors. (Rot. Pari. ii. 414 ; Madox, i. 721.) It was only for pleas of the forest that he was a justice itinerant in Essex, from 20 to 29 Edward I., 1292-1301, where he received six shillings a day for his expenses. (Pari Writs, i. 88, 397.) He died in the following year. «S CEOKESLEY, Richaed db, succeeded the before-mentioned Richard de Barking as abbot of Westminster on March 25, 1247, (Monasticon, ii, 283.) He is twice named by; Madox (U, 318, 319) in his List of Barons of the Exchequer in 36 and 42 Hemy IIL, takmg precedence of the trea surer, instead of being placed, as his pre decessor was, after him. In the interval between these two dates he had been de- .spatched by the king ashis ambassador to CEOMPTON the court of Rome (Rymer, i. 344), aud on two other occasions had been seni on mis sions to the Duke of Brabant, to negotiate a marriage between Prince Edward and the duke's daughter. Matthew Paris de scribes him as a leamed and elegant man, 'with a handsome person and a pleasing voice. He died about July 21, 1268, as some say by poison (Dart's Westminster, U. xxi.), leaving such extravagant bequests to the poor that a mandate was procured from the pope limiting the expense, (Pad- dington. Past and Present, by W. Robins, 1853.) CEOMPTON, Chaeles, was descended from an old family settled at Derby as eminent bankers, several of them ha'ving been members for the county, and one of them raised to a baronetey in 1838, which died -with him m 1849, The judge was the third son of Peter Crompton, Esq,, M,D,, of Eaton, near Liverpool, by his cousin Mary, the daughter of John Cromp ton, Esq,, of Chorley in Lancashire. It is somewhat remarkable that of the judges of the reign of Victoria there are at least eight who can boast of medical paternity — Lords Denman, Langdale, and Westbury, and Justices Maule, Park, Vaughan, Crompton, and WiUes. To these may be added Lord ChanceUor Lord Cottenham, who was the nephew of the eminent physician to George HL, Sir Lucas Pepys, Bart. Charles Crompton was bom at Derby in 1797, and was educated at Trinity CoUege, Dublm, where he graduated -with great ' distinction, obtainmg honours in 1814, 1815, and 1816. He then entered the Inner Temple, and was admitted as a bar rister in November I82I. On the Northern and the Western Cfrcuite he soon became kno-wn as a deeply read la-wyer, and conse quently acquired great experience in the practical part of the profession both there and in Westminster Hall. He successively filled the posts of tub-man and post-man in the Com't of Exchequer, where he was counsel for the Board of Stamps and Taxes. Of the decisions in that court he was a reporter from 1880 to 1836, in con junction at first -with Mr. (afterwards Chief Justice) Jervis, and subsequently -with Messrs, Meeson and Roscbe. In 1836 he was appomted assessor of the Court of Passage at Liverpool, and in 1851 he was selected as one of the commissioners of enquiry into the proceedings, practice, and jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery. On the retirement of Sir John Patteson from the Court of Queen's Bench, Mr, Crompton was appointed in February 1852, and re ceived tne customary knighthood. He was obUged from iUness to resign his seat in October 1866, and on the 30th of that month he died. CEOM'WELL He married a daughter of Thomas Fletcher, Esq., of Liverpool, by whom he left several children, CEOM'WELL, Thomas (Eael of Essex), was bom towards the latter end of the fifteenth century, at Putney, where his father Walter Cromwell carried on the business, first of a blacksmith, and then of a brewer. His mother, after Walter's death, was married to a cloth-sheerer in London. His education was that of his class, but his activity and intelligence were great, and early in Ufe he had the advan tage of going abroad, in what capacity is not known. During this period he so im proved his opportunities that he mastered several foreign languages, and acquired that aptness in the conduct of affairs for which he was afterwards distinguished. He seems, from a letter addressed to him by CecUy, Marchioness of Dorset, com mencing ' Cromwell, I woU that you send to me,' &c., to have been at one time in the household of that lady. (Ellis's Let ters, 1st S, i. 218,) "While at Antwerp he was retained by the English merchante there to be their clerk or secretary, and during his employ ment in their affairs he became acquamted with Sir Richard Gresham, the father of the founder of the Royal Exchange, (Burgon's Gresham, i. 218.) Whether this took place before or after his admis sion to Gray's Inn in 1524 is uncertain; but there is no doubt that he afterwards went to Rome, since he was present as a soldier at the sacking of that city in May 1527 under the Duke of Bourbon, He is represented as having been engaged at Antwerp by two persons from Boston m Lincolnshire to accompany them and en deavour to obtain from the pope a renewal of the indulgences granted to the guild of Our Lady in their church of St. Botolph, and as having succeeded by gratifying his hoUness's palate with some dainty jelUes made after the English fashion, Drayton, in ' The Mirror for Magistrates,' intimates that the pope's favour was obtained by Cromwell's singing to him 'freemen's catches,' and further aUudes to Ms playing there, with other of his countrymen, ' as a comedian,' (Notes and Queries, 3rd S. xi. 74.) Retiurning to England, Cromwell was admitted into the family of Cardinal Wol sey,' who had met him in France aud at once appreciated Ms abUities. What office he held in that household does not clearly appear, but in the two years that he was retained in the family he made himself eminently useful, assisting Wolsey in many important matters, and particularly in the foundation of Ms colleges at Ips-wich and Oxford. This short service was sufficient to create so great an affection as to prompt CEOM'WELL 207 him to come boldly forward, apparentiy at the risk of the king's displeasure, in defence of his fallen master. Haying procured a seat in the House of Commons, ' there was nothing,' to use Cavendish's words, ' at any time objected against my lord but he was ready to make answer thereunto ; by means whereof he, bemg earnest in his master's behalf, was reputed the most faithful ser vant to his master of all other, and was generally of all men highly commended.' When the bill of impeachment was sent down to the Commons, ' against it Master Cromwel did inveigh so discreetly, and with such witty persuasions, that the same would take no effect.' It is impossible, however, considering the general subser viency of parliament, not to beUeve that he had received some encouragement from the king before he ventured on this opposi tion. That he had then access to Jhis [majesty is manifest from his being sent on various comforting messages to Wolsey, among which was the communication of the royal intention to give 10,000/. when the cardinal was going mto the north. He was almost immediately taken into the Mng's service. Wolsey died on November 29, 1530 ; and in less than eighteen months Cromwell had made himself so serviceable to the kmg that he was rewarded with the post of master and treasurer of the Mng's jewels, on April 14, 1582. (Auditor's Patent Book, i. 130.) Stow (Thoms's, 67) teUs a story which charges CromweU 'with maMng an oppres sive use of the power he had thus attamed, in the erection of his house and the enlarge ment of his garden in Throgmorton Street ; but is is not imlikely that there is some exaggeration in the tale, since Cromwell on other occasions showed a grateful and a feeling heart, remembering in his prospe rity the services he had received when ne was poor. At the gate of this very house also, in Throgmorton Street, which is now the site of Drapers' Hall, two hundred per sons were served with bread, meat, and drink twice a day when Cromwell had the means to be bountiful. On July 16, 1632, he received the profit able office of clerk of the Hanaper, -with an annual rent of 40/. ; and on AprU 12, 1533, the still more important one of chancellor of the Exchequer. (Rymer, xiv. 456.) It was about this time that Sir Thomas More gave him that excellent advice, wMch it would have been weU for him to have followed, and which was dictated probably by the great man's suspicions that Cromwell was the prompter of those ecclesiastical ques tions which were then being agitated. After commiming together on a message Cromwell had deUvered fi-om the kmg. Sir Thomas, who had lately resigned the chan- 208 CROMWELL cellorship, said to him, ' Mark, Cromwell, you are now entered into the service of a most noble, wise, and Uberal prince ; if you -will follow my poor advice, you shall, in your council-giving to his grace, ever tell him what he ought to do, but never what he is able to do. . . . For if a lion knew his o-wn strength, hard were it for any man to rule him.' (Singer's Roper, 56.) On October 8, 1584, he was made master of the RoUs, having pre-yiouslybeen appointed principal secretary to the king. In the next year he was nominated visitor-general of the monasteries, under the pretence of correcting the kno-wn abuses in them, but m fact to lay the foundation of their ulti mate dissolution. There can be no doubt that Cromwell was au early convert to the reformed opi nions, and he is said even in Ms journey to Rome to have learned by heart Erasmus's translation of the New Testament. He had encouraged the -writers and promoted the circulation of ballads and books ridi culing the pope and all popish idolatry. (MaitlancTs Reformation, 286.) His name therefore was naturally held in utter de testation by all those who adhered to the old reUgion, and every species of wicked ness and cunning was charged upon him. We must consequently be cautious m adopting the terms of vituperation -with which writers of that church assail his cha racter, and hesitate to give full credit to all the stories they tell to his disadvantage. At the same time there is no doubt that his zeal in the king's service, strengthened possibly by his own con-victions of the inutility, if not the evils, of the monastic estabUshments, betrayed him into measures which even now have the appearance of harshness, making no distinction between well-conducted houses and those which were a pest and a nuisance, nor discrimi nating between the virtuous and the guilty, but invol-ving aU in one common ruin. The personal grants also that he obtained out of the religious plunder of course occa sioned, and perhaps justified, the imputa tion that avarice had a share in prompting- Ms energetic proceedings. And yet, while doubting his motives in reference to these acts of severity, it would be unjust not to advert to that conduct which seems to result from the real feelings of his nature — his tenderness towards Sir Thomas More. He was one of those who urgently -pressed the king to exclude the name of Sir Thomas from the bill of attainder in connection with the 'Holy Maid of Kent,' and he it was who sent the comfortmg message to the fallen chancellor, that he had suc ceeded. In the examinations which took place as to the oath of supremacy and ma trimony, in which Cromwell was a neces sary actor as the king's secretary, he exerted CEOM'WELL himself to save Sir Thomas, who in several letters speaks of him in terms of gratitude; (Singers Roper, 114-168.) After holding the office of master of the Rolls for somewhat less thau two years, he resigned it on July 2, 1586, for the more elevated one of keeper of the privy seal (Rymer, xiv. 671), and on the 9th of the same month he was raised to the peerage by the title of Baron Cromwell of Okeham. in the county of Rutland. This creation was no doubt made to give greater weight to a higher dignity which was reserved for him. The Mng having thrown off his obe dience to the pope, and assumed the rule- in aU ecclesiastical matters, reqmred a re presentative to conduct the business wMch thus devolved upon him. To this duty he- appointed CromweU on July 18, with the title of vicar-general and vicegerent, in which character he sat m synods and con vocations above the whole prelacy of the Mngdom — a position which a layman could scarcely be deemed competent to fill. Even in parliament precedence was aUotted to him, not only above all peers, but above the great officers of the cro-wn. It is curious that, though CromweU was never admitted into holy orders, the king- in this very year, as if for the purpose of investing him with some ecclesiastical cha racter, presented Mm with the prebend of Blewbury, in the church of Salisbury, and m the foUowing with the deanery of Wells (Rymer, xiv. 669; Le Neve, 36) — prefermente which he held tiU Ms death. The proceedmgs which he took in the quaUty of vicar-general belong more to the history of the Church than to this biography. Suffice it to say that, steering -wisely be tween the confiicting opinions of the king, who, while he repudiated the pope's au thority, reteined the prmcipal pointe of the old religion, Cromwell discouraged the- obnoxious practices of popery, as the wor ship of images, &c., and served the cause of the Reformation most effectuaUy by directing the Lord's Prayer, the Creed, and. the Commandmente to be taught to chUdren in their mother-tongue, and by ordering a Bible in EngUsh to be placed m aU cbm-ches for the parishioners to read at their plea sure. To prevent the pubUcation of corrupt copies of the Holy Scriptures, a patent was afterwards granted to him wMch prohi bited aU persons from printing an English edition except those who were deputed by him. To him also is to be attributed the useful introduction into each parish of a register of births, marriages, and deaths. The rapid elevation of a man of so obscure an origin natm-aUy disgusted the nobles; Ms efforts in suppressing the monasteries, and in promulgating the king's supremacy and the new tenets, created murmurs CROMWELL against him by a large portion of the clergy ; and the extravagance with which the produce of the confiscated abbeys was wasted, together with the demands which he was in consequence compelled to make on both clergy and laity to supply the defi ciency in the king's coffers, rendered him an object of odium in the eyes of all but the king, who, benefiting by his exertions, appreciated his zeal and capacity, and esti mated them at a higher value from his resolute defiance of the unpopularity that foUowed him. He was accordingly re warded with munificent grante of manors and lands which had belonged to the dis solved houses, a list of which is given in Dugdale ; and additional dignities were conferred upon Mm, among which was the office of chief justice of the forests beyond the Trent, With these continued proofs of the royal favour, he might still have disregarded the efforts of his enemies, had he not in his anxiety to support his position taken a step which alienated the affections of his only friend. The king's avowed adherence to the ancient doctrines of the Church had encouraged those who continued to be attached to them ; they were gradually ob tainmg an ascendency in the royal councils, and the advocates of the reformed tenets were consequently placed in a difficult dilemma. CromweU could not but see the danger that hung over him, and, deeming that his party would resume ite power if it had the support of a Protestant queen, he recommended, in an evil hour to himself, the Princess Anne of Cleves as the new partner of the royal bed. The disgust taken by the king to this lady from his first introduction to her is well known, and Cromwell soon became the victim of his resentment. He did not, however, imme diately betray his purpose, but, on the con trary, heaped upon the devoted statesman higher honours. The marriage with Anne of Cleves was celebrated on January 6, 1640, and on April 17 Cromwell was created Earl of Essex, which was immediately foUowed by his admission into the order of the Garter, and his appomtment to the office of lord high cham'berlain of England, It would almost seem that Cromwell was raised to this high pinnacle of great ness for the mere purpose of gratifying the capricious malice of the tyrant, for within two months after his elevation to the earl dom he was suddenly arrested at the coun cU table on June 10, on charges which must have been for some time m prepara tion. The principal crime alleged against him was heresy and the encoiu-agement of heretics, and this was embellished with accusations of having spoken heinous words against the king two years before. In order that he might not have an oppor- CEO"WDEE 209 tunity of answering, a bUl of attainder was hurried through the parliament, in pur suance of which he was beheaded on Tower Hill on July 28. Whatever were the faults attached to Cromwell's character, no one had less cause to complain of them than King Henry, Zealously devoted from his first introduc tion at court to the royal interests, disre garding public obloquy in his efforts to promote them, and evidencing by all his acts the most sincere affection for his master, his death by that master's hand adds a deeper shade to the aversion 'with which the whole of Henry's career after the death of Wolsey must ever be re garded. Archbishop Cranmer, the only one of Cromwell's adherents who had the courage to come forward in his defence, wrote a letter to the king, which in its exposition of the claims the fallen favourite had on the royal mercy would have staggered a less obdurate heart ; but both that and the humble and affecting letter of CromweU himself, though it moved the king to tears, were unavailing. It would seem, however, that when it was too late the capricious king regretted the haste with which he had sacrificed his active minister, and there is an evident proof of his ' compunctious visitings ' in his patent, dated on the 18th of the following December, granting to Cromwell's son Gregory the barony wMch his father had held. This b.arony survived through seven generations. In 1687 it and the Irish earl dom of Ardglass, which had been granted to the fourth baron, became extinct. The Protector Oliver Cromwell was a descendant from Thomas Cromwell's sister, who married one WiUiams, and whose son Sir Richard Williams, one of King Henry's privy chamber, and afterwards constable of Berkeley Castle, assumed the surname of Cromwell, and was the great grandfather of Oliver. (Herbert's Henry VIII. ; Baron age, ii. 370 ; Weever, 605.) CEO'WDEE, Richaed Bitddbn, son of William Crowder, Esq., of Montague Place, was born in London about 179.5, was edu cated at Eton, and Trinity CoUege, Cam bridge, and, entering the Middle Temple, was called to the bar in May 1821. On the Westei'u Circuit he got intogood prac tice as well as in London, and in both displayed great power and abUity. He obtained a silk gown in 1837, and was appointed recorder of Bristol in 1846. For a short time he was in parUament, being elected member for Liskeard in 1849, but was not so eminent as a senator as he was as a barrister. In the latter character he was very effective with the jury and the court, byhis sound common sense, and his forcible, if not eloquent, oratory. He p 210 GULE'WOETH held the posts of counsel of the Admiralty and judge advocate of the fleet at the time of his promotion to the bench. That event occurred in March 1854, when he was selected to supply a vacancy in the Com mon Pleas. There he continued for nearly six years, distinguished by his honourable and manly bearing and his courtesy and urbanity. He died unmarried on Decem ber 6, 1859. CULE'WOETH, William de, in II Henry III. was engaged in fixing the tallage for the counties of Cambridge and Hertford, (Rot Claus. U. 176, 180.) This employ ment, in connection with his future position on the bench, makes it very probable that he was regularly engaged in forensic occu pations. From Easter 1236, 20 Henry in,, to Hilary 1242, he was one of the justiciers at "Westminster, fines being re gularly acknowledged before him ; -with a salary of 20/. per annum, CUMIN, John, or COMYN (Aechbishop OF Dublin), a monk of Evesham, and then a canon of St. Paul's, was one of the chaplains of Henry H., who employed him in several important embassies. In 1164 he was sent to the emperor on the subject of the anti-pope, and by his long stay there caused considerable uneasiness to Pope Alexander and the adherente of Becket. Again, in 1166, he was one of the three ministers despatched to Rome, where they succeeded, not only iu obtaming the ap pointment of two cardmals to hear and to determine the dispute with Becket, but also in bringing back to the king the letters which Becket had addressed to the pope, and which any other person had written in his favour. In 1169 and the five following years his name appears as one of the itinerant justices into several counties, and it seems DALISON probable that he held a responsible office in the Exchequer, as iu II70 he had the custody of the bishoprics of Hereford and Bath, then vacant; and in 1 180 WUliam Malduit, the chaniberlam, and he were employed to convey the treasury fi-om Northampton to Nottingham. (Madox, i. 93, &o., 289.) When the council of Windsor, in II79, divided the kingdom into four parts for judicial purposes, he was one of the six justiciers who were not only appointed to act in the northern counties, but were also speciaUy constituted to hear the complaints of the people in the Curia Regis. His ser-yices were not long unrewarded. In 1182 he was consecrated Archbishop of DubUn. Before tMs ceremony was per formed he received priest's orders from the pope, which, it would seem, neither his canonry nor Ms chaplamcy required. There are, mdeed, several instances of per sons holding higher rank m the Church without being prieste. He founded St. Patrick's Church m DubUn, and in 1186 he presided at a pro'vincial synod, for the better regulation of the manners and dis cipline of the Irish clergy. He died about 1213. (Brady's EngUnd, 872 ; Lord Lyttel ton ; Lelands Ireland, i. 138, 195 ; Holin shed, vi. 43.) CITESON, Robeet, became a reader of LincoM's Inn m autumn 1629, and a second time in Lent 15-37. On the ac cession of King Edward VI. m 1547 he was promoted to the bench as second baron of the Exchequer, and Ms successor in that office was appointed on May 6, 1650. CUSEE'O'GGE, Bald-win de, had property in Berkshire, and was one of the justices itinerant employed m 9 Richard L, 1197-8, to fix the tallage in that county, (Madox, i. 705.) D DAIVILL, John de, or D'AYEVILL, was one of the justices itinerant appointed in 10 Henry III,, 1226, for the coimtv of West moreland. He was the son "of Robert Daivill, a baron of Yorkshire and Not- tmgham and had joined in the rebelUon against King John, whereupon his lands were seized into the king's hands. Duo'- dale, in his 'Baronage ' (i. 693), states that they were again forfeited for some offence in 38 Henry IIL, but being restored to favour, he was appointed justice of the forests beyond Trent in 41 Henry III. and was afterwards constituted governor of the castles of York and Scarborough, In the contest between the king and his barons he joined the latter, and was summoned to the parUament they held after the battle of Lewes, He even continued the contest after the royal victory at Evesham, and, suffering another defeat at Chesterfield, fled to the isle of Axholme in Lincolnshire. He, however, purchased his peace in 61 Henry HI., and was again restored to his possessions. He married Maude, the widow of James de Aldithley. (Rot Claus. i. 243, 249, ii. 128,151.) ^ ^ DALISON, William. WilUam D'Alan- zon, who came over -with the Conqueror, was the founder of this family. The first who wrote himself Dalison, a direct dC'' DALLAS ecendant in the eighth generation, was of Laughton in LincoMshire, which, near two centuries afterwards, gave the title to the baronetcy granted in 1611 to Sir Roger DaUson, but which failed in 1645. Sir Roger was the grandson of George, the elder brother of Judge William, and they were the children of William DaUson, sheriff and escheator of his native county, by a daughter of George Wastneys, Esq., of Haddon in Nottinghamshire. WiUiam was educated at Cambridge, and, entering at Gray's Inn, was called to the bar in 1587, and was reader in I5'48 and 1652, In the October of the latter year the society presented him with 51. and a pair of gloves on his leaving them to assume the degi'ee of the coif (Dugdale's Orig. 137, 293); and on November 2, 1556, he was made serjeant to Kmg Philip and Queen Mary. In April 1554 he was elected representative of the county of LincoM, and was appointed a justice of the Common Pleas m the county palatine of Lancaster, He was constituted a judge of the Queen's Bench about Hilary Term 1556, being mentioned, not only m Dyer's Reports in that and subsequent terms, but also in a commission of the same and the succeed ing year, among the proceedings preserved in the 'Baga de Secretis ' (4 Report Pub. Rec, App. il. 256), and was then knighted. On Queen Elizabeth's accession Ms pa tent was renewed, but he survived only till the 18th of January foUo'wmg. He was bmied in Lincoln Cathedral under an altar tomb 'with his portrait thereon. By his -wife EUzabeth, daughter of Robert Dighton, Esq., of Sturton Parya in Lin- ¦ colnshire, he left four sons and five daughters. His learning as a lawyer was in high ¦ estimation. His reading on the statute ¦ 3 Henry VIIL, entitied ' That -wi-ongful disseisin is no descent in law,' is quoted by Dyer (219) ; and his Reports in conjunction with Serjeant Bendlowes are a valuable record of the cases of the time. DALLAS, Robeet, was the son of a gen tleman of the same name li-ying at Ken sington in Middlesex, and his mother was Elizabeth, daughter of the Rev. James Smith, minister of Kilberney in Ayrshire, He became a member of Lincoln's Inn, and trained himself to public speaking at the debating society held at Coachmakers' HaU, according to the common practice of the time, 'This was of considerable advantage to him when he was called to the bar, and enabled him to produce his arguments with much more ease to himself and with greater effect to the court, in which he soon ac quired considerable practice. In January 1788 he was engaged in the defence of Lord George Gordon. He next appears ns one of the counsel for Mr, Hastings, the DALLAS 211 trial of whose impeachment lasted seven years, from 1788 to 1796, and highly dis tinguished himself by his exertions, and by his polished addresses to the lords. Natu rally disgusted with the inveteracy of Burke against his cUent, he gave the relentless prosecutor no credit for patriotic feelings, but, attributing his attacks to the innate malignity of his nature, composed this bitter epigram : — Oft have we wonder'd that on Irish ground No poisonous reptile has e'er yet been found : Eeveal'dthe secret stands of Nature's ¦work — She sav'd her venom to produce her Burke. In 1796 Mr. Dallas received a silk gown ; and through all the succeeding years till he was raised to the bench the latter volumes of the State Trials record his efforte either for the defence or the prosecution. Among these his speech on the motion for a new trial m the case of General Picton was separately published. In the meantime he had obtained a seat in the House of Com mons, where he represented St. Michael's, Comwall, in 1802, and afterwards the Scotch boroughs of Kirkaldy, &c. In 1804 he was promoted to the chief justiceship of Chester, and presided there till 1813, when on May 4 he was appointed to the office of soUcitor-general and knighted. Six months afterwards he was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas, on November 5, 1818, and on the same day in 1818 he was promoted to the headship of that court. There he presided for five years with ac knowledged abiUty and universal respect. A curious question having been raised in 1823, whether the Lord Lieutenant of Ire land had the same power to confer knight hood after the Union which he undoubtedly possessed before that measure had passed, a meeting of the judges was held in June at Chief Justice Dallas's to consider the point, when they were of opimon unani mously that the Act of Union did not deprive him of his former privilege. It was a matter of some speculation how the right should have remained undisputed for above twenty years, during wMch it had been frequently exercised, and only now be impugned ; and it was suspected that the doubt was invented for the purpose of mortifying Lady Morgan, who had offended the ministers by the freedom of her writings, and whose husband had received an Irish knighthood. (Lady Morgan's Memoirs, U. 172.) At this time his health began to break, and he soon found he could no longer undergo the fatigues of his office. He therefore resigned his seat at the end of 1823, and lived little more than one year longer, dying on December 25, 1824. He left several children by his wife, Char lotte, daughter of Lieut.-Col. Alexander Jardine. 212 DAMIMRTIN DAMMAETIN, Manaseeitts de, was one of the justices itinerant named by Dugdale under the year 1170, but who were rather commissioners to enquire into the abuses of the sheriffs. Some of the family of Dam- martins were settled in Surrey, and some in Norfolk. DAMFIEE, Hbnet, descended from the Le Dampierres, anciently Counts of Flan ders, wasthe son of the Rev. Thomas Dam- pier, a native of Somersetshire, who from 'being one of the masters at Eton College was raised to the deanery of Durham, and, haying married twice, was most fortunate in his famUy. Thomas, the elder of his two sons by his first wife, Anne Hayes, became succes.Hively Bishop of Rochester (1802) and Ely (1808) ; and John, the younger, held a canonry in the latter cathedral. Henry, his only son by his second ¦wife, Frances Walker, was born on December 21, 1768, at Eton, and, having received his early education there, was elected to King's College, Cambridge, in 1776. He took his degree of B.A. in 1781, and of M.A, in 1784 ; in the interim gaining the members' prizes both in 1782 and 1783, Preferring the legal to the clerical profession, for which he was at first intended, he entered the Middle Temple in 1781, and was called to the bar in the customary routine. Dur ing the next thirty years he pursued the rugged paths of the law, admired and esteemed for Ms intelligence as an acute counsel, and for his obliging disposition and his classical as well as legal learning, made more attractive by the brilliancy of his conversation and his wit. At last he was appointed a judge of the King's Bench on June 23, 1813, when he was knighted. His judicial career was doomed to be shorter than any who had lately preceded him. Ere he had graced the bench for two years and a half, he died on February 3, 1816. Few have left a name so universally respected. He married in 1790 Martha, daughter of the venerable John Law, archdeacon of Rochester. She and five of their children survived him, one of whom, John Lucius Dampier, was recorder of Portsmouth, and became vice-warden of the Stannaries in Comwall. DANASTEE, John, In Dugdale's Ust of the governors of Lincoln's Inn the name of John Danaster occurs five times from 21 to 31 Henry VIIL, 1629-30, and in the last year he is called 'Baro Scacc' In the 'Chronica Series,' however, the name is not inserted among the barons ; but in a list kindly suppUed by Mr. Adlington, an officer of the Exchequer, John Banester appears in Michaelmas Term 1688 as third baron, who is also omitted in Dugdale's Ust, There can be no doubt that the same indi vidual is intended in both cases ; and the DANBY preference must be given to Dugdale's account, not only because the name of Danaster is so often repeated, for it appears that he was also a reader at Lincoln's Inn in 1630 and in 1635, but also because he is specially mentioned ¦with the title as one of the commissioners for receiving the in dictment against Henry Pole, Lord Monta cute, on November 29, 1639, preserved in the 'Baga de Secretis.' He died before Easter 1540. (Dugdale's Orig, 251, 259^ 3 Report Pub. Rec, App. n, 256, 258 f Manning and Bray's Surrey, iii. 224.) DANBY, Robeet, of a "Jorkshire family, in I44I is mentioned as an advocate in a case before the pri^vy council. The Year Books mtroduce his name as early as 1481, and he was called serjeant on February 14, 1443, 21 Henry VI. , being appointed one of the king's seijeants soon afterwards. He was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas on June 28, 1452, 30 Henry "VI., and held his place during the remainder of the reign. if he be the Robert Danby mentioned in the 'Paston Letters ' (i. 34), he was evidently an adherent to the Yorkist party. If so, we can well understand why on May 11, 1461, immediately after the accession of Edward IV., he was made chief justice of the Court of Common Pleas, Dugdale is in error when he mtroduces Sir Richard Choke as chief justice in I Edward IV,, fom' months after the appomtment of Danby. The Year Books plainly prove that throughout the next ten years both Danby and Choke were in the court to gether, the former described as chief jus tice, and the latter as justice only. He was still chief justice on the restora tion of Henry VL, who continued him at the head of the court during the six months of his renewed reign. Ou the return of Edward IV, in 1471 he was not re-ap pointed ; but whether the change arose from his death or removal we are not informed. In Holinshed's Chronicles (iii, 299) under this year is an account of the curious means adopted by Sir WUliam Haukes- ford, knight (meaning Hankford), one of the chief justices, to rid himself of Ufe, by directing his keeper to shoot any person whom he found in the park at night, and who would not stand when called upon, and then placing himself in the way of the fatal shot. That this could not apply to Sir William Hankford is evident from the fact that he had been dead for nearly fifty years. Whether it be true at all, or the mistake is only in the name, cannot now be determined ; but the only chief justice who disappears at this time is Sir Robert Danby, and to him not only is the high character given by HoUnshed in favour of " the misguided man equaUy applicable, but ¦ DANIEL the perplexities of the time afford a more probable reason for the tragic catasti-ophe. That Sir Robert was an excellent judge ,is evidenced by the great deference with which he was treated by the other judges and by the counsel in the Year Books, and by the frequent reference made to his opimons. DANIEL, William, was a younger son of the ancient family of Daniels of Over- Tabley in Cheshire. The name was origi nally D'Anyers, and is to be found in the Ust of those who entered England with the Conqueror. He was entered at Gray's Inn in 1566, and became reader there in 1579, and treasurer in 1580 and 1587. In 1584 he was admitted deputy recorder of London to Serjeant Fleetwoode, and his name appears in Coke's Reports in ,HUaiy 1691. When about to be advanced to the degree of serjeant-at-law in 1594 his name was struck out of the list upon an in formation to his prejudice relative to one Hacket, but was restored at the request of Lord Bm'leigh, who contradicted the re port, and testified to his bemg 'a vearie honest, learned, and discreat man,' On February 3, 1604, he was constituted a judge of the Common Pleas, as one of the two new judges King James had deter- ¦niined to add to the judicial staff. (Egerton Papers, 388.) There is no record of his argument in the great cose of the post-nati, but he joined the majority in the affirma tive view of the question, (State Trials, ii. 576.) He died in I6I0, DANVEES, Robeet. The foimder of this family in England was Roland D'An yers, who accompamed the Conqueror on his invasion, and whose descendants, by grante and marriages, acquired considerable property in Berkshire and Oxfordshire. Robert was the eldest son of John Danvers, ¦of Cothorp in the latter county, by his first wife Alice, daughter of WiUiam "Verney, of Byfield. He became one of the governors at Lincoln's Inn in 1428, 6 Henry VI. In 1433 he was implicated in an erasure which had been made in an act of council (iv. 166), but was exonerated from all blame on that account by a special warrant under the pri-vy seal. The record does not explain the particulars ; but it seems pro bable that they were in some way con nected with the city of London, of which he was about this time common serjeant. He was advanced to the recordership in 1442, and was called, seijeant on February 14, 1448. In I^444 he' was one of the king's Serjeants, and in 1445 was member for the city of London. In July 1450 Jack Cade, on taking up his head-quarters in London, forced Robert Danvers, the recorder, to be the head of a commission of oyer and terminer, at which several noblemen and gentlemen were tried DAVENPORT 213 for high treason, and some of them executed. That his conduct while acting in this capa city was not displeasing to the govemment appears by his being named on a commis sion into Kent, issued on August 1, to try the adherents of Cade, and by his being raised to the bench as a judge of the Com mon Pleas on August 14. He continued to sit there till the deposition of King Henry \T. ; and, being re-appointed by Edward IV., he passed the remamder of his life in the quiet performance of his judicial func tions. He died in 1467, being described as a knight in the inquisition then taken. (Cal. iv. 841.) He and his wife Agnes were buried in the church of St. Bartholomew, in Smithfield. By her, who was daughter of Richard Quatremains, of Rycot iu Ox fordshire (or, according to Stow, of Sir Richard Delaber), he left no male heirs. The baronetcy of Danvers and the earl dom of Danby were granted to descendante from Sir Robert's brother Richard, but are both now extinct, DANVEES, William, was half-brother to the above Robert, being one of the sons of John Danvers, of Cothorp in Oxfordshire, by his second wife, Joan, daughter of Wil liam Bruly, of 'Waterstock in the same county. There must have been a consider able difference between the ages of the two, because William's career as an advocate, in the Year Books, does not commence till 1476, seven or eight years after Ms brother's death. He attained the degree of serieant- at-law soon after the accession of Henry VIL, and on February 5, 1488, he was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas. Fines appear to have been acknowledged before him as late as February 1504. (Dug dale's Orig. 47.) He married Anne, daughter and heir of John Perry, Esq., of Ohamberhouse in Berkshire ; and his descendants were settled at Upton in Warwickshire. DAENALL, JoHN, on February 26, 1544, was appointed ingrosser of the Great RoU of the Exchequer, otherwise called clerk of the Pipe ; on May 5, 1648, he was con stituted fourth baron of that court, and he retained his seat till his death, on No vember 28, 1549. Beyond this there is no account of him. DAVENCESTEE, Philip db. In II Henry IL, II65, a charter between the abbots of St, Albans and Westminster was executed at the Exchequer, ' assidentibus justiciis regis,' the last of whom is ' Philippo de Davencestriee ' (Daventry), without any designation of the office he held, (Madox, i. 44.) He was sheriff of Cambridge and Huntingdon for three years, from 1-j Henry II. DAVENPOET, Humphebt, the second son of WiUiam Davenport, of an ancient and genteel family settied at BromhaU in 214 DE GREY Cheshire, by Margaret, daughter of Sir Richard Ashton, of Middleton in Lanca shire, was bom at Chester about 1566, and after entering BalUol College went to Gray's Inn, where he was called to the bar on No vember 21, 1690, and m Lent 1618 became reader to this society. He was elected member for Brackley in 1588, and made an ineffectual effort to introduce a measure of Church reform. (D'Ewes, 438.) In June 1623 he took the degree of the coif; and, haying been knighted by King James, he was created king's serjeant, shortly after King Charles's accession, on May 9, 1625. He was raised to the bench on February 2, 1630, as a judge of the Common Pleas, and had not sat there a year before he was called upon to fiU the office of lord chief baron, to which he was nominated on January 10, I63I. (Rymer, xix. 188, 254 ; W. Jones's Reports, 230.) In the case of ship-money he gave his opinion assuming the kin^ power to im pose it, but acquitting Hampden on a technical pomt, that the writ was not good in law. The majority of the judges having decided against Hampden, it became the duty of the lord chief baron to deliver the judgment, which afterwards, in the Long Parliament, was declared to be void. His equivocal opinion in favour of Hampden did not avail to prevent that parUament from condemning the support he had given to the king's illegal impositions. Articles of im peachment against him were accordingly carried up to the House of Lords on July 6, 1641, and he was ordered to give 10,000/. bailforhis appearance. It is pro'bable that he then withdrew himself altogether from the duties of his office, for on January 25, 1644, the king appointed Sir Richard Lane his successor. It is curious, however, that Sir Humphrey's patent of revocation is not dated till January II m the foUowing year. The date of his death is not given. Fuller (i. 188) says he 'had the reputation of a studied lawyer and upright person ; ' and A. Wood (iii. 182) states that ' he was ac counted one of the oracles of the law.' DE GEEY, William (Loed Walsing ham). The root of this family can be traced to the twelfth century, and that branch of it to which the judge belonged possessed, with other lai-ge estates, the manor of Merton in Norfolk for about four hundred years before he came into the world. His father was Thomas De Grey, who represented that county in parliament ; and his mother was EUzabeth, daughter of William Wyndham, of Felbrigge. WiUiam was their third son, and was born at Merton on July 7, 1719. After receiving his edu cation at Christ's College, Cambridge, he entered the Middle Temple, and was called to the bar in 1742, He was made Mng's DELVES counsel to George H. in 1758, and in Sep tember 1761 solicitor-general to the queen of George III. In the latter year he was elected member of parliament for Newport in Cornwall, and in December 1763 was appointed solicitor to the Mng. In August 1766 he became attomey-general, and was knighted. He was also comptroller of the first-fruits and tenths. He filled the office of attomey-general for nearly five years, and in the parUament foUo-wing his appointment had the honour of bemg elected by three different consti tuencies — at first for Newport and Tam- worth, selecting the former; and after wards, in January 1770, for the university of Cambridge. In that parliament he con tended against the legality of Mr. WUkes's return for Middlesex ; and on aU other oc casions strenuously supported the measures of Lord North's ministry. On a motion to abridge the power of the attomey-general in filing ex officio informations, he boldly defended himself, and proved that the power was not only constitutional, but, when discreetly exercised, essentiaUy neces sary. He conducted the proceedings against WUkes, when he surrendered in 1768 after his conviction, on the question of his out lawry; in the various discussions previous to his sentence ; and m the -writ of eiror before the House of Lords, by whom the conviction and sentence were confirmed. Though sharing of course the unpopularity with which all the opponents of that dema gogue were visited, Sfr WUliam De Grey does not seem to have excited any special animosity, but to haye been regarded as merely doing his duty as an officer of the crown. On January 25, 1771, he was appointed lord chief justice of the Common Pleas. After presiding over his court for nearly ten years, the faUure of his health ohhged him to resign in June 1780. In acknow ledgment of his services, the king in the following October called him up to the House of Peers by the title of Lord Wal singham. He enjoyed his new honours for little more than six months, dying onMay 9, 1781, when he was buried at Merton. He was a most accomplished la'wyer, and of the most extraordinary power of memory. J I have seen him,' says Lord Eldon, ' come into com't with both "hands wrapped up in finnnel (from gout). He could not take a note, and had no one to do so for him. 1 have known him try a cause which lasted nine or ten hours, and then, from memory, sum up all the evidence with the greatest correctness.' (Twiss, i. 113.) He married Mary, daughter of William Co-wper, Esq., M.P, for Hertford, and first cousin of the poet ; and the title is stiU en joyed by his descendants. DELVES, John de, wasthe son of Richard DENE de Delves, of Delves HaU, near Uttoxeter, in Staffordshire, who was constable of Heleigh Hall, in that county. At the battle of Poictiers, in 1856, the Lord Audley, with his^four esquires, of whom John de Delves was one, performed such acte of valour that Prince Edward gi-anted to him, on the field, ' fyue hundred markes of yerely reuenewes,' which the generous lord immediately re signed to his four squires, saying that they had ' alwayes seruedme truely, and specially this day ; "that honour that 1 haue is by their valyantnesse,' And each of them was allowed to add a part of their lord's arms to Ms own, John de Delyes was soon afterwards knighted, and retained in the service of the Black Prince. In 36 Edward HI. he is caUed his ' valettus,' in an order to the sheriffs of London to supply him with as many bows and arrows as the prmce should require; and he was entrusted with the wardship of the Duchess of Brittany. However natural it was that the royal goodwill should be extended to him, it seems strange that a place on the judicial bench should be selected as a reward for his mUitary services, since there is no evidence that he had been ever previously connected ¦with the law. Yet so it was, a,nd on Fe bruary 3, 1364, 38 Edward IIL, he was constituted a judge of the Common Pleas. There is evidence, however, that he ac companied the Black Prince to Gascony two months afterwards, so that he did not de vote himself much to his legal avocation. Fines, however, appear to have been levied before him tUl the middle of the foUowing year. As Ms name was not afterwards in serted among the judges who received their salaries, he probably then retired from the bench. He was lucky enough, at this time, to announce to the king the birth of his grandson Edward, the son of the Prince of Wales, for which he had a grant of 40/. a year. (Cal Rot Pat 180,) He lived till 1369, and was buried at Audley in Staffordshire, By his -wife Isa beUa, daughter of PhiUp de Malpas, he left a daughter, Joan, the widow of Henry de Kymes, and bequeathed to her most of Ms manors; but he was eventually suc ceeded in his estates by his brother Henry, one of whose descendants, Thomas Delves, of Dodington, obtained a baronetcy, which is now extinct. (Froissart, i. 197, 206; Dugdale's Orig. 45 ; CaL Inq. p. m, ii. 296.) DENE, Henet (Abchbishop oe Cantee bitet), although holding three sees succes sively, wore the episcopal mitre for little more than five years. His public career is equally short, and little is preserved of his private history. His origin is not recorded, except that he was a "Welshman, which might perhaps operate as a recommendation to Henry VH. He was born about 1450, DENHAM 215 and the place of his education is claimed by both Oxford and Cambridge. He be came in I46I prior of Llanthony Secundus, near Gloucester, a cell to that in Monmouth shire, but afterwards, m I48I, made the principal house. In 1494 he was consti tuted Chancellor of Ireland, when his ser vices in turning away the impostor PerMn Warbeck from the Irish shores secured the royal favour, and he was not only rewarded by being made deputy and justiciary of that kingdom in 1496, but also Bishop of Bangor, In this see he restored the rights of the church, and regained several valuable properties, and in March 1500 he was translated to the more important diocese of Salisbury, Six months afterwards, on Oc tober 13, he was invested with the custody of the Great Seal with the title of lord keeper, and in the following January he was consecrated Archbishop of Canterbury. The pope soon after appointed him his legate m England; and before the end of the year he solemnised the nuptials of Prince Arthur with Catherine of Arragon, and was en gaged in negotiating the treaty of marriage between the King of Scots and the Princess Margaret. No reason beiug assigned for his early resignation of the custody of the Great Seal on July 27, 1502, it may pro bably be attributed to the failure of his health, as he survived his retirement only half a year. He died at Lambeth, on Fe bruary 16, 1602-3; and his remains were deposited in Canterbury Cathedral, (God win, 132, 862, 625 ; Rymer, xn, 623, 642, 798 ; Arch. Journal, xviU. 256-267.) DENE, Ralph de, one of the twelve m- quisitors against the sheriffs in 1170, who are caUedjustices itinerant by Dugdale, was of a Sussex family, in which county he had considerable property. He settled some canons of the Prssmonstratensian order at Ottham in Sussex. (Madox, i. 576, ii. 78 ; Monast yi. 911.) DENHAM, John, in the memoir of his son Sir John Denham, the poet, is described as of Little Horsley in Essex. He was a member first of Fumival's Inn, and then of Lincoln's Inn, and, haying been called to the bar in L587, was chosen a reader of that society twenty years afterwards. Eton CoUege employed him as their counsel, and made him their steward. On June 5, 1609, having been first called ser jeant, he was appointed lord chief baron of the Irish Exchequer, and knighted. From this office he was advanced within three years to that of lord chief justice of the King's Bench, in the same country. This he held for flve years, and then exchanged it on May 2, 1617, for a seat in the English Court of Exchequer. How well "he per formed his duties iu Ireland may be judged from the address of Lord ChanceUor Bacon ( Works, vU. 264) to his successor. Sir Wil- 216 DENISON liam Jones, who is recommended to imitete ' the care and affection to the commonwealth of Ireland, and the prudent and politic ad ministration of Sir John Denham.' He was so good an ' administrator of the re venue' there, as Bacon calls him, that he set up the customs, which, bringing flrst only 500/., were let before his death for 64,000/. per annum, (Ibid. 816, notei)^ In the proceedings against his eminent eulogist, three years afterwards, he had the unpleasant duty of delivering the message of the lords to the fallen chancellor, re- qiuring a special answer to the charges against him. (ParL Hist, i. 1289.) In the case of ship-money he joined the other judges for the sake of conformity in the opinion they gave to the king in favour of its legality ; but on the hearing of the case against Hampden he was absent during four days of the argument, and, being sick and weak, gave a short written judgment on Maj' 28, 1638, in opposition to the king's claim. (State Trials, ui. 1201.) He lived only seven mouths after the unfortunate de cision of the majority, and dying on January 6, 1639, was buried at Egham in Surrey, where there is a monument to him and his two wives. The flrst of these was Cicile, the widow of Richard Kellefet, Esq. ; and the second Eleanor, the daughter of Sir Garrett Moore, first Viscount Drogheda. The judge built the mansion called ' The Place ' at Egham ; but his estate was wasted in gambling by his only son, John Denham, equally celebrated as the author of ' Coop er's Hill ' and other poems, and as a loj'al adherent of King Charles through all his adversities. He was rewarded on the Resto ration with the post of surveyor-general and the knighthood of the Bath, and died in 1668. (Aubrey, ii. 320 ; Brit Biography, V, 458.) DENISON, Thomas, was the younger of two sons of Mr. Joseph Denison, an opulent merchant at Leeds, the elder of whom was the grandfather of the Right Honourable John Evelyn Denison, speaker of the House of Commons since 1867. He was bom in 1699, and received his legal education at the Inner Temple, where he was called to the bar. His merits as a lawyer soon pro cured him a considerable practice, and, ¦vrithout having filled any of the minor offices of the profession, he was made a judge of the King's Bench in December 1741. He was knighted in November 1745, when he joined in the loyal address to the king on the rebelUon. After ad ministering justice in that court for more than twenty-tM-ee years, his health and his sight failing him, he resigned on February 14, 1765. He sat under three successive chief jus tices — Sir William Lee, Sir Dudley Ryder, and Lord Mansfield ; the latter of whom DENMAN had so high an opinion of his learning, and so great an affection for him, that when he died on the 8th of the following Septem ber, he wrote the beautiful and characteristic epitaph on his monument in the church of Harewood in Yorkshire, where he lies near Lord Chief Justice Gascoigne, He married Anne, daughter of Robert Smithson, Esq., but left no issue. DENMAN, Thomas (Loed Denman), than whom no chief justice of England since the death of the Earl of Mansfield has been regarded -with more personal esteem and affection, and none since the days of Lord Chief Justice Holt have left a character of bolder independence or more fearless and uncompromising patriotism, was bom on February 28, 1779, at his father's house in Queen Street, Golden Square, which m honour of the infant then brought into the world has lately assumed the name of Denman Street. He was the only son of Dr. Thomas Denman, the most eminent physician of Ms time in his par ticular branch of science, and of his wife Elizabeth, daughter of Alexander Brodie, Esq., a descendant from the ancient family of Brodie, of Brodie in Morayshire. The family from which he sprang was origmally settled in Nottinghamshire, some tiine at East Retford, and more lately at Bever- cotes, but Dr. Denman's father removed to Bakewell in Derbyshire, where for many years he practised as a surgeon. The judge therefore is anotherinstance, of which there are so many in this reign, of the legal bench being supplied by men of medical Imeage. At three years he commenced his school education under that amiable and exceUent woman Mrs. Barbauld, then resident at Pal grave in Norfolk, and to her system of in struction durmg the two years he was under her tuition the judge was accustomed to attribute the retentive memory and what ever grace and facility of diction he after wards attained. After leaving Mrs. Bai-bauld's, he was placed for a short time under the Rev. Dr. Thompson at Kensington, whence he pro ceeded when seven years old to Eton. His industry and application during the years that he remained there are evidenced by the stores of classical literature which re mained in his memory, aud by the delight which he took in thein, and his readmess in quoting them; aud his social character among his schoolfellows may be estimated by the many lasting friendships which he formed there. To the last period of his Ufe he retained that affection for the noble establishment with which those who have been educated within its waUs invariably regard it. Before proceeding to the uni versity he spent one or two years as a pupil with his maternal uncle, the Rev. Peter Brodie (the father of Mr. Brodie DENMAN the emment conveyancer, and Sir Benjamin Brodie the great surgeon, his feUow pupils), under whom he added largely to the classi cal and historical knowledge which he had laid in at Eton. From 1796 to 1800 he spent at St. John's College, Cambridge, and took his degree of B.A. in the latter year, and that of M.A, in 1803, without aiming at a place on the list ¦of imiversity honours, as he had a great distaste to mathematical studies, and de voted himself entirely to his favourite classics. He then entered Lincoln's Inn, and placed himself as a pupil under the great ¦conveyancer Charles Butler, and the emi nent pleader Mr. Tidd, the initiator into legal mysteries of so many remarkable men. After due preparation, he practised for a short time as a special pleader until 1806, when he was called to the bar, and joined the Midland Circuit and Lincoln Sessions. He had two years before married Theodosia Ann, the eldest daughter of the Rev. Richard Vevers, rector of Saxby in Lei cestershire, While making the slow progress which is so much the fate of junior barristers, he ¦employed some part of his leisure in writing ¦critiques on the classical literature of the day for the ' Monthly Review,' then the leading whig journal, until it was super seded by the advances of its Edinburgh competitor. But he gradually got the ear of the court, and so early as 1809 by his lucid, elaborate, and successful argument on the right application of the rule in Shelley's •case, in opposition to so able an opponent as Mr, Copley (afterwards Lord Lyndhurst), proved that he had not sat at the feet of the great conveyancing Gamaliel in vain. (II East, 548.) But the event to which he ¦attributed his ultimate success, and which recommended him to the first honours he received, was his employment on the trials of the Luddites in 1817, when he was en gaged for the defence of the prisoners ar raigned at'Derby. In 1818 Mr, Denman obtained Ms first seat in parliament as representative of Wareham in Dorsetshire, He soon em barked on the stormy sea of politics, and distinguished himself by the boldness with which he attacked abuses and pronounced opinions to which he adhered through life, and in particular by advocating the neces sity of an amelioration of the criminal law. In this his first year he had obtained a position of considerable importance in the House of Commons, and had estabUshed a reputation which was soon to be extended throughout the country. The old king George III. died on January 29, 1820, and the Prince of Wales, who had held the regency of the kingdom for the nine previous years, ' heavily in clouds ' DENMAN 217 commenced his actual reign of George 1V« A conspiracy, widely spread among the lower orders of the people, had been orga nised to overturn the government of the country just before his acces3ion,and •within a month after it a plan was concerted for the commencement of the outbreak by the murder of all the ministers at a cabmet dinner at Lord Harrowby's. The plot was discovered only just in time. On the very day of its intended execution the body of traitors were arrested in the midst of their preparations, and their conviction and exe cution soon followed. The agitation arising from what was called the Cato Street con spiracy had scarcely subsided before the public were excited by the prospect of an investigation of a very different nature, but threatening equally perilous consequences. In the meantime Mr, Denman had at the general election of that year been returned for Nottingham. Queen CaroUne, who was Uving apart from her husband in foreign lands, had intimated her intention of coming to Eng land to claim the righte and privileges due to her new rank, which it was known that the Mng mtended to resist, as he had already excluded her name from the usual prayers in the Liturgy. One of the first acts of her progress towards England was to ap point Mr, Brougham her attorney-general and Mr. Denman her soUcitor-general. Numerous negotiations took place between the government and her law officers, in order to avert the inconveniences which threatened to follow her arrival. But all endeavours of accommodation failing, her majesty entered London on June 7, amidst the triumphant acclamations of the people, and the whole town, partly from sympathy and partly from force and fear, was illumi nated in the evening. The cause of this popular feeling was not so much a conviction of the queen's inno cence, for of that the majority knew little and cared less, as a disgust at the indignities offered to a female, and an admiration of the spirit she exhibited in hastening to face her accusers, together with the gro'wing unpopularity of the king, much increased. by the knowledge of the grounds of recri mination which the queen, even if the charges against her were true, could justly bring against him. Meetings of arbitrators, motions in parUament, were aUke ineffectual to produce an arrangement, the interesting protocols and debates in which will be found in Hansard and the 'Annual Register ' for the year. In aU these proceedmgs Mr. Denman of course took a prominent part, and in the new House of Commons he spoke with so much mdignation, boldness, and force that he drew from the mouth of a member a question to which the spirit of prophecy might be attributed. Mr. R. 218 DENMAN Martin asked her majesty's solicitor-general ' if by any train of fortuitous events he should at some future period find himself elevated to the bench of this country (and, as all things were in the hands of Providence, such an event was by no means unlikely), how he would like to have hurled against his judicial dignity any former opinion which he might have professed in that house or elsewhere ? ' Mr. Denman was certainly prophetic in the dignified answer that he gave to this impertinence. He said that ' he did not fear that any opinion he had delivered or should deliver in that house would ever rise up in judgment against him, nor should he desert those opinions in any situation in which he might be placed.' The ' Green Bag ' containing the dirty details was brought in and referred to a secret committee, upon whose report the BiU of Pains and Penalties was introduced into the House of Lords on July 5, the ob ject of which was to deprive the queen of her title and to dissolve the marriage be tween her and the king. The second read ing was put off till August 17. Nearly the whole talent of the bar was engaged, and of the eleven counsel who appeared, six on one side and five on the other, no less than ten were afterwards elevated to high legal distinction. Only one of the advocates for the queen — namely, Sir Nicolas Tindal — re ceived his judicial promotion while George IV. remained on the throne, and though the two principal advocates received legal rank during the reign, it was not granted till near the end of it, and then with the greatest reluctance and difficulty. With so much displeasure did the king regard Mr. Denman for the bitter terms in which he had alluded to the grounds of recrimination which the Hng had afforded, that he was omitted from the batch of king's counsel created on the accession of the liberal- minded Lord Lyndhurst to the chancellor ship, and it was only by his bold remon strance that the Duke of Wellington was enabled to remove the injustice. During the progress of the trial the ex citement of the people was unbounded. They wholly discredited the evidence ad duced against her majesty, declaring that the witnesses were suborned, and when the ministers were obliged to abandon the bill the delight of the populace Etlmost amounted to frenzy. In the queen's popularity the advocates of her innocence, who had shown such fearless gallantry in her defence, of course largely participated. The popular effervescence had not sub sided when Sir John Sylvester, the recorder of London, died and Mr. Knowles was appointed his successor in 1822, leaving a vacancy in his former place of common serjeant. This was in the gift of the DENMAN Common Council, and would natiually have fallen to their senior pleader, Mr, BoUand, ¦who was a deserved favourite in the city. But the queen's party in the council deter mined to testify their admiration of the exertions made in her defence by Mr. Den man, on whom in the previous year they had conferred the freedom of the city, and elected him to the office by a majority of 131 over 119 for Mr. BoUand, who some years after was appointed a baron of the Exchequer, In this new character Mr. Denman dis appointed his opponents, who gave him credit for more eloquence than law, by ex hibiting those judicial powers which are most admirable while presidmg over a criminal coui't — patience, firmness, and humanity ; and by the sweetness of his disposition, joined with the natural dignity of his character, he gained the affection and respect even of those who differed most from him m poUtics. These feelings found utterance in the various addresses they presented to him upon every occasion of his advancement. He retired from parliament from 1826 to 1830, when on the general election conse quent on the accession of WilUam IV, he was again elected for Nottingham, which he continued to represent tUl his elevation to the bench. On the death of the queen in I82I he of course lost the precedence which his office of her solicitor-general gave him in the courts, and was obliged to retire behmd the bar ; and it was not till seven years after wards, in 1828, that he received a silk gown. From that time his promotion was rapid. WUliam IV. in 1830 succeeded to the cro'wn, and on the accession of the whig ministry, scormng to remember the personal attack which Mr. Denman in his zeal had uttered against him on the queen's trial, sanctioned Ms appointment as attor ney-general on Novemlber 26, and knighted him. He had not fiUed the office of attor ney-general qiute two years when Lord Tenterden died, and Sir Thomas was with out a moment's hesitetion appointed, on November 4, 1832, his successor as lord chief justice of the King's Bench, For nearly eighteen years he graced that seat with the highest commendation from his brother judges, the bar, and the public. "\^'^ithout pretending to the deep black-letter learning of some of his colleagues, he had laid up a sufficient store of legal knowledge to meet every requirement, and being deeply imbued with the principles on which the law is founded, knew well how to apply them in the justice he adminis tered. He maintained on the bench the same independence, and exhibited the same courage, as distinguished him at the bar, and in the famous case of Stockdale DENMAN V, Hansard did not hesitete boldly to sup port the rights and liberties of the subject in opposition to the assumed privileges of parliament, and the threats of the House of Commons. No judge ever showed more unaffected dignity in his demeanour, more kindness and courtesy to all who were in communication with him, more patience and discrimination in investigating the righte of the parties before him, or more flrmness and perspicuity in delivering his judgmente. In March 1834 he was created a peer by the title of Baron Denman of Dovedale in Derbyshire, and ventured to break through the custom of chief justices attendmg par liament m their judicial robes, by always sitting in his ordinary dress. Lord Den man was called upon, in consequence of the ilMess of Lord Cottenham the chancellor, to preside as lord high steward when the Earl of Cardigan was indicted for shooting Captain Tuckett in a duel, who was ac quitted from the omission of the prosecution to prove the identity of the man wounded with the man named in the indictment. At the age of seventy Lord Denman's health began to fail, and after several months' suffering he felt that he could no longer perform the duties of his office with satisfaction to himself or with benefit to the public. He therefore sent in his resig nation at the end of Hilary Term 1860, and Lord CampbeU, who was only two years his junior, was appointed m his place. In no instance of a judge's retirement was so much regret expressed. Not only from the citizens of London, who looked upon them selves as in some sort the founders of his fortune, and who had placed his portrait on the walls of their council chamber, but from the whole bar, and specially from the members of his own (the Midland) circuit, from the grand juries of Lmcolnshire, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, Leicester shire, Warwickshire, Kent (conveying the sentiments of admiration and regret of the leading gentry of those counties), was he gratified by receiving the most affectionate addresses. The solicitors gave a permanent testimony of their participation in these feelings by placing his bust in their hall in Chancery Lane ; and the poet-laureate of the Home Circuit, Sir Joseph Amould, since a judge at Bombay, embodied them in a beautiful copy of verses describing in elegant and pathetic lines the various excellences by which he was distinguished, and their loss in being deprived of his example. The sympathy thus shown in this countiy extended even to America, and was com municated in an elegant letter from Mr. Everett, who had been ambassador here. But the highest gratiflcation experienced by Lord Denman was in receiving the un exampled compliment from his colleagues DENNY 21^ in the court m which he presided of a valuable inkstand, in a beautiful classical design, accompanied by a letter the lan guage of which must have been even more precious than the gift. His four brethren say, ' We do desire to bear sincere and con siderate testimony to the leading good sense and abilitj', the industry and uprightness, the candour, patience, dignity, and good temper with which you have adorned the bench on which we haye had the hap piness to sit as your assistants. But we are bound to add to this our gratitude for the uniform kindness which individuaUy we have experienced at your hands, the hearty acceptance which you have ever given to such assistance as it was our duty and m our power to afford you, and the delightful friendlmess, without change or diminution at any time, which has shed a peculiar charm on our private intercourse. By these we have been made, we trust, more useful servante to the pu'bUc, as we are sure we have been enabled to enjoy our few leisure hours more perfectly.' "The letter bears the subscription of the respected names of Sir John Patteson, Sir John Coleridge, Sir WiUiam Wightman, and Sir WiUiam Erie. Throughout his life he preserved his en joyment of every branch of literature and science ; and, though he did not publish any work with his name, he contributed many elegant translations to Bland's ' Greek An thology,' besides often relaxing himself in playful dalliance with the Muses. He lived nearly flve years after his resig nation, spending most of his time at Stony Middleton, near Bakewell, which he had inherited from his father, in those acts of charity and kindness which endeared him to his fellow-creatm-es, and in contempla tions which prepared him for his end. His death occurred on September 22, 1854, at Stoke Albany, near Rockingham. He left a large family. DENNY, Edmund, or Edwaed, from being a clerk of the Exchequer, was raised in 1504 to the office of king's remem brancer, and on May 6, 1613, 5 Henry VIIL, to that of fourth baron, in which he continued till his death in 1620. He was buried in the chm-ch of St. Benet, Paul's Wharf, London. He is described as of Cheshunt in Hertfordshire, and was the son of Thomas Denny and Agnes his wife. He h.id three wives : the flrst was Margaret, daughter of Ralph Leigh, Esq., of Stock- well, Surrey, M.P. for the county; the second was Mary, daughter and heir of Robert Troutbeck, Esq., of Bridge-Traf- ford, Cheshire ; and the third Jane, daughter of . By his second ¦wife only he had issue. Besides several daughters, one of whom, Joyce, was the mother of the celebrated Sir Francis Walsingham, and the matemal ancestor of the Viscounts 220 DENTON Falkland, he had t^wo sons, tha younger of whom was Sir Anthony, the Mng's remem brancer, and gentleman of the king's privy chamber. His grandson w;as created Baron Denny and Earl of Norwich, both of which titles haye become extin!ct. The family is now represented by a baronetcy, created in 1782. DENTON, Albxandbb, was the nephew of Sir Edmund Denton, a baronet, whose title is now extinct, and the son of another Alexan der Denton, of Hillesden, near Buckingham. In 1704 he was caUed to the bar py the Middle Temple, and in February fflf the next year he was committed to the custody of the serjeant-at-arms by the Hokse of Commons for pleading for the plaintiffs in the Aylesbury case. (State Trials, xivi 809.) In 1708 and 1714 he was elected member of parliament for Buckingham. Taking a high rank in his profession, he was on Jime 25, 1722, appointed a judge of the Common Pleas, and after filling it with respectabiUty for eighteen years, he died on March 22, 1740, holding at his death the office also of chancellor to the Prince of Wales. 1 He married a lady ¦with a fortune of 20,000/., named Bond, but left no issui. DENUM, William de, of a family esta blished in Durham, was the son of Robert de Denum. Both he and his elder brother John were seijeants, and are probably the persons who are generaUy called J. and W, Devom in the Year Books of Edward II. and III. William, in the early part of the reign of the latter monarch, was frequently employed in conducting the negotiations with Scotland. In 1829 he was one of the itinerant judges into Nottinghamshire, and in 1831 was constituted king's serjeant. On September 24, 1832, he was made a baron of the Exchequer; and a little later in the same year Dugdale mtroduces him among the justices of the King's Bench, on the authority of a liberate. But it is most probable that this document was nothing more than the order for his salary as a baron, the titles not being always clearly distinguished. No entry occurs relative to him after this date, so that it is not unlikely that he retired from the bench when he succeeded to the manor of Herdwick-j uxta-IIesilden, and other large family estates, on the death of his brother. He died in 1360, leaving his wife, Isa beUa, and four daughters, (Surtees's Dur ham, i. 61, 192 ; N. Fcedera, U, 704-849 ; Abb. Rot Orig. ii, 91, 261.) DEEBY, William, was a clergyman, and ¦no doubt a clerk in the Exchequer, On February 8, 1436, 13 Henry VL, he was nominated third baron, and on June 16, 1436, was raised to the second seat in the court. He died in 1488. (Acts Privy Council, iv. 295.) DESPENCEE, Hugh le, was, there is no DESPENCER doubt, the descendant of one who had been the steward of the king, and who was, in the language of the time, called Dispensa- tor, or le Despencer, which title became a surname of the family. Dugdale caUs Hugh a grandson of another Hugh, and the son of Thomas (Baronage, i, 389) ; while Col lins makes him the son of Geoffrey, and grandson of Thurstan. (Peerage, iv, 496,) If the former, Dugdale leaves us in doubt as to his actual ancestors ; but if the latter, his succession from the steward of Henry I. is clearly shown. That Hugh le Despencer, however, was of the baronial famUy of that name is suffi ciently proved by his accompanying Richard, King of the Romans, to Germany, in 1267 (Rymer, i. 355), and by his being selected as one of the twelve commissioners on the part of the barons at the parliament of Oxford in 1258, when Hugh Bigot was nommated chief justiciary by them. In 44 Henry IH. he went as a justice itinerant- into three counties, and on the retirement of Hugh Bigot at the latter end of that year he was appomted by the barons to succeed him. Although the Mng, in the following July, on resuming his authoritj', placed Philip Basset in the office of chief justiciary, Hugh le Despencer continued to act in the same capacity on the part of the barons till April 1262, when, an accom modation takmg place, PhUip Basset seems to have been established in the office, as he certainly performed its functions durmg the king's absence m Guienne in that year. [Excerpt, e Rot, Fin. ii. 385, &c,) On a pretended reconciliation between the king and the barons m 1263 Hugh le Despencer was again appointed cMef justi ciary. Early in the next year the barons' war again broke out, and the Earl of Lei cester having secured the citizens of Lon don on his side, Hugh le Despencer, at the head of their associated bands, destroyed the houses of Philip Basset and the loyalist nobiUty, imprisoned the judges, and left the Jews, after enriching himself with the ran som of some of the most wealthy, to the tender mercies of the mob. (Lingard,iii.l35.) In the battle of Lewes, fought on May 14, 1264, the chief justiciary distinguished him self on the barons' side, and after the king's defeat no less than six castles were placed under Hugh's government, with a grant of 1000 marks for his support in his office. (Rymer, ii, 445,) In Leland's ' Collectanea ' (U, 378) there is a stetement that he afterwards quarreUed with the Earl of Leicester ; and it is some what curious that in three records quoted by Brady (i, 660-1), dated in May and June 1266, the title ' ,Iusticiarius ' is added to the earl's name. This bears the appear ance of the retirement of Hugh ; but as in the following August he was in arms vrith. DEVON that nobleman, the difference could not have been of long continuance. The firm ness of his friendship was sho-wn at the battle of Evesham on August 4, 1266, when, re fusing to quit the field before it began, though urged by the earl to do so, he and Leicester were slain together. As a soldier he seems to have been va- Uant and bold; but the few facts that are Tccorded of him in his capacity of chief justice of the kingdom are marked with the violence and rapacity of the times. He married Alyna, or AUva, the daughter and heir of Philip Basset, of Wicombe, who, after his death, became the wife of Roger Bigot, Earl of Norfolk. By her he left a son and a daughter, the latter of whom married Hugh de Courtney, father of Hugh, flrst Earl of Devon. The son, Hugh, was created Earl of Wmchester in 1822; but being beheaded in 1326, his honours became forfeited. His grandson, however, was summoned to parUament by Edward III. ; but his successor (who had been created Earl of Gloucester in 1397) was beheaded in 1400, and the honours were again forfeited. This attainder being reversed in 1461, the barony was restored to his granddaughter EUzabeth, the wife of Edward Nevill, and, after falling several times into abeyance, still survives in the present Baroness le Despencer, DEVON, Eael of. See H, DE Coitete- NETE. D'EYNCOTJET, EDMirND,the son and heir of John, who was lineally descended from Walter D'Eyncourt, who came over with the Conqueror, and was royally rewarded with many lordships in the counties of York, Northampton, Nottingham, Derby, and Lincoln, at his father's death, m 1267, was a minor, and when he attained Ms majority served the Mng in his wars in 'Wales, in Gascony, and in Scotland. He was summoned to parliament m 27 Ed ward I, (Barcmage, i. 888), and subscribed the letter to the pope by the title of ' Do minus de Thurgerton.' In 1305 he was appomted one of the justices of trailbaston for LmcoM and nine other counties, and throughout the following reign he still con tinued to act as a judge. (Pari. W., ii, 769,) He died in 1327, I Edward III. His lands and title devolved by royal Ucence on Ms nephew WiUiam, the son of his brother John, On the death of the thirteenth baron, in 1422, the barony fell into abeyance, and ultimately became forfeited. (Nicolas's Synopsis.) DIGGES, Dttdlbt, whose pedigree, pre pared by himself, commences in the reign of Henry IIL, was the grandson of Leo nard Digges, 'insignem mathematicum,' and the son of Thomas, 'mathematicum insignissimum,' by Anne, the daughter of Sir Warham de Sentleger. Both of these DIGGES 221 progenitors, so eminent for their mathema tical studies, were resident at Digges Court Barham, in Kent, where Sir Dudley was born in 1583. He was entered a gentleman commoner of University CoUege in Oxford, where he took the degree of B.A. in I60I, and, in the multitudinous distribution of honours by King James, he was knighted soon after the accession. He was member for Tewkesbury from. 1604 to I61I, Part of this time he spent abroad; and in I6II he is mentioned as ' busy -with the discovery of the north-west passage,' and in 1614 as 'mo-ying every stone to obtain employment,' (CaL St. Papers [1611], 96, 226,) He was subse quently employed on a mission to the- Hague. Whether he then held any office at court is uncertain ; but he probably did so in October 1615, when he deposed, on the tiial of Weston for the murder of Sir Thomas Overbuiy, that the knight had imparted to Mm his readiness to be em ployed in an embassy to Russia, to which the king had appointed him. He was cer tainly a gentleman of the king's privy chamber in 1618, for he is so described in a commission of that date appointing him ' ambassador to the great duke and lord of aU Russia, to treat concerning a loan from the king to the duke,' Of this voyage, in which John Tradescant accompanied him as a naturalist, there is a MS. account preserved in the Ashmolean Museum, (Notes and Queries, 1st S, iii, 392.) In the parUament of 1621, so fatal to Lord Chancellor Bacon, Sir Dudley sat again for Tewkesbury, and was one of the committee that brought forward the charges against the noble delinquent. Though he seems to have taken altogether a moderate and conciliatory part, the Mng thought otherwise, for, though not included among the ' ill-tempered spirits ' mentioned in his proclamation on the dissolution, whom he committed to the Tower, Sir Dudley and a few others were punished by being sent into Ireland on a frivolous commission. They were dismissed from their penal em ployment in February 1623, recei-ving each thirty shillings a day for 124 days from October 26, when they entered on their commission. (Pell Records, 266.) Archbishop Abbot, in his narrative, says that Sir Dudley had been ' a great servant' of the Duke of Buckingham, who, he pre sumes, lost his friendship for some un worthy carriage offered to him ; and also alludes to Sir Dudley being committed to the Fleet, and kept there for seven or eight weeks, without any known reason for his imprisonment. (Rushworth, i. 460.) It is apparent that these two persons bore great illwiU towards each other, for Sir Dudley, m the second parliament of Charles I. (1626), was one of the most active managers of ¦222 DIGGES the impeachment against the duke. In the conference with the Lords, having made some allusion to the plaister admi nistered to the late Mng, BucMngham en deavoured to fasten upon Mm expressions which were little less than treason to the present king, and thereupon obtained his committal to the Tower. There was evi dently a wilful misrepresentation of the words used, and on the murmured resent ment of the Commons, Sir Dudley was released, after three days' detention. ( White loeke, 5.) In the next year he suffered an other imprisonment in the Fleet, for some ' unfitting words' at the council table. (Ccd. ¦St Papers [1627], 2,64.) In Charles's third parliament (1628) Sir Dudley was returned for the county of Kent, and took a prominent part in for warding the Petition of Right, being ap pointed to open the conference with the Peers on the subject. The lord president in reporting to the house describes him as ^ a man of volubility and elegance of speech.' This parliament was angrily dissolved in March 1629, and the next was not called until eleven years afterwards. In the in terim. Sir Julius Csesar being a very old man, the reversion of Ms office of master of the RoUs had been granted to Sir Hum phrey May, an old officer and constant sup porter of the court, but he dying in four teen months, the reversion in the following November (1630) was given to Sir Dudley Digges, who, though a strenuous advocate for the liberty of the subject, had, since the death of his enemy the duke, shown no disposition to oppose governmen't measures, .and had probably resumed his connection -with the court. On obtaining this grant he entered himself as a member of the so- ¦ciety of Gray's Inn, and, honoris causa, was immediately made a bencher. He had to wait for nearly flve j^ears and a half before ' Sir Julius Csesar died ; but in the mean time he was admitted one of the masters in Chancery on January 22, 1681. He thus Lad a slight opportunity of acquiring some professional knowledge ; for neither he nor ¦Sir Humphrey May, having never studied .any branch of law, could from their legal experience found any claim to the judicial seat. On Sir Julius's death on April 18, 1636, Sir Dudley immediately acceded to the office ; but of his proceedings in it, dur ing the three years of his possession, there is no account. He died on March 18, 1639, and was buried at Chilham, the manor and castle of which he acquired by his marriage with Mary, one of the daughters and co-heirs of Sir Thomas Kempe, of Ollantigh in the next parish. He was intelligent, eloquent, and ready as a public man, and pious, amiable, and generous in his private Ufe, He pub lished ' A Defence of Trade' during his life, DODD and was the author of ' The Oompleat Am bassador,' printed after Ms death. _ The family was famous for literature ; his bro ther Leonard was an accomplished poet, and is connected with the memory of Shakspeare by his commendatory verses, which have been often reprinted ; and his third son Dudley was also a good poet and linguist. His grandson. Sir Maurice Digges, received a baronetcy in 1666, which became extinct -within the year. (Ath. Oxon. U. 684 ; Fasti, i. 290 ; Hasted, -yii. 265.) DIGHTON, William de. In 48 Edward IIL, when he had letters of protection granted to him to accompany the Duke of Brittany abroad, he is caUed clericus, and is described as 'alias dictus Willielmus Marmoyn.' In the pre-yious year his name, as canon of St. Paul's, London, is attached to the treaty -with the King of Portugal. (New Fcedera, iU. 985, 1010.) He was made keeper of the pri-yy seal in the early part of the reign of Richard H. ; and when the king dismissed Richard le Scrope from his second chanceUorsMp, on July II, 1882, Dighton was joined with Hugh de Segrave and John de Waltham in the custody of the Great Seal, until a new chancellor was appomted, and they held it for ten weeks. He is not mentioned later than the ninth year of the reign, when he is still called canon of St. Paul's. (Rymer, vU. 620.) DIXON, Nicholas, was in holy orders, and held the chm-ch of Cheshunt m Hert fordshire for thirty years from 1418. He was then clerk of the Pipe, and soon after became sub-ti-easurer of the Exchequer. His next elevation was to the bench of that court ou January 26, 1423, I Henry VL (Acts Privy Council, iu. 22^ He is mentioned as late as 19 Henry VI. in a deed relating to property granted to Richard, Duke of York. (Ibid. V. 186.) His retirement from the court must have been previous to 22 Henry VL, as Ms name does not appear among those to whom the usual robes were then assigned (Orig. 99) ; but he UvedtiU Octo ber 30, 1448, 27 Henry VI. He was buried m the church at Cheshunt, which, together -with a chancel dedicated to the Virgin, was erected by him; and Ms epitaph celebrates both his justice and his charity, (Fidler's Herts, i. 438 ; Chauncy, 302.) DODD, Samitbl, was descended from a Cheshire family, and was the son of Ralph Dod, who describes himself ' Civis et Pellio Londini.' He was born about 1652, The Inner Temple was his school of law, where he was called to the bar in 1679, and ad mitted to the bench in 1700, He was coimsel for Dr. Sacheverell in the ill-judged impeachment agamst him in 1710, and pleaded so manfully and ably that he ob tained a great amount of popularity among DODERIDGE the }Agh. church party. (State Trials, xv. 213, &c.) Ou the accession of George I. he was ap pointed the lord chief baron on November ;22, 1714, aud knighted. He occupied his seat barely seventeen months, dying on AprU 14, 1716, when he was buried in the Temple Church. He left a manuscript vo lume of Reports, which is preserved among the Hargrave Collection in the British Museum. By Ms wife Elizabeth, sister and coheir of Sir Robert Croke, of Chequers, Bucks, .he had two sons, who both died without issue. DODEEIDGE, John, according to the more received opinion, was the son of Richard Doderidge, an eminent merchant at Barn staple, and Joan Badcock, of South Moulton, and was born at Barnstaple in 1556. He entered Exeter College, Oxford, and, having taken the degree of B,A,, became a member ¦of the Middle Temple. At both his studies were so successful that Fuller says ' it was hard to say whether he was better artist, divine, civil or common la'wyer.' Among his other pursuits, history was a favourite one, and he joined the leamed men who formed the nucleus of the Society of Anti- ¦ quaries, then meeting at the Heralds' Col lege in Derby House. (Reliq. Spelman, 69.) In 1598 and 1602 he was selected by his inn to deliver lectures at New Inn. The sub ject of the last course was ' Advowsons and Church Livings,' published after his death ¦ under the title of ' A Oompleat Parson,' In the following year he was appomted Lent reader to Ms o-wn society; and on J.anuary 20, 1604, he was caUed to the degree of the coif, being at the same time nominated ser jeant to Henry, Prince of Wales, Nine months after, on October 28, he was ap pointed soUcitor-general, being at this time representative in parliament for Horsham in Sussex, After filUng the office of soUcitor-general nearly tMee years, during which he argued the famous case of the post-nati (State Trials, U, 666), he was induced on June 25, 1607, to resign it, and become prmcipal ser- jeant to the king, in order that Bacon might be put into his place. For this accommo dation he was knighted on July 5, with a promise of the first seat that should become vacant in the Court of Kmg's Bench. This did not occur for the next five years, when, on November 25, 1612, he received his patent (Croke, Jac.) ; and in that court he continued during the remamder of his life. When the practice of privately interro- gatmg the judges was adopted. Bacon (Works, xU. 126) teUs the kmg 'that he had found Judge Doderidge very ready to give opinion in secret,' a course in which it is lamentable to think that most of his col leagues concurred. When King James was DODEEIDGE 223 negotiating for Ms son's marriage with the Spanish princess, and was desirous of show ing some 'leniency to the Catholics, Walter Yonge (Diary, 69) reports that 'Judge Doderidge saith he thought they [the judges] should find out a way by law to dispense -with the statute against recu sancy.' This spirit of accommodating their opinions to the royal wishes was further shown when the judges refused to admit Hampden and others to bail for refusing to subscribe to the late loan. On their being called before the House of Lords in April 1628 to assign the reasons for their judg ment. Judge Doderidge, though he at tempted to justify the decision, seemed to acknowledge they had committed a mistake, by th'us apologetically concluding : ' Omnia habere in memoria, et in nullo errare, di- vinum potius est quam humanum.' (Pari. Hist. ii. 291.) This speech exhibits some what of the drivelling of an old and failing- man ; but in it he says, ' God knoweth I have endeavoured always to keep a good conscience,' an assertion which is borne out by the general tenor of his Ufe, He had the habit of shutting his eyes while sitting on the bench, for the purpose of concen trating his attention on the argument, with out being distracted by surrounding objects, and was thence jocularly called the Sleeping Judge. He survived his appearance in the House of Lords only five months, dying on Sep tember 13, 1628, at Forsters, near Egham, in Surrey, and was buried in the Lady chapel in Exeter Cathedral, where there is a stately monument erected to his and his wife's memory. Croke, in recording his death, describes him as ' man of great knowledge, as well m common law as in other humane sciences, and divinity' (Croke, Car. 127), and Fuller (i. 282) says of Mm, ' His soul consisted of two essentials, ability and integrity, hold ing the scale of justice with so steady a hand that neither love nor lucre, fear or flattery, could bow him on either side.' But it must be acknowledged that in several instances be betrayed that subservi ence to the ruling powers for which the judicial bench was then remarkable. He composed a variety of works, legal and antiquarian, none of wMch were pubUshed in Ms lifetime, and some of which still re main in manuscript. - He married three wives, but outUved them all. His flrst -wife was a daughter of — Germm; his second was a daughter of — CuUum, of Canon's Leigh in Devon shire ; and the third was Dorothy, daughter of Sir Amias Bampfield, of North Molton, and widow of Edward Hancock, of Combe Martin, Esq. By the two former he had no issue, and by the latter only one son, who died before him. He was succeeded 224 DOLBEN in his property by his brother, Pentecost Doderidge, of Barnstaple, whose son became recorder of that town, and edited one of his uncle's tracts concerning ParUament,' (Athen. Oxon. ii. 426.) DOLBEN, William, of an ancient and re spectable Denbighshire family, was the son of John, Archbishop of York, and brother of Gilbert, the judge of the Common Pleas in Ireland from 1700 to 1719, who was created a baronet by Queen Anne. He pm-sued his legal studies at the Inner Temple, was called to the bar in 1663, and was elected a bencher in 1672, and autumn reader in 1677, His legal merits probably procured him a royal recommendation for the recordership of the city of London, to which he was elected on February 8, 1676, and knighted. He held the place tiU he was advanced to the bench, when the cor poration voted him a piece of plate ' as a loving remembrance.' In 1677 he was the first-named serjeant, and was immediately made one of the king's Serjeants. On October 28, 1678, he was constituted a judge of the King's Bench; and it was his misfortune to sit under Sir WiUiam Scroggs as chief, and to be present at all the trials arising out of the Popish Plot, in the existence of which, as far as it appears, he had a firm belief But he saw and fairly pomted out the inconsisten cies and improbabilities of the evidence against Sir 'Thomas Gascoigne, which re sulted in an. acquittal; and at the trial of Sir Thomas Stapleton at York for high treason he summed up favourably for the prisoner, who was thereupon acquitted. (State Trials, vi, 1821, vU. 964, yUi, 326, 623.) Being found to be too independent, and suspected of not siding with the crown in its attempt against the charter of the city of London, he was, according to the vicious practice of the time, suddenly super seded on April 20, 1683, just before the judgment against the city was pronounced. Whether he returned to the bar is un certain. At the Revolution Sir William Dolben was replaced in his former seat on March II, 1689, On the 2'9th of the following month, in delivering a charge to the grand jury in the King's Bench, Narcissus Luttrell says that 'he inveighed mightily agamst the corruption of juries the last seven years, and gave in charge the laws against Pa pists,' The same diarist records (i. 609, 627, u. 253, 269, 262) that ou a similar occasion in 1691 he directed the grand j ury ' to enquire into malecontents to the govern ment, such as disturbed the^ peace of the kingdom by dispersing seditious and false news.' He died on January 26, 1694, seized with an apoplectic fit while going into court, and was buried in the Temple Church. DORMER iDONCASTEE, JoHN DE, in 28 Edward L was a commissioner of array in Yorkshire. He was summoned to attend the cere mony of the coronation of Edward IL, and also was included in the list of judges and others called to assist at the parUaments from the first year of that reign. In 1310- he was appointed a judge of assize for the northern counties, and he is named in various judicial commissions during the next seven years. On June 5, 1319, he was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas ; but the fines. levied before him in that court do not ex tend beyond the next year, and he was not summoned to parliament after the early part of the fourteenth year. He was pro bably at that time removed from the court, although he was named in a special com mission for trying some forest offences in his own county two years afterwards. He was alive in 5 Edward HL, when the king confirmed certam grante wMch had been made to him and his wife Alicia,. and their heirs, by the Earl of Surrey. (ParL Writs, i. 345, ii. p, ii. 781; Abh.. Rot Orig. U, 52, 66.) DOEMEE, Robeet, a descendant of the Buckinghamshire family of that name, a branch of which was ennobled by James L, with the title of Lord Dormer of Wenge, which has flourished ever smce, was the grandson of Sir Fleetwood Dormer, and the second son of John Dormer, of Ley Grange and Purston, a barrister, by' Katherine, daughter of Thomas Woodward, of Ripple in "Worcestershire. To his elder brother John, Charles II. in 1661 presented a baronetcy, which became extinct in 1726. Robert was born in 1649, and, having entered LincoM's Inn, was caUed to the bar in 1675. He is mentioned as junior counsel for the cro-wn in several trials in 1680, and was soon afterwards constituted chancellor of Durham. In 1698 he represented Aylesbury, in 1701 the county of Bucks, and in 1702 Northallerton. In the great question f of Ashby and White he opposed the assumed privilege of the House of Commons, which would have prevented au elector from pro ceeding at common law for the injury he sustained by the returning officer refusing his vote. On January 8, 1706, he was made a judge of the Common Pleas, and sat there nearly one-and-twenty years, till his death on September 18, 1726. His seat was at Arle Court, near Chel tenham. His marriage with Mary, daughter of Sir Richard Blake, of London, produced him four daughters only, one of whom married Lord Fortescue of Credan, and another John Parkhurst, of Catesby in Northamptonshire, the father of the author of the Greek Lexicon to the New Teste- ment, (Atkyns's Gloucestersh. 174; St. Trials, DORSET TU, 967, 1188 ; ParL Hist. vi. 267 ; Lord Raymond, 1260, 1420; LuttreU, vi. 15; Gent Mag. Ixx. 615.) DOESET, Eael or. See Osmund. DOUBEIDGE, or DOUNEBEIGGE, Wil liam, was appointed a baron of the Ex- chefl[uer on May 12, 1389, 12 Richard H., havmg previously held the office of auditor of the Exchequer, in which he was paid 6s, 8d. a day for going to Lostwithiel to audit the accounte of CornwaU and Devon, It seems probable that he died in 17 Richard IL (CaL Rot Pat. 115, 117; Devon's Issues Exch. 223, 285.) DOVEE, John de, and his compamons, made the assize of the king's demesnes in Warwickshire and Leicestershire in 20 Henry IL, II74, as the justices errant for those counties. (Mado.v, i. 126.) He was the son of WiUiam de Dover, and nephew of Hugh de Dover, Lord of Chil ham in Kent, to whom his son Fulbert de Dover eventuaUy became heir. (Madox, i, 97, 126, 252, 630 ; Arch. Cantiana, iv, 214.) The family became extinct in the reign of Edward I. DEAYTON, Nicholas de, an ecclesi astic, was probably the son or nephew of the already mentioned Thomas de Brayton, who was sometimes called de Drayton, to whom the Great Seal of Edward III. was occasionally entrusted in the absence of the chancellor. On December I, 1363, he was appointed custos of the scholars supported by the royal bounty at the Aula Regis m Cambridge (N. Fcedera, iii, 717) ; and a few years afterwards he was a disciple of John Wickliffe, and had the greater ex communication fulmmated against him by Sudbiu-y, Bishop of London, for promul gating among the people errors against the articles of the Catholic faith ; and whom the king, on March 20, 1370, authorised that prelate to incarcerate until he re nounced his heresies. (Ihid. 889.) How he purged himself does not appear ; but it is by no means surprising that he should have been raised to the bench of the E.t- chequer on November 14, 1876, 60 Edward HI., and been continued there in the fol lowing June, on the accession of Richard IL, since the authority of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, who partook of the same opinions, was paramount at both these dates. DEAYTON. See T. de Beatton. DSOES, Hugh db, was appointed one of the two coroners of Wiltshire in 7 Henry 111, and it was no doubt in that character that two years afterwards his name was added to the list of justices itinerant for that county. In 10 Henry IIL, 1226, he was one of those appointed to teke an assize at Devizes as to the last presenta tion of the church of Harrendon, and to coUect the quinzime of the county. He DROKENESFOED 225 was still alive in 20 Henry IIL, when he assessed the tallage there. (Rot. Claus i 560, ii, 76, 136, 140, 146.) DEOGO is the last witness in a charter of William II. granting the church of And over to the monks of St, Florentius, and is there described -with the words ' qui custodiebat sigillum.' Galdric was chan cellor at the time, being the second wit ness to it ; so that it is difficult to explain the nature of the office held by Drogo, unless, if the ' sigillum ' mentioned was the royal seal, he was merely the officer atten dant on the chanceUor, whose duty it was to carry it, TMs is the less unUkely, from the fact that no previous evidence exists of any such appointment as keeper of the seal, either independent of or in connection with the chancellor, and from his position at the end of the list of witnesses. The charter has no date, but was probably granted in or soon after 1093. (Monast. vi. 992.) DEOKENESrOED, John de (Bishop op Bath and Wells), was keeper of the king's wardrobe, and on the chanceUor's resignation on August 12, 1302, 30 Edward I., the Great Seal was placed, as was the usual custom, under his care in the ward robe, but with no power to use it, and eleven days after it was given to Adam de Osgodby, the master of the Rolls. He possessed the ma,nor of Eston Crok, in the forest of Chute, and had a licence to impark his wood of Horsley there and eighty acres in addition. He had also grants from the king amounting to 260 acres in Wolnemere and Windsor forests. (CaL Rot Pat 56, 62.) He evidently had previously flUed some office in the Treasuiy or the Exchequer,as he is mentioned in 1296 as the locum tenens of the treasurer, an office to which he was again appointed in 1306, in which year he is also described as pleading for the king in a suit relative to the manor of WoodhuU in Bed fordshire, He retained the office of keeper of the wardrobe till the end of that reign, when it would appear that m 1 Edward II. he exchanged it with John de Benstede for the office of chancellor of the Exchequer. {Madox, i. 72, 325, ii. 71, 324; Abb. Placit 256, 298.) His ecclesi.istical preferment consisted at this time of a canonry in the cathedral of Wells, and he was also a chaplain to the pope ; but in the next year he was elected Bishop of Bath and Wells, and was con secrated on November 9, 1309, King Ed ward II. entrusted him with the care of the kingdom when he went into France in 1312, but he afterwards joined the partisans of the queen against her husband, The nineteen years of his rule were continually disturbed by contests with the canons of his church. He died at Dogmers- fleld m 1329, and was interred in the chapel Q, 226 DUKET of St. Catherine m his ovyn cathedral. (Godwin, 376.) DTJKET, Richaed, was probably the son of Nicholas Duket, chamberlain of London in the reign of Richard I. (Madox, i. 776.) He held an office in the court, his name frequently appearing on grante m 5 to 8 John. (Rot Claus. i. 4-73.) In the latter year, being then called 'clericus noster,' he received a grant of an annual pension of five marks out of the abbey of "WMtby. (Ibid. 83.) In 6 and 7 Henry HI. he was sherifl" of the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk. In 1226 he was one of the justices itinerant commissioned to several counties, and while performmg this duty in Norfolk and Suffolk he was summoned to the Mng to undertake an embassy to the court of Rome, whither he proceeded with Philip de Hadham. In the next year and tiU 17 Henry III. he was still employed as a justice itinerant, and from the numerous commissions m which his name thus occurs through so many years, and the position wMch he occupies in them, it is not impro bable that he was at this time one of the re gular justiciers at Westminster. His death occurred about 1246, when his son Hugh did homage for his lands in LincoMshire. (lUd 77, U. 68, 78, 108, 141, 161, 218 ; Orig. 104 ; Excerpt e Rot Fin. i. 446.) DUEEDENT, 'Waltee, is only kno-wn as a resident in BucMnghamshire, and as actmg as one of the justices itinerant for that county in 9 Henry IH, (Rot. Claus. i. 376, ii. 77.) DTTBEM, John, was appointed one of the barons of the Exchequer in 1449, 27 Henry VL, and remained in Ms seat till the restoration of that monarch m 1470, but does not appear to have been reappointed on the return of Edward in the following year. He died between that date and 1476, when his widow, EUzabeth, made her will, by which it appears that they left a son Thomas and two daughters, and that he possessed property at Wendover in Bucks, and also in the counties of North ampton, Bedford, and Huntingdon. He was buried in the church of St, Bartho lomew in Smithfield, (Test. Vetus. 842.) DYEE, James, was born at RoundhiU in Somersetehire about the year 1512, His father, Richard Dyer, of 'Wincalton, was of an honourable family, ¦which produced in a senior branch Sir Edward Dyer, the author of several poems, and an especial favourite of Queen Elizabeth, who conferred on Mm the chancellorship of the Garter, His mother's name was Walton, He is said to have been educated at Broadgate's Hall Oxford, on the site of which Pembroke' College was afterwards founded, and went from thence, first, to New Inn, and then to the Middle Temple, He must have been eaUed to the bar before the year 1537, as D"YEE he is then first mentioned as an advocate in his own Reporte. On May 19, 1662, he received his writ to take upon himself the degree of the coif in the following Michaelmas Term ; and in the interval, according to a common custom of the time, he was appointed autumn reader to his society. The ' Statute of Wills' was the subject of his reading. He was admitted to the degree of the coif on October 17, 1552, and the ceremony was remarkable as the first recorded instence of a motto being inscribed on the rmgs pre sented, that adopted on this occasion being ' Plebs sine lege ruit.' (Dyer, 71.) But it appears, though not recorded, that it was an ancient practice, and instences occur m the reigns of Henry 'VII. and VHI. (See SlE John FiNEux and Sie Edwaed Montagu.) Withm a month he was nominated one of the king's seqeante, and in March 1553 he was retumed member for Cambridgeshire, and elected speaker of the last parUament of Edward's reign. His next honour was the recordersMp of Cambridge, and he was soon after knighted. On May 8, 1667, he was constituted a judge of the Common Pleas. Another patent, dated April 23, 1668, appointed him a judge of the King's Bench durmg pleasure — a temporary ap pomtment, without removing Mm from the Common Pleas, made for the sole pur pose of his keeping the essoign of Easter Term, instead of Justice Francis Morgan, who was too iU to perform the duty. A question was mooted whether Dyer's first patent was not rendered void by this new patent; and, as this was decided in the affirmative (Dyer, 143, 168), it is more than probable that Judge Dyer was at once restored by a new patent to the Common Pleas. This view is strengthened by the facts that a fine was levied before him in Trmity Term followmg (Orig. 48), and that on the accession of Queen Elizabeth in November his patent was for that court. Queen Mary's death took place in the middle of Michaelmas Term, and the new patents to all the then existing j udges were issued on the foUowing day. But before the commencement of the next term the two chief justices, who werfe CathoUcs, were removed to a lower grade, and Judge Dyer was promoted to the head of the Common Pleas on January 22, 1569. Here he presided till his death, on March 24, 1682, a period of more than twenty-three years, during which the law was admi nistered in his court and on the circuit with such efficiency, firnmess, and patience as not only to secure the confidence and admiration of his contemporaries, but also to fix a glory round his name which three centuries have faUed to dim. His judicial manner is thus described by George Whet stone, who sung his praises in a long lament, DYEE which, 'written when flattery would be unprofitable, is more valuable than any •epitaph : — 'Settled to heare, but very slowe to speake. Till either part, at large, his minde did breake. And. -when he spake, he was in speeche repos'd ; His eyes did search the simple sutor's harte ; To put bv bribes his hands 'were ever closde, His prbcesse just, he took the poore man's parte ; He ruTd by la'we and listned not to arte ; These foes to truth,— love, hate, and private gaine, With most corrupt, his conscience 'would not staine. The friendless 'wight, which did offend through need. He evermore with mercy did respect ; Tlie prowder thiefe, that did his trespasse feede, Through truste in ftiendee, ¦with scourge of lawe he cheekt ; For by the fault, not friendes he 'did direct. Thus he, with grace, the poore man's love did drawe, And by sharpe meanes did keepe the prowde in awe. This last point of Ms character was per haps suggested' by the energy he displaj'ed at the Warwick assizes in 1574 in support ing a poor ¦widow against the oppression of a rich knight of that county, whose illegal proceedings were assisted by the bench of magistrates there ; the particulars of which are related m the Ufe of the judge prefixed to his Reporte, edited by John Vaillant, Esq, ; together with his reply to the articles exhibited agamst him to the privy council by the angry magistrates, whose punish ment or dismissal of the complaint does not appear, but is alluded to by Lord Chief Justice Sir Edward Montagu in Wrayn- ham's case in I6I8, (State Trials, U, 1080,) The judge continued to be an ornament to the 'bench for nearly eight years afterwards. He was buried m the parish church of Great .Stoughton m Huntingdonshire, under a handsome monument still existing. His Reports, which extend from 4 Henry VIH. to the period of his death, are re markable for their conciseness and accuracy. They were first pubUshed in French tMee years after he died, and several editions have since issued from the press. That of 1688 was illustrated by margmal notes and re ferences by Chief Justice Treby ; and that of 1794, the edition now used, is an En glish tianslation by John Vaillant, Esq,, with valuable additions of modem cases, and preceded by a life of the author. He mai-ried Margaret, the daughter of Sir DYPE 227 Maurice a Barrow, of Hampshire, and widow of Sir Thomas Elyot, the celebrated author of the ' Boke of the Governour,' but left no children ; and on his death his mansion in Charterhouse churchyard and his estate at Great Stoughton descended to Sir Richard Dyer, his great-nephew, whose grandson Ludovick was created a baronet in 1627, but the title became extmct at Ms death. ( Whetstone's Poem ; Vaillant' s Life ; Athen, Oxon, i. 480,) DYMOCK, Andeew, descended from a branch of the famUy of Sir John Dymock, who acquired the manor of Scrivelsby in LincoMshire in the reign of Edward HI,, and held it by the service of being the Mng's champion at the coronation, was con stituted soUcitor-general in I486, 1 Henry VII, ; but, as his name is never mentioned in the Year Books, his duties were proba bly conflned to the advocacy of the king's intereste in the Exchequer. To the second barony in that court he was preferred on May 2, 1496, II Hemy VIL, andfiUed the seat tUl the I6th year of that reign. He married Elizabeth, daughter and one of the coheirs of Sir Peter Ardern. (Cal, St, Papers [1609], 190.) DY'VE, William db, sometimes called Dyne, is mentioned by Dugdale as a justice of the Kmg's Bench in I32I-2, on the authority of a passage from Leland's ' Col lectanea ' (i. p. ii. 276) ; but, referring to it, we find that Geoffrey de Say and WUliam de Dyne, 'justiciarii regis,' are stated by Gervas of Canterbury to have been sent into Kent to enquire ' de fautoribus Bade- lesmer.' Now the term 'justiciarius regis ' was at that time applied, not only to the judges of the two benches and the justices of assize, but also to any others who were appointed on a special judicial commission ; and it is not improbable that such a commission, although no record of it has yet appeared, may have been issued to those two gentlemen to try the adherente of Bartholomew de Badlesmere, who was executed for treason in that year. Though there is nothing whatever to show that William de Dyve, or Dyne, was connected with the courte at Westminster, it has been deemed right, on Dugdale's authority, to introduce his name. There were two famiUes of that name, one settled in Northampton, and the other lords of the manors of Docklington and Dadington in Oxfordshire. a2 228 E IBEOICIS, Stephen de (Evreux), was appointed by a mandate of 4 Henry HI. (Rot, Claus, i. 437), with three others, one of the justices to deliver the gaols of Here ford of all the prisoners therein detained. It is e-yident, however, that he was only included m this commission on account of Ms being a knight residing m that county, where his principal seat was the castle of LenhaU. (Rot Chart 156.) For his lauds at BadeUngham he was accustomed to pay annually thirty-two gallons of honey to the castle of Hereford, a charge from which he was for ever released in 17 John. (Rot Claus. u. 188.) He died in 12 Henry III. (Excerpt, e Rot Fin. i. 168.) EDENESTO'WE, Henet de, so called from a place of that name in the county of Not tingham, now Edwinstowe, where he had possessions. (Cal. Inquis. p. m. ii. 102), was a clerk in the Chancery in 18 Edward IL, 1326, and in 4 and 6 Edward IIL he acted as clerk of the parliament, (Rot. ParL i. 420, ii. 52, 68.) In the latter year and on several occasions the Great Seal was placed in the custody of the master of the RoUs, in the absence of the chancellor, under the seals of two of the clerks, of whom Henry de Edenestowe was one (Hardy's Catal.) ; and in 20 Edward IIL, 1346, he is named for a loan to the king of 100/. (N. Fcedera, in. 69.) EDENHAM, Geoeeebt de, had property in Lincolnshire, where there is a parish of that name. He was made a judge of the King's Bench on January 18, 1831, 4 Ed ward IIL, and is last mentioned, with Thomas de Longevillers, as possessing the manor of Aykle in Lincolnshire in 15 Edward HL (Abb. Rot Orig. ii. 110, 138 ; Rot ParL ii. 446 ; Ccd. Inquis. p. m, H, 105.) EDINGTON, William de (Bishop op Winchbstbe), was bom at Edington, a parish iu Wiltshire, where, when he be came Bishop of Winchester, he built a church and founded a large chantry for a dean and twelve ministers, (Monast. vi. 585.) He was educated at Oxford, and was presented in 1385 to tho living of Cheriton in Hampshire, and also had a canonry in Salisbury Cathedral. In 1341 he was receiver of the ninth granted by parliament (N. Foedera, ii. . 1154), and in 1848 he was keeper of the king's wardrobe. On April 10, 1844, he was appointed chancellor of the Exchequer, from which he was raised, at the end of t-ivo years, to the high and responsible office of treasurer. (CaL Rot Pat. 147, 154,) This he held for no less than ten years, and then only exchanged it for the higher post of chanceUor. On the death of Adam de Orlton he was- placed m the vacant see of Wmchester, by papal provision in his favour dated De cember 9, 1345 ; but he was -wise enough to renounce the pope's nomination as pre judicial to the rights of the crown; and the Mng, ' of his special favour, and not by virtue of the said buUs,' accepted his fealty, and restored the temporaUties to- him on the I5th of the foUowmg February. (Cal Rot Pat 168 ; N. Foedera, Ui. 39, 64, 69 ; Devon's Issue Roll, 150.) His treasurership was Ulustrated by the unfortunate introduction of two new coins, called a groat and a half-groat, the real worth of which was so much less than their nommal value as to produce a cor responding mcrease in the price of all articles of consumption tMoughout the kingdom. On the institution of the order of the- Garter m 1349 Edward constituted Mm the prelate of it, perpetuating the dignity in his successors of the see of Wmchester. In 1356 he was left one of the custodes of the kingdom in the absence of the Mng on his renewed invasion of France. The Great Seal was placed m his hands, -with the title of chanceUor, on November 27, 1366, 30 Edward HI., and he retemed it for more than six years, during which he ¦ preserved the royal favour -without losing the confidence of the people. He wa.s, as the record says, ' gratefuUy absolved ' from its duties on February 19, 1363. He survived Uttle more than three years,, still continumg high in the confidence of his sovereign, Shortlj- before his death the monks of Canterbury elected him arch bishop, on the decease of Simon Islip; but he refused the proffered dignity, humorously saying that, though Canter bury was the higher rack, Wmchester was the better manger. He died on October 7, 1366, and was buried at Edington. (Godwin, 225.) ^ EGEETON, Thomas (Baeon Ellesmbee, ^'iscoTJNT Beackley), whosc sumome was assumed from a manor in Cheshire so called, possessed by his father's ancestors when Domesday Book was compiled, was the natural son of Sir Richard Egerton, of Ridley in the same county, by a young woman named Alice Sparke. He was born in 1540, and about 1556 was admitted a commoner at Brasenose EGERTON CoUege, Oxford, where he remained for three years. He then entered LincoM's Inn, and was called to the bar in 1572, He became govemor in 1680, Lent reader m 1682, and treasurer in 1587. He practised principally in the Court of Chancery, and was raised to the office of ¦solicitor-general on June 28, 1581. It is related that this appointment arose from the admiration of Queen EUzabeth on hearing him argue in a cause against the ¦cro'wn, when she is said to have exclaimed, ' In my troth, he shall never plead against me again.' (Life of Egeiton, 8.) During the intervals of his laborious avocations his cMef relaxation was in the sporte of the field, and several noble cliente gave him licence to ' hunt and kill ' in their parks and manors. Egerton held the office of solicitor- general for the .space of eleven years, tUl he became attorney-general on June 2, 1592, and so remained for nearly two years. Dming this long period of office he was of course engaged in all the pro secutions for high treason and offences against the state. His name appears in those against Campion and others in 1581, against Abingdon and others in 1686, agamst Secretary Davison in 1587, against Philip Earl of Arundel and against Sir Richard Knightly in 1689, and against Sir John Perrotin 1592. (State Trials, i. 1051-1322.) If these criminal proceedmgs were to be judged accordmg to the present enlightened views 'with regard to the administration of the law, not one of the persons engaged in them would escape condemnation. But this would be palpably unjust. With whatever abhor rence the iniquitous principles on which these trials were conducted may be now regarded, the only fair enquiry which can Ije raised with respect to the advocates em ployed in them is whether they exceeded their duty according to the practice which then prevailed, LooMng through the Re ports from this pomt of view, Egerton must receive a full acquittal from aU imputation of harshness towards the prisoners. In 1693 the office of chamberlain of Chester was conferred upon him, and soon after he was knighted. By this title he was promoted to the mastership of the Rolls on April 10, 1694. So active and efficient did he prove himself in this office that the queen at once constituted him lord keeper on the death of Sir John Puckering, delivering the Great Seal to Mm on May 6, 1696, His appointment arose entirely from the liigh reputation he had attained for his legal iknowledge and mtegrity,and not only with out the intervention of any courtly mterest, ¦but even, it is said, in opposition to the wishes and endeavours of Lord Bmleigh, EGEETON 229 and his son Sir Robert CecU. Fuller (i, 186) that '_aU Christendom afforded not a person which carried more gravity in his countenance and behaviour, .... so much that many have gone to the Chancery on purpose truly to see his venerable garb (happy they who had no other business), and were highly pleased with so acceptable a spectacle ; ' adding that ' his outward case was nothing in comparison with his inward abilities, quick wit, solid judgment, 'ready utterance,' He stiU retained the place of master of the Rolls, and executed during the rest of the reign the whole busi ness of the Court of Chancery in his double capacity. The intrigues of the lawyers who aspired to the second place were counteracted by his influence with the queen, and her conviction that he needed no assistance. In the foolish hneute raised by the Earl of Essex in February 1600, so fatal to himself, the grave lord keeper was placed in a position of some danger. On the queen's being informed of the earl's se ditious meeting in Essex House, she sent the lord keeper there, accompanied by the lord chief justice and other lords of the council, ' to understand the cause of this their assembly, and to let them know that if they had any particular cause of grief against any persons whatever, it should be heard, and they should have justice.' On being admitted they found the courtyard crowded with armed men, who, after the lord keeper had deUvered the queen's mes sage, cried out, ' Kill them ! ' ' Cast the Great Seal out of the window ! ' &c. The earl, under pretence of conferrmg privately with them, took the lords into his back chamber, and, telUng them that he was going to the lord mayor and sheriffs of London, and would be back in half au hour, left them under lock and key, ' guarded by Sir John Davis and others with musket- shot,' There they were detained from ten o'clock in the mornmg till four in the afternoon, when Sir Ferdinando Gorges, who had joined Essex in his progress through the city, and found that he re ceived no encouragement, hastened back and released them. Considering how much the earl was mdebted to Egerton, who had always acted as a sincere and considerate friend, it is to be hoped that his allegation that he locked up the counsellors for their security against his irritated partisans was founded in truth ; but the Earl of Rutland in his examination acknowledged that it was purposed to teke the lord keeper with them to the court, which they intended to surprise. (State Trials, 1340-7.) During Queen EUzabeth's Ufe Egerton enjoyed her utmost confldence and favour. She employed him in various treaties with the Dutch and the Danes, in the manage- 230 EGEETON ineht of which he showed himself a good diplomatist; and she entrusted him with great powers under several special commis sions, which he exercised with mildness and moderation. Within eight months of her death she paid him the honourable but burdensome compUment of a three days' visit to his mansion at Harefield in Mid dlesex, the enormous expense attendmg which may well account for her majesty's subjects dreading such visitations. (Egerton Papers, 340-7.) No sooner did King James hear of his peaceful accession to the throne than he issued a mandate from Holyrood House, dated April 6, 1603, appointing Egerton keeper of the Seal during pleasure, who met the king on his arrival at Broxboume in Hertfordshire, on May 3, when his ap pointment was confirmed. He was also continued in the office of master of the Rolls till the I9th of the same month, Edward Bruce, Lord Kinloss, being then named as his successor. On delivering him the new Great Seal on July 19 his majesty created him Baron of EUesmere in Shrop shire, and on the 24th he was constituted lord chancellor. He held this high position for nearly fourteen years under King James, which, in addition to the seven years under Elizabeth, makes his term of service as the head of the law extend to the long period of twenty-one years. Few have filled so prominent a station with so much honour and so few enemies. LooMng at the cha racter of the two monarchs whom he served, he must have been endowed with more than ordinary wisdom, prudence, and learning, to suffer no alienation from the caprices of either, and to preserve such continued ascendency in their councils, without degrading himself by that abject and humiliating flattery to which they were both too much accustomed. He was elected chancellor of Oxford in 1610, and his presidency lasted till within two months of his death, when he resigned it on January 24, I6I7, The best mode of judging of the character of an individual is to see the reputation which he held amonw his contemporaries of various grades. 'That of Egerton will stand the ordeal. Camden records an anagi-am on his name, ' Gesiat honoeem,' which would not have been discovered if it had not been applicable; Ben Jonson wrote three epigi'ams in his praise, one of them the last time he sat as chancellor ; and Bishop Hacket describes him as one ' qui nihil in vita nisi laudandura, aut fecit, aut dixit, aut sensit.' Among the writers of the next generation. Fuller gives the same testimony ; and Anthony 'Wood says, ' His memory was much celebrated by epi grams while he was living, and after Ms death aU of the long robe lamented his loss.' EGEETON Among the most emment was Sir John Davies, the poet, statesman, and lawyer, who, after summing up the characteristics of a good chancellor, gracefully applies them to Lord EUesmere. (Preface to his Repoiis.) He is said to have been the flrst law chancellor since the Reformation who en tertained a chaplain in his family. This was Dr. John WiUiams, who subsequently filled the same office as his patron, and became also Archbishop of York. Another eminent man. Dr. Donne, afterwards dean of St. Paul's, spent many years under Lord El lesmere's roof, as his secretary, and there formed that secret connection -with his wife Anne Moore, the niece of the chanceUor's second marriage, which had so fatal an in fluence on his earlier fortunes. Few of his judicial decisions are re ported; but in the case of the post-nati,. being the question whether persons bom in Scotland after the accession of King James to the throne of England were aliens in the latter country, and therefore disabled from holding lands there, he delivered an elabo rate judgment that they were entitled to all the righte of natural-bom subjecte, which by the king's command he published in 1609. Twelve out of the fourteen judges concurrmg in his opmion, his remarks on the doubte of the other two afford a curious specimen of the extraordmary manner in which Scripture allusions were mtroduced into the oratory of the period. He said, 'The apostle Thomas doubted of the re surrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, when all the rest'of the apostles did flrmly beleeve it ; but this his doubting confirmed, in the whole Church, the faith of the resurrec tion. The two worthy and leamed judges that have doubted in this case, as they beare his name, so I doubt not but their doubtmg hath given occasion to cleare the doubt in others, and so to confirme in both the Hngdomes, both for the present and the future, the truth of the judgement in this case.' He does not name the two dissentients, and it is uncertain which they were, as three of the judges who pro nounced their opimon were named Thomas — -viz.. Sir Thomas Flemmg, Sir Thomas Walmesley, and Sfr Thomas Foster, all of the Common Pleas. (^State Trials, U. 669.) Besides the pubUcation of this judgment, he printed no other work durmg his life ; but he left several valuable manuscripts. He objected strongly to the Stetute of WUls, passed in the reign of Henry VIH, and he was wont to tell the foUowing merry story as an illustration of its evils: — 'A friar coming to visit a great man in his sickness, and finding him past memory, took opportunity, according to the custom of the times, to make provision for the monastery whereof he was, and, finding that the sick EGEETON man could only speak some one syllable, which was for the most part "Yea" or " Nay," in an imperfect voice, forthwith took upon him to make his will ; and demandmg of him, " Will you g^ve such a piece of land to our house to pray for your soul?" the dymg man sounded " Yea. Then he asked Mm, " WiU you give such land to the main tenance of lights to our Lady ? " The sound was again "Yea." AVhereupon he boldly asked him many such questions. The son and heir standing by, and hearing his land going away so fast by Ms father's word *' Yea," thought fit to ask one question as well as the friar, which was, " Shall I take a cudgel, and beat tMs friar out of the chamber?" The sick man's answer was agam "Yea," which the son quickly per formed, and saved unto himself his father's lands.' (Archeeologia, xxv. 384.) In the latter part of his judicial career he was annoyed by Sir Edward Coke's attempt to restrain the jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery, and by the proceedings which were taken, not only against certain suitors there, but against the counsel; who were engaged in the causes, and even the masters in Chancery to whom they were referred, to subject them to the penalties of prsemimire, to which, under an old statute, all persons were subject who impeached the judgments of any of the king's courts. The enquiryjresulted in the complete tri umph of Lord EUesmere, by the confirma tion of the powers of his court, and it had no little effect m disgracing Coke, ita insti gator. On November 7, 1616, the king rewarded Ms long services by advancing him in the peerage to the title of Viscount Brackley, which the wits of Westmmster HaU, who objected^to Ms interference with the judg ments of the common law courts, converted into Viscount Break-law. He had in 1613, and several times since, requested the king to allow him to retire from his arduous post, the duties of which he felt were too heavy for his increasing age and infirmities. Sickness at last compelled him to press his resignation, and the Close RoU records that on March 3, 1617, being ill at Ms residence, York House, he was visited by the Mng himself, who then freed him from the custody of the Great Seal, but limited his retirement to two years. Within two weeks from this time, however, his earthly career was closed. He died on March 15, and his body being removed to Doddleston in Cheshire, was there buried. The king, who appears to have regarded him with great affection, is said to have parted from him with tears of gratitude and respect, and to have signified his inten tion to raise him to an earldom. Though death prevented the chanceUor from receiv ing this last mark of his sovereign's favour. ELIOT 231 little more than two months elapsed before his majesty proved his sincerity by creating the heir Earl of Bridgewater in Somerset shire on May 27, 1617. This title was changed into a didiedom in 1720, but both have since become extmct. The earldom, however, was revived in 1840 m the grand- nephew of the last duke. The chancellor was thrice married, but had issue by his first wife only. She was Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas Ravenscroft, Esq., of Bretton in FUntehire. His second wife was Elizabeth, sister to Sir George More, knight, of Losely Farm, Surrey, lieutenant of the Tower, and widow, first of Richard Polstead, Esq., of Abury in the same county, and then of Sir John WoUey, knight, chancellor of the order of the Garter. His tMrd wife was Alice, daughter of Sir John Spencer, of Althorpe, knight. and widow of Ferdmando, fifth Earl of Derby. ELDON, Eael oe. See J. Scott. ELEEIxrS was a monk m the priory of Cogges in Oxfordshire, of which he became prior in 1227. From that he was promoted to the abbacy of the monastery of Pershore in Worcestershire on March 19, 1251, 35 Henry III. In August of that year he was appointed the king's escheator on this side Trent, and continued in th.at office tiU 1266 (E.vcerpt e Rot Fin.ii. 112-220), in which year he was employed by the king on a financial commission into Wales, where he was most honourably received by LleweUyn and his nobles, (Leland's Coll, i. 243,) In 1257-8 he is inserted in Madox's list of barons of the Exchequer (ii. 319), on the authority of the memoranda of that year ; but he is not mentioned afterwards in that court. He retired from the abbacy of Pershore on October 24, 1262, having previously granted to it his manor 'de Hauekesbuii.' (Monast. ii. 412, 418, vi. 1003.) ELIOT, Richaed, was allied to the an cient family of that name first seated in Devonshire and afterwards in Comwall, a member of which was raised to the peerage in 1784 as Baron Eliot of St, Germams, whose son was created Earl of St, Germains in I8I5. Richard was an advocate of the Middle Temple in 8 Henry VIL In 1503 he took the degree of the coif, and in 1606 he was appomted one of the kmg's seijeants. On April 26, 1613, he was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas, and exercised his judicial duties there tiU 1622. By his will he directed his body to be buried in the cathedral of Salisbury. (Orig. 47, 113, ELIOT, William, was named master of the Rolls, in conjunction with Robert Morton, on November 18, 1485, to hold for Ufe and for the life of the survivor. There is no evidence of his exercising the duties of 232 ELLENBOEOUGH the office, nor of his retaining it, after his partner was consecrated Bishop of Wor cester in February 1487. On the contrary, David WiUiam is mentioned in the office on the 22nd of that month, and WilUam EUot as acting as a simple master in Chan cery, being named in that character as a receiver of petitions in parUament from the fourth to the eleventh year of the reign. (Rot ParL vi. 346, 409, 441, 4.58.) ELLENBOEOFGH, Loed. See E. Law. ELLESMEEE, LoED. See T. Egeeion. ELLES'WOEXH, Simon de, had a grant in II Edward I. from Simon de Torp of lands in Torveston, Bucks, with the ad vowson of the church there. (Abb. Placit. 206.) He was not a regular justice itine rant, but merely for pleas of the forest, in which he is mentioned as acting in 1292 for the county of Essex. In 28 Edward I, the custody of the religious houses belong ing to France in the counties of Northamp ton, Rutland, Cambridge, and Huntingdon was committed to him, and in the next year he was joined with the chief justice of the forests in a commission to rent out the wastes of the foreste beyond the Trent. (Abb. Rot Orig. i. 91, 94.) In 21 Edward 1. he was one of the sureties for the ap pearance of William de Luda, Bishop of Ely, on a complaint made against Mm ¦ by the Archbishop of Dublin (Rot. Pari. i. 112) ; aud on Ellesworth's death, in 26 Edward I., the bishop retumed the obliga tion by becoming security for the payment of his debts to the crown. (Madox, ii. 44.) ELLIS, William, son of Thomas, thrice mayor and once M, P, for Norwich, was a member of Lincoln's Inn, where he became a reader in Lent 1502. He was made a baron of the Exchequer in 1623, being so named in the list of the judges, &c., who were assessed to the subsidy in November of that year. He contmued on the bench tiU 1636. He was lord of the manor of Attlebridge in NorfoUi, where his son WUliam, whom he had by EUzabeth his wife, Ues buried, (Blomefield s Nonvich, ii. 199 ; Orig. 250.) ELLIS, William, Noble, in his ' House of CromweU' (i, 437), states that the Wil liam EUis who was solicitor-general to the protector became judge of the Common Pleas under Charles II, ; and, notwithstand ing the apparent improbabiUty that one who had held so prominent a ministerial office under the Commonwealth should be selected to fill a judicifd one under the monarchy, there seems Uttle reason to doubt that the solicitor and the judge were one and the same individual. The appoint ment as solicitor is dated 1654, and the judge was chosen bencher of Gray's Inn in that year ; he was a member of the parUa ments of 1640 and 1664 for Boston, and in those of 1656 and 1659 for Grnnthnm, the ELLIS first being the place that the judge repre sented afterwards in 1679, and the last being the place of his father's residence : facts sufficient to support the identity. The famUy of Ellis, or Ellys, is said to have been originally 'Welsh, but afterwards to have settled in LincoMshire, _ Sir Wil liam Ellis, an ancestor of the judge, was an eminent lawyer in the reign of Queen EUzabeth, and from him descended Thomas Ellis of Grantham, who had two sons, Thomas and WiUiam. The former was made a baronet m 1660 for his loyalty durmg the rebelUon, but the title became extinct in 1742 ; the latter sided -with the opponents to the crown and was the future judge, (Wotton's Baronet, in. 90.) WUUam EUis was bom about 1609, and was sent for his education to Caius College, Cambridge, where he took his degrees of B.A. and M.A. in 1632 and 1636. Ad mitted into Gray's Inn, he was called to the bar in 16.34. The town of Boston re turned him to the Long ParUament in 1640, where he subscribed the Solemn League and Covenant ; but, m consequence of voting 'that the king's answers to the propositions of both houses were a ground for peace,' he was one of those excluded from the house by Pride's Purge, m De cember 1648. Whiteloeke states (p. 405) that he was re-admitted in the following June, and accordingly he is found among the Rump who resumed their sittings on the dissolution of Protector Richard's go vernment in 1669, (Pari. Hist. u. 611, in. 1248, 1647.) In the meantime, however, he had ac cepted office under Cromwell, being ap pointed solicitor-general to his highness on May 24, 1654, the functions of which he continued to perform under Protector Richard. In the parUament of 1654 he was returned for Boston, and in those of 1656 and 1659 for Grantham, havmg m the in terim received a baronetey fi-om the pro tector. In Richard's parliament he showed great activity, but all his speeches, as re ported by Burton, were in a sober and accommodating spirit, Havmg from the beginning been an adherent to the sup porters of the Commonwealth, he was opposed in his attempt to be re-elected at Grantham to the Healing Parliament of 1660. Probably his brother's loyalty, added to his own insignificance, preserved him from censure or even notice at the Restora tion. (ParL Hist iii. 1430, 1480, 1538, iv. 4, I08I.) Losing his title and Ms place on the king's arrival, he fell back into the legal ranks, and pursued his profession with sp much success that, after havmg been chosen reader of his inn in 1663, he was called serjeant iu 1669, and made one of the king's Serjeants in 1671, when he was knighted. ELY He was appointed a judge of the Common Pleas on December 18, 1672, but in October 1676 he was removed from his place for some political reason not stated, but pro bably for the mere purpose of giving his seat to Scroggs, whom the minister Lord Danby favoured. His dismissal was evi dently not caused by any reflection on his character, for he was replaced in less than tMee years, when Danby's influence had ceased. In the interval he again entered parUament, being chosen in 1679 by his old constituents at Boston, while his nephew. Sir WiUiam, was selected for Grantham. These elections may have been the cause of his being recalled to the bench on the Ist of the next May, when he was also aUowed to resume his former prece dency. He died at his chambers in Ser jeants' Inn, Fleet Street, on December 3, 1680, leaving no issue. (Sir T. Raymcmd, 217, 251, 407.) ELY, Nicholas de (Bishop op Win chbstbe), was appointed archdeacon of Ely about 1249, 33 Henry IIL, and on October 18, 1260, the barons placed the Great Seal in his hands. He kept it only till the 5th of the following July, when King Henry transferred it into the hands of Walter de Merton, but by a separate patent specially recommended Nicholas for his good service. In the following year the king appointed him his treasurer ; and on July 12, 1263, the Great Seal was again entrusted to him, with the title of chanceUor. On the king's going abroad soon afterwards, the Seal re mained in his possession, with a prohibi tion, however, from affixing it to any in strument which was not attested by Hugh le Despencer, the chief justiciary. In the course of the next year he resigned the office of chancellor, and resumed that of treasurer. (Madox, U. 319.) In September 1266 he was elected Bishop of Worcester, from which see he was on February 24, 1267, translated to Win chester, over which diocese he presided about twelve years, and died on February 12, 1280, at "Waverley in Surrey, where his body was buried, his heart being sent for interment at Winchester. (Godwin, 222, 261 ; Le Neve, 73, &c, ; Rapin, iU, 142,) ELY, Ralph de, was accordmg to Madox (ii. 818) a baron of the Exchequer in 24 and 27 Hemy IIL, but there is no other notice of his name. ELY, William oe, a canon of the church of LincoM, was the king's treasurer during the whole of the reign of John and part of that of Henry III, He is mentioned in that character as one of the justiciers before whom flues were acknowledged in 10 John, 1208, and Dugdale records his death in 8 Henry IIL, 1223, caUmg him then AngUre Thesaurarius, (Rot. Chart. 49,) ENGAINE, Waenbe, is flrst mentioned ENGLEFIELD 233 in 19 Henry IIL, 1235, when, being then custos of the honor of Richmond, he was directed to deliver it up to Alexander Bacon, (Madox, i. 835,) In 1240 he was one of the justices itinerant for the northem counties, before whom a fine was levied at York. At tMs time he had the custody of the king's manors, and failing to account for the proceeds in 29 Henry HI., his per son was attached, and he was called upon to appear before the barons of the Ex chequer. . (Madox, U. 243.) On his death, in 1253, he was stUl indebted to the crown, as the king then granted his brother, James Engaiiie, permission to pay the balance due into the Exchequer, by half-yearly mstal- ments of 100 shilUngs each, (Excei-pt. e Rot Fin. U, 166.) ENGLEFELD, Alan de, called so from the place of that name in Berkshire, of which he was the parson, was added to the commission of the justices itinerant for that county in 9 Henry III, He was at the same time coroner for Staffordshire, and possessed property, not only in both these counties, but also in Oxfordshire and Buck inghamshire, all of which were seized into King John's hands, but restored to him on returmng to his aUegiance in I Henry III. (Rot Claus. i. 300; U, 76, 124.) ENGLEFIELD, William de, probably the nephew of the above, was sheriff of Devonshire in 86 Henry III., I26I, and the two following years. (Mado.v, i. 597, ii. 193.) In 1255 and the two foUowing years he was one of the justices itinerant who visited se veral counties, and again in 1260, About that time it seems probable that he was made a justicier at Westminster, for the Rotulus de Finibus (Exceipt. ii. 335) contains an entry of an amercement imposed by him. From 46 to 50 Henry III, he was employed in a judicial character. (Ibid. ii. 422-445.) He derived his name from the town of Englefield in Berkshire, where it is said his family had property above two hundred years before the Conquest. He was the son of John Englefield, of that place, and was succeeded by his own son John, one of whose descendants is the subject of the next article. ENGLEFIELD, Thomas. In regular de scent from the above William came Sir Thomas Englefield, justice of Chester, and twice speaker of the House of Commons, who died about 1614. leaving by his -wife Margery, daughter of Sir Richard Danvers, of Prescot, a large family. His second son was Thomas the judge, who on the death of his elder brother without issue suc ceeded to the inheritance, having pre-yiously entered the Middle Temple, where he was reader in 1520, In I5I9 he was .sheriff of Berkshire and Oxfordshire. In I62I he was caUed to the degree of the coif, and on December 3, 2.34 ERDINGTON 1523, he was advanced to be king's serjeant, at the same time receiving a grant of 100/. a year for life. From the Year Books it appears that he sat as judge of the Common Pleas in Michaelmas 1626, 18 Henry VIIL, being knighted at the same time. He performed the functions of his office till his death, which took place on September 28, 1637, To his judicial duties were added those of master of the king's wards, which he held in conjunction -with Sir William Paulet, He was buried at Englefield, where there is a brass memorial of him in his robes, and of his wife Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Robert Throgmorton, of Coughton, War- -wickshire. His eldest son Francis lost the paternal estate by attainder for high treason m 35 Elizabeth, His second son John, seated at Wootton Basset, was the father of another Francis, created a baronet in 1612 — a title which expired in 1822. ( Wotton's Baronet. i. 254; Dugdale's Orig. 47, 215; KaL of Exch. i, cxxxix,) EEDINGTON, Giles de, was the son of Thomas de Erdington, of an opulent family seated at Erdington, near Aston, In War wickshire, who was honourably and fre quently employed by King John, and died in 2 Henry III, His mother was Roesia, the widow of Adam de Cokefleld. Giles was evidently a minor when his father died, and so continued for the twelve follow ing years, for it was not till April 12, 1230, 14 Henry IIL, that he obtamed permission from the king to pay his father's debts by instalments of 100 shillings a year, (Ex cerpt, e Rot. Fin. i. 195.) Though there are no reports of the period, it may be pre sumed that he practised in the courts of Westminster. He was made a judge be fore August I25I, 86 Henry III., the first date of a payment for an assize to be taken before him, and when he held pleas for the city of London. He retemed his place on the bench till December 1267, soon after which he died, (Ibid. U, 118-464 ; Abb. Placit 137.) Although Dugdale, in his ' Origines Juri- diciales' (21), caUs him a canon of St, Paul's, he makes him in the ' Baronage ' (ii, 112) father of Henry, who succeeded to his estates, and whose son, also Henry, was summoned to parliament in 9 Edward III., but not afterwards, EELE, WjLLiAM, is the lineal descendant of a very ancient family of that name, settled in Somersetshire, from the time of our earliest kings, several members of which have rendered themselves eminent for their services to the country. He is the son of the Rev. Christoper Erie, of GilUngham in Dorsetshire, and was born at Fifehead- Magdalen in its neighbourhood in 1793, After going through Winchester School EENLE he entered New College, Oxford, where be took his degree in civil law in I8I8, In November of the next year he was caUed to the bar by the society of the Middle Temple, and joined the Western Circuit, He also purchased the situation of one of the counsel of the palace court, in which he acquired those habite of business which are of slow attainment in the superior courts. His erudition as a lawyer and his attainmente as a scholar soon insured him such fuU employment on the circuit and in West minster HaU that he was made Mng's coun sel in 1834. The city of Oxford retumed Mm as their representative in parliament in 1837, and, though his support was given to the liberal party in the house, the conservative prime minister. Sir Robert Peel, regardmg his merite only, did not hesitate to appomt him ajudge of the Commons Pleas on November 6, 1844, whereupon he was kmghted. He sat in that court nearly two years, and in October 1846 was transferred to the Queen's Bench. For little less than thirteen years he remamed in this seat, when he was promoted on June 24, 1859, to take the vacant place of chief justice of the Common Pleas, in which Mgh position the urbanity of his manner added force and effect to the unquestioned impartiaUty of his de cisions. These quaUties were eloquently recog nised by the attomey-general in his fare well address on the chief justice's retire ment from the bench on November 26, 1866, after a judicial life of twenty-two years. He still gives his services at the privy council. He married the daughter of the Rev. David WUliams, warden of New OoUege and prebendary of Winchester. EEMYN, OE AEMYN, William, pos sessed property at Osgodby m Lincoln shire, In 2 Richard H. he was treasurer of Calais, and in 3 Henry IV., 1402, he is mentioned as a baron of the Exchequer. Neither the date of Ms appointment nor of his death is recorded ; but he was the an cestor of a knightly family which long flourished in the county. (Devon's Issues E.vch. 211 ; CaL Inquis, p. m. Ui. 199.) EENLE, John, whose name was derived from a family which had flourished at Ernie, a manor near Chichester m Sussex, before the reign of Edward I,, was the second son of John Ernie, of Emle, and Agnes, daughter and heir of Simon Best, who brought him her mother's mheritance of the manor of Etchilhampton in Wilt shire. He was made soUcitor-general in 1507 ; and in 1509, a few days after the accession of Henry "VIIL, he was promoted to the attorney-generalship, which he oc cupied till he was raised to the chief seat of the Court of Common Pleas, on January EESKINE 27, 1519, whereupon he received the honour of knighthood. He did. not enjoy his pre sidency much above two years, his death occurring in I52I. He was buried at Emle, where his remains lie under a monument stUl existing. He had two -wives : the flrst was Anne, daughter of Constantine Darel, Esq., of CoUinboume, Wilte ; and the se cond was Margaret, daughter of Edmund Dawtry, Esq. From his second son, John, descended Sir John Emle, knight, chancellor of the Exchequer to Charles II. ; and also Walter Emle, of Etchilhampton, who in 1660 was created a baronet — a title which became extinct in 1787. ESSKINE, Thomas (Loed Eeskine). That only one short year of judicial life should have distinguished an advocate who retained for the long space of twenty-eight years the most prominent place at the British bar would naturally excite sur prise, were it not for the recollection that the party to which he was attached was during that period wholly deprived of the power of selecting the law officers of the crown, except for an equally short interval at the beginning of his career, when he was too young and inexperienced to expect pro motion. Such was the position of the Hon, Thomas ErsMne in 1806, when he was raised per saltum to the highest office of judicial dignity ; although without a single inter ruption from his very first entrance Mto the forensic arena in 1778, his progress had been one continued march of triumph. This eminent advocate was the youngest of three sons of Henry David, Earl of Buchan, by Agnes, daughter of Sir James Steuart, Bart., the eldest of whom suc ceeded to his father's title, and the two others, Henry and Thomas, became equaUy distinguished for their extraordinary talente, the former being twice lord advocate of Scotland, in 1783 and 1806, and the latter eammg honours in England which are now to be recorded. Thomas ErsMne was born at Edinburgh on January 21, 1760, and received his edu cation at the High School of Edinburgh and the university of St. Andrews, the very restricted mcome of the earl his father forbidding any other advantage. In 1764 he left his native country as a midshipman in the ' Tartar,' and during the four years he remained at sea he visited America and the West Indies. He retired from the service in 1768, and entering the army as an en sign in the Royals or First Regiment of Foot, attained his lieutenancy in April 1773. While yet au ensign, m 1770, and when Uttle more than twenty years of age, he married Frances, daughter of Daniel Moore, Esq., M.P. for Marlow, and spent the next two years with his regiment at Minorca, devoting his leisure hours to EESKINE 235. EngUsh literature with so much avidity that there was scarely a passage in Shakspeare, Milton, Dryden, or Pope which he could not recite from memory. He used to re late that while in Minorca he not only read prayers to the regiment, but also composed. and preached two sermons. Retuming to England m 1772, his agree able manners and pleasant vivacity soon procured him access to the society of the metropolis, among the distmguished mem bers of which are the names of Mrs. Mon tagu, Jeremy Bentham, Dr. Johnson, Bos- well, Cradock, and Sheridan. He also commenced authorship in a '^mphlet ' On the Prevailing Abuses in the British Army,' which had a considerable circulation. After serving in the army for seven years, he saw too palpably that 'without interest that profession would not secure a provision for his'increasmg family, and he could not but feel that his talents were more Ukely to be productive in a wider field for their exer cise. Resolving, therefore, to enter the legal profession, he sold his lieutenancy, and was admitted a member of Lincoln's Inn in 1775. His next step was to be matri culated at one of the universities m order that by taMng his degree his time of legal probation should be shortened from five to three years. With this object he entered Trinity College, Cambridge, on January 13, 1776, as a nobleman's son, which entitled him to a Master of Arts degree in two years without examination. This did not prevent him from striving for and obtain ing the college prize for English declama tion, the harbinger of Ms future fame. His degree was conferred in June 1778, and on July 8 he was caUed to the liar. During the mterval lietween his matri culation and his call he kept his terms both at Cambridge and Lincoln's Inn, di- vidmg his time between Uterary and legal studies. For the latter purpose he placed himself under the instruction of Sir lYancis Buller, and afterwards of Sir George Wood, both subsequently raised to the bench ; and by steady application gained that know ledge of the principles of the law, and that mastery of the intricacies of special plead ing, so necessary for his future success. He also attended a debating society in order to obtain fluency and confidence, and to ac custom himself to the sound of his own voice. His circumstances were so strait ened during this period that he himself ac knowledged, and indeed vaunted, that his family were usuaUy feed on cow-beef and tripe, and that when he was called to the bar he was almost reduced to his last sMl- Ung. But his sangume disposition and Ms courageous self-reliance supported him through all his difficulties. No sooner was he called to the bar than there was a propitious change in his cir- 236 EESKINE cumstances. From being almost penniless Le became suddenly affluent, and though ¦a perfect novice in Westminster HaU, he was at once recognised as one of its brightest ornamente. One happy accident followed by another gave him the fortunate oppor tunity. Happening to dine in company with Captain Baillie, against whom a rule to show cause in the folio-wing Michaelmas Term why a criminal mformation should not be filed for a libel on the officers of Greenwich Hospital had been recently ob tained, Erskine, in ignorance that the cap tain was present, expressed himself freely on the doomed pamphlet, which was then the general subject of conversation, _ He spoke with so much warmth and indigna tion against the tyranny and abuses im puted to Lord Sandwich, first lord of the Admiralty, and the officers of the hospital, that the captain, enquiring who he was, determined to employ him as his advocate, Erskine had not then taken his seat in court, and his flrst retainer and flrst brief was as counsel for the defence of Captain Baillie, But still, as he was the last of five barristers retained on that side, he could not expect to haye any opportunity of dis tinguishing himself; but again fortune favoured him. His four seniors expended so much time in their arguments, and Mr, Hargrave was obliged by illness so often to interrupt Ms address, that at the close of it Lord Mansfield adjourned the court, Erskine therefore had to commence the proceedings on the next morning, and in a speech as powerful and effective as was ever heard in court he exposed and stig matised the practices of Lord Sand-wich and the officers of the hospital, with so much eloquent invective that the rule was dismissed, and Erskine was triumphant. The effect of this brilliant oration was so great that retainers flowed in upon him from all quarters, and from that time for ward there was scarcely a cause or a trial of importance in which he was not engaged. This first appearance occurred on November 28, 1778, and as a consequence of his suc cess he was employed in the following ¦January to defend Lord Keppel, on the charges brought against him by Sir Hugh PalUsser. The trial lasted thirteen days, and, though from the restricted privUeges of a counsel at a court-martial he was not allowed to examine witnesses nor to make «, speech in defence, he suggested the ques tions to be put, and composed the address which Lord Keppel was to deliver. To the excellence of that address his noble client attributed his triumphant and unani mous acqmttal, testifying his gratitude by the noble present of 1000/, Though acquiring in less than a year the lead over many an elderly aspirant, his success was productive of no jealousy or EESKINE illwill. His manners were so pleasing and his bearing so unpretending that he soon became a umversal favourite, and Ms competitors willingly submitted to the su periority of his genius. His business be came so extensive that he found it neces sary to refuse to hold junior briefs, and he accordingly received a patent of precedence in May 178-3, before he had been five years at the bar. The coaUtion ministry, of which his whig friends formed a part, had in the previous March come into power, and, bemg naturally desirous of the assistance of one so much famed for his eloquence, procured his elec tion for Portemouth in the foUowing No vember. He made his first speech on the introduction of Mr. Fox's India bill, and continued to support it iu ite progress through the house. When the rejection of that biU by the Lords caused the dis missal of his friends from the govemment, he took a prominent part m the vexatious attempts in the remamder of the session to oust Mr. Pitt, the new minister. The natural consequence was that, -with the dissolution of that parUament in March 1784, Erskme was made one of 'Fox's I Martyrs,' and his senatorial Ufe suffered an , interruption of more than six years. In truth, he had somewhat disappomted public ' expectation. His eloquence was less suited to the senate than to the forum; and, I though he made some effective addresses, he was considered to have been cowed by the superior powers of Mr. Pitt, against whom he was mdiscreetly put m collision. : During this interval he devoted Mmself to his profession, m the piu-suit of which he increased Ms fame and fortune. Besides his command of business in Westminster Hall and on the Home CUcuit, he was called by special retainer to prosecute or defeiid very many important causes in other parts of the Mngdom. Among those of a more public nature was his defence of Dr. Shipley, the dean of St, Asaph, for publishing a tract by Sir WiUiam Jones, when, in a contest with his former master, Mr. Justice BiUler, he boldly in sisted on the verdict of the jury being taken iu the very words they used, and after wards, in a speech which Charles Fox de clared to be the finest piece of reasoning in the EngUsh language, contended for the power and right of the jury to determine whether the publication complained of was or was not a libel. Though the judgment was afterwards ai'rested, the judges decided against him on this question ; but Ms ar gument was the death-blow to their doc trine, and led to the ensictment of Mr, Fox's libel bUl in 1792, which fully estabUshed the right of juries to give a general verdict on the whole matter in issue. At this time Mr. Erskine had regained his seat in parlia- EESKINE ment for his old borough, and had the satisfaction of seconding Mr. Fox's motion on bringmg in the bill. At this time also he was attomey-general to the Prince of Wales, who on the formation of his e.sta- 'blishment had nominated him to that office. Another triumph in libel cases was in his inimitable defence of Stockdale, prosecuted for pubUshing Logan's pamphlet against the managers on Hastings' trial, when his forcible argument for free discussion, and his impressive introduction of the celebrated Ulustration of the Indian chief, produced so enthusiastic an effect on the auditory, and mduced the jury, even before the libel biU was passed, to acquit the defendant. 'When the French Revolution electrified the world, a schism arose among the whigs, many of whom, led by Burke, supported government m its efforts to counteract the spread of revolutionary principles in this country. The Prince of Wales took the alarm with this section, but Erskine, though Ms royal highness's attorney-general, and designed for the same office to the cro-wn had the regency been established, had the spirit and independence to join the other section, led by Fox, to whom throughout his Ufe he zealously adhered. Happening then to be retained for the defendant in the prosecution of Paine's 'Rights of Man,' attempts were made to induce him, to refuse the brief ; and on Ms firm refusal to do so, upon the principle that he was bound by professional etiquette to defend any man for whom he was retained, he received a message from the prince, unwilUngly re questing him to resign his office, which he accordingly did in February 1793. This episode of unpopularity was of short duration. In the next year he rose to the highest pitch of public admiration by the noble stand he made against the doctrine of constructive treason in his defence of Hardy, Home Tooke, and Thelwall, severally in dicted for high treason as members of societies professing parliamentary reform, but charged with conspiring to subvert the existing laws and con.stitution, and thus compassing the kmg's death, 'The trial of Hardy lasted eight days, that of Home Tooke six days, and that of Thelwall four days, in aU eighteen days, and each resulted in an acquittal, produced principally by the wondrous exertions, the powerful reason ing, the; eloquence, and the tact of their advocate. This triumph was hailed by the general public as the preservation of the constitution from the perils that would have environed it if the subjects were Uable to such proceedings. No further attempt has been smce made to impute treason by con- stmction or inference. The applause which Erskine received could scarcely be ex ceeded ; honours flowed in to him from all quarters M the freedom of corporations. ERSKINE 237 and the sale of his portrait and bust was excessive. For the next twelve years he preserved his undisputed ascendency in the courte, and was engaged for the plaintiffs or defen dants in almost every cause. In state trials the defence was generally entrusted to him as the advocate of Uberty of speech, and re sulted most frequently in verdicts of ac quittal. In parliament he was always^ found on the liberal side, supporting Mr. Fox, and joining him in his temporary secession from the house. He pubUshed a pamphlet entitled 'A View of the Causes and Consequences of the present War with France,' of which no less than thirty-seven editions were called for. In it he made a violent attack on Mr. Pitt, against whom he had a strong animosity, arising, perhaps, from his consciousness of failure in competi tion with the minister in the senate. On Pitt's resignation in I80I, Mr. Addington offered Erskine the attorney-generalship, which from a doubt of the prince's approval he declined. He however supported that administration till it was superseded in 1804 by the return of Mr. Pitt, but he seldom addressed the house. In the foUow ing year the prince revived the office of chanceUor to the duchy of Cornwall, and gave it to Mr. Erskine ; and on the renewal of the war he for a time resumed Ms old profession by becoming colonel of the Law Association, a corps of volunteers which was familiarly called ' The Devil's Own,' It is curious that it should have fallen to his lot soon after to contend for the right of volunteers to resign, when the govemment wished to deprive them of that power ; but, as usual, he was triumphant, the judges unanimously deciding that the service was entirely voluntary. On Mr, Pitt's death in 1806 the whigs, after an exile from court of more than twenty years, were allowed a temporary taste of the sweete of office, and Erskine was certain to be a partaker. He would have preferred to preside over a common law court, conversant as he was -with its rules and practice ; but the existing chiefs. Lord EUenborough and Sir James Mans- fleld, wisely resisting the temptation of the Great Seal, its possession was given to him on February 7, 1806, as lord high chancellor of Great Britain, and he was at the .same time raised to the peerage by the title of Lord Erskme of Restormel Castle m Com wall, a designation with which the Prince of Wales complimented him, as it had been the ancient residence of the Dukes of Corn wall, With whatever feelmgs of pride he went in state from his house in Lincoln's Inn Fields to take the oaths, or may have welcomed these rewards for his long public services in the cause of Uberty, far greater must have been his gratification at the 238 EESKINE recognition of his private worth and per sonal character in the unprecedented address ¦of congratulation which was unanimously voted to him by the whole bar of England, That body might well regret his retirement from ite ranks, for never had they, and mever could they expect to have, a leader whose hilarity of spirits, whose lively wit, and whose uniform kindness, added to such extraordinary powers, could secure at once their affection and respect. Though little acquainted -with the rules of equity or the practice of his new court, he had the wisdom to avail Mmself of the advice of more experienced men ; and by his natural quickness of perception, his dis cretion and caution, he passed through his fourteen months of trial m so satisfactory a manner that only one of his decrees was appealed against, and that one, arising out of Mr. TheUusson's extraordinary wUl, was affirmed. In the trial of Lord Melville, Lord Erskine presided as chancellor, and -acted with that dignity, firmness, and im partiality that excited universal admiration. As a peer of parUament he of course sup ported the measures introduced by hisparty, and had the satisfaction to announce the royal assent to the bill for the abolition of slavery. In the summer the death of his friend Mr. Fox was a source of sincere lamentation to him, which was followed in the following spring by the dissolution of the ministry, occasioned by the refusal of George III, to sanction a bill aUowing Roman CathoUcs to hold commissions in •the army. Though himself adverse to the measure, he shared in the dismissal, and gave up the Great Seal on April 7, 1807. In the fifteen years during which he survived his loss of office he very rarely took a prominent part in the politics of the day; but on some occasions he exhibited the same command of argument and ora torical power which had formerly distin guished him. When the kmg's pei-manent illness necessitated a regency in I8I0, Lord ErsMne opposed the restrictions on his patron the Prince of Wales, who, in 1815, though lie had deserted his old whig connections, complimented his former chancellor 'with the green ribbon of the order of the Thistle. Lord Erskine now amused himself as a man of the world, mixing in all gay so cieties, and being acceptable to all by his liveliness and wit. His bon-mots and his vers de society at this time and while at the bar would fill a good-sized volume, and Mr. To-wnsend in his agi'eeable memoir has made a happy selection of them. He again ventured Ms fame by becoming an author on a more extended scale, and published a romance called 'Armata,' being a clever allegory, in the manner of Sir Thomas More's 'ptopia' and Dean Swift's 'Voy- ,.age to Laputa,' on the poUtics of England EESKINE and the customs and manners of London life. It had a temporary popularity and passed through several editions, but from the want of interest in the story it is now almost forgotten. When the popular tumults and discon tent in 1817 led to the introduction of re strictive measures. Lord ErsMne appeared again m the political world, and contended agamst them 'with aU his ancient vigour. He stood boldly and prommently forward also m 1820 m defence of Queen CaroUne, al though by so doing he opposed his old patron and friend. But, deeming the queen an innocent and injured woman, he cast every personal consideration aside, and tMough out the Mvestigation battled on her part, and when the BiU of Pams and Pendties was withdrawn, he sounded ite knell in the last speech he made in parUament, By this mdependent conduct his favour with the people, by whom he was almost forgotten, was revived, and was exMbited in every shape. His likeness was a treasure uni- versaUy sought, addresses and mimicipal freedoms were showered' upon Mm, and pubUc dinners were given to do him ho nour. One, on which he most prided Mm self, was that at Edmburgh, which he had not visited since his departure from it as a midshipman in 1764, a period of fifty-seven years. In 1822 he pubUshed a ' Letter to Lord Liverpool ' m support of the cause of the Greeks, proving that Ms love of free dom was unabated ; and another pampMet on agricultural distress, his advocacy of increased protection in which is strongly opposed to the principle of free trade that now prevails. His career was now draw ing to its close. In the autumn of 1823, as he was proceeding by sea to pay a visit to his brother the Earl of Buchan at Dry- burgh Abbey, he was suddenly attacked with inflammation m the chest. On land ing he went direct to AmmondeU, near Edinburgh, where the widow of his deceased brother Henry resided, and where the Earl of Buchan joined Mm. There he breathed his last on November 17, 1823, and his remams Ue in the family burying-place at UphaU in the county of Linlithgow. In the eloquent words of Lord Brougham, 'if there be yet among us the power of freely discussing the acts of our rulers ; if there be yet the privilege of meeting for the promotion of needful reforms ; if he who desires wholesome changes in our con stitution be still recognised as a patriot, and not doomed to die the death of a traitor, let us acknowledge with gratitude that to this great man, under heaven, we owe this felicity of the times.' The courtesy of his manners, the cheerfulness of his disposition, the geniality of his 'wit, his ' generous im pulses and honom-able feelings,' and the wonderful power of his eloquence, Uve EESKINE almost as vividly among the few who now survive as they impressed those who at his ¦death erected a statute to his memory in LMcoM's Ttiti Hall Against merits such as these the only faiUng that is suggested is a charge of egotism and vanity, -with too ^eat a tendency to introduce himself and the mcidents of Ms life upon aU occasions. Let those who laugh at him on that account ;ask themselves whether, if they had founded their fortunes in the same surprising man ner, they could have altogether abstained from self-glorification. Of the mcidents of his private life there .are few records. If they were mixed with some fraUties, we may ask. What mortal is ¦exempt from them ? Whatever they were, they may be designated by the words of that rigorous moralist. Lord Kenyon, ' blots m the sun.' ' The great fortune which he .must have acquired by Ms forensic suc cess he lost by unfortunate speculations in Transatlantic funds, and by the pm-chase of .an estete in Sussex, which produced no- thmg but brooms ; so that at last he was obliged to part with his beautiful seat at Hampstead, and live upon the retiring al lowance of chanceUor. He lost his flrst -wife, after a union of thirty-flve years, m December 1805, just before his attaining the peerage. His se cond wife was Miss Mary Buck. By both he left issue. Thomas, one of his sons by the first -wife, having acquired judicial ho nours, is next to be noticed. (Lives hy JRoscoe, Townsend, and Lord Campbell; Lord Brougham's Historical Sketches ; &c. &c.) EESKINE, Thomas, the fourth son of the above celebrated advocate by his first wife, Frances, the daughter of Daniel Moore, Esq., was bom on March 12, 1788, at No, 10 Serjeante' Inn, Fleet Street, then the abode of his father. He was educated at Harrow under Dr, Drury and Dr. Butler his successor. His career at school was inter rupted by Ms father's elevation to the office of lord chancellor, whose inauguration he was summoned to attend, and who gave him the secretaryship of presentation.s, the duties of which did not require any great experience. At the same time he was entered at Trmity College, Cambridge, andm I8II as a peer's son gi'aduated as M,A., without residence or examination. In 1807 he became a member of Lincoln's Inn, commencmg his study of the law as a pupil of the eminent special pleader .loseph Chitty, Esq., and acquired such a mastery of the science that in 1810 he began practice in the same branch on his own account. After a suc cessful pursuit of it for three years, Mr, ErsMne was caUed to the bar in 1813. He at first joined the Home Circuit, and after wards availed himself of the privilege of changing it once, by attachmg Mmself to .the "Western Cu'cuit, EESKINE 239 Takmg no active part m political con troversy, and more mtent on the steady performance of his duties than in the pur suit of pubUc distinction, he progressed slowly but surely, till he acquired such a position as to entitle Mm to claim the honour of a silk gown. He was appointed a Mng's counsel m 1827, and speedily acquired a place, if not among the flrst leaders of the common law bar, yet one of considerable distmction on his own cir cuit. His speeches as a leading advocate were not so much characterised by fluency or copiousness of language, or by strong appeals to the feeUngs, as by great clear ness of statement, and, according to the subject of the case, placing it on a high moral ground, or treating it with dry humour and epigrammatic force. He pos sessed a power which in those days, when verdicte were more often won or lost on techmcal grounds than now, was of mfinite importance, — he saw perfectly the pointe of attack and defence ; and no one was more acute in detecting a latent non-suit in his opponent's pleadings. When Serjeant 'Wilde found on consultation that there was a weak point in his case, he would commonly ask, ' Whom have we against us ? ' and if the an.swer was ' Mr. Erskine,' would shake his head and say, 'Then we may be pretty sure this blot wiU be hit.' When the new Court of Bankruptcy, established by stat. I and 2 WiU. I"V., c. 66, received the royal assent on October 20, 1831, Mr. Erskme was selected as the chief of the four judges who were thereby appointed as a Court of Review. Though the junior of his three colleagues, he soon by the unfeigned simplicity of his manner and attractive cordiality overcame any jealousy that might have existed among them ; and by the clearness of his intellect, the soundness of his judgment, his great industry, impartiality, and care, amply justifled the appomtment. He presided over this court for eight years, assisting also in hearing appeals before the judicial committee of the privy council, and m the early period of its existence aiding greatly in shaping ite proceedmgs into that course which has graduaUy raised it to so pre-eminent a rank among the judicial tribunals of the country. So effective were his services considered that he was appointed ajudge of the Common Pleas on January 9, 1839 ; and for nearly four years he held both offices together, not resigning Ms chief justiceship of the Court of Review iu Bankruptcy tUl November 1842, He accompanied Mr, Justice Coleridge on the Northern Circuit in the spring of 1840, when the deUnquents among the Chartists were to be tried ; and it is to the credit of these two judges that the manner in which they disposed of these poUtical 240 ESCUEIS trials contributed not a little to the settle ment of disturbed minds, and to disabuse ill-informed persons of the prejudices they had entertained against the tribunals of the country. The effect was that the judges were not merely the objects of general admiration, but that their conduct was most highly applauded by those papers (especially the ' Northern Star,' of which Feargus O'Connor was the editor) which were supposed to guide and to express the feelings of the lower orders, Mr, Justice Erskine's judicial career was short. Amid the performance of his duties he was seized -with a sudden chill, which produced a severe attack of influenza and congestion of the lungs, which resulted in the rupture of a blood-vessel and tuber cular disease in the lungs, producing such a state of bodily incapacity as to render him totally unfit to discharge the functions of his office, requiring as -they did the active employment of the voice. Under this com pulsion he reluctently retired from the bench in November 1844, and many were the testimonials he received from his dis tinguished contemporaries of the value of those services they were about to lose. The retired j udge was long in a dangerous state, and it was nearly ten years before the bleeding from the lungs entirely ceased; and the continuance of his life for twenty years after Ms first seizure was little less than a miracle. He died at Bournemouth, on November 9, 1864. By his wife Hen rietta Eliza, daughter of Henry Trail, of Dairsie in Fifeshire, he had a large family, of whom only four were li^ving at his death. ESCUEIS, Matthew de, was one ot the five justices errant appointed by Richard de Luci to impose the assize in the county of Hants in 20 Henry IL, II74. (Mado.v, i. 126.) He is not otherwise noticed. ESPEC, Walter, was a powerful baron in the north, his principal estate being Helmsley, or Hamlake, in Yorkshire, and having also large possessions in Northum berland and several other counties. The loss of his only son Walter, by a fall from his horse, is said to have induced him to devote a great part of his estate to the ser vice of God. He and his wife Adelina founded a priory of Augustin canons at Kirkham in Yorkshire, to the honour of the Holy Trinity, in 1121, endowing it with seven churches, and other lands to the amount of 1100 marks per annum. He also founded the abbey of Rievaulx in the same county, for Cistercian monks, in 1131, dedicating it to the Virgin Mary ; and the abbey of "Warden in Bedfordshire, in II35, for the same order, with endowments of like munificence. He was justice of the forest for Yorkshire in the reign of Henry 1, ; and he and Eus tace Fitz-John, another northern baron. ESSEBY were justices itinerant in that county, and! also in Northumberland, Cumberland, and the bishopric of Durham. The precise period of their appointment is uncertain, but they both fined to be reUeved from being judges of Yorkshire in SI Henry L (Mag. Rot.) They had certainly acted as justiciers in the two preceding years, dur ing which they were excused, as the judges then usuaUy were, from the payment of Danegeld and other impositions. In the early part of the reign of King Stephen, Walter Espec appears in the cha racter of an experienced warrior, heading his countrymen against the ferocious inva sions of the Scots, Animated by despair, under the barbarities which they witnessed, the northem barons summoned their neigh bours and dependants, who put themselves under the command of Walter Espec and WUUam of Albemarle, and marched to Northallerton, There they placed a sUver pix contaimng the consecrated host on the top of a tall mast, ¦with the banners of their patron sainte, to serve as a raUymg point ; and from this sacred ensign the battle which followed, and which was fought on August 22, 1138, received the name of the Battle of the Standard. From the foot of this standard Walter Espec harangued his associates, and then, by givmg Ms hand to WiUiam of Albemarle, and exclaiming with a loud voice, ' I pledge thee my troth either to conquer or to die,' he kmdled such en thusiasm among his hearers that the oath was repeated by every chieftom around him. The result of the battle was the en tire overthrow of the mvaders, 'with the loss of 12,000 men. He died in 1153, and was buried in his own monastery of Rievaulx. To his piety and bravery may be added that he w.is equally distinguished for wit, modesty, sincerity, and loyalty, and (not to omit what was a great recommendation in those days) was of high and commandmg sta ture. Leaving no issue by his wife Adelina, his property descended on his three sisters, from one of whom, Adeline, the wife of Peter de Roos, the Duke of Rutland and Lord de Roos are descended. ESSEBY, JoEDAN DE (Ashby), wasthe grandson of another Jordan, and had con siderable possessions in the county of Lin coM. Others were subsequently conferred upon him by King John for his adherence to the royal cause. (Rot. Claus. i. 224, 290.) In 7 Henry HL he was appointed by the Archbishop of York to appear for Mm before the barons of the Exchequer relative to the debt due by his predecessor to the crown (Ibid. 386), from which it may be inferred that he was an advocate in the court. _ He was selected as one of the justices itinerant for Lincolnshire in 9 ESSEBY Henry III., 1225, being at that time con stable of Lmcoln Castle, (Ibid. ii. 68, 77,) ESSEBY, Robert de, sometimes called Essebume, appears in the acknowledgment of a fine m 27 Henry IIL, 1243. In I22I a Robert de Esseby was appointed with WiUiam Basset to deUver the gaol at Roell in Leicestershire (Nichols, 579), and Robert and Thomas de Esseburn, in 10 Henry IIL, were attorned by William de Ferariis in a suit he had against Walter de Widevill. (Rot, Claus. ii. 153.) His property was situate in the counties of Leicester, North ampton, and Nottingham. (Lbid, i. 253, 258, u. 26 ; Abb. Placet 99.) ESSEX, Hbnet de, whose grandfather, Swene, at the time of the general survey was lord of Rachley in Essex, and of no less than fifty-four other lordships m that county, besides others in Suffolk and Hunt ingdonshire, was the inheritor of this pro perty after the death of Robert his father. He was m great favour with Henry II. , and held the high office of constable. His pleas as a justice itinerant in many counties are recorded on the rolls of that Mng from 1156 to 1168, (Pipe RoUs, 31, 78, &,c.) He was likewise sheriff or fermer of the counties of Bedford and Buckingham. His prosperity, however, was not of long continuance. In the war which King Henry waged with the Welsh in 1157, his army, faUing into an ambush at ColeshuU in Flintshire, was thrown into confusion, and the Mng himself placed in great danger, Henry de Essex, who bore the king's standard, instead of hastening to his assis tance, was seized with a sudden panic, and, exclaiming that the king was dead, -threw away his banner and fied from the field. The Mng -with much difficulty rallied the troops, and, though his army suffered severely, overlooked the dereliction of Ms officer, maMng allowance probably for the terror of the moment, and remembering his former services. The subsequent conduct and bravery of Henry de Essex in the war of Toulouse, in 1169, justified his sovereign's leniency, and tended to wipe out the stam from Essex's character. The disgrace would probably have been entirely forgotten but for a quarrel which he had six years afterwards -with Robert de Mont fort, who, publicly charging hini -with the fact, and offering to prove it in mortal com bat, the king had no choice but to consent to the trial. The duel accordingly took place on April 18, 1163, at an island near Reading, and terminated in the defeat of Essex. The ' Chronicle of Bracelonda ' (60, 136) says that, being believed to be dead, the Icing, on the petition of his re lations, permitted his body to be taken to the neighbouring abbey for interment, and that there he recovered, and took the habit of the order. This account is stated to have EUSTACE 241 ' been narrated by himself to the abbot of St. Edmunds, on his visit to the abbey of Reading about the year II96 ; so that he had then been thirty-three years in the cloister, where, FuUer quaintly observes, ' between shame and sanctity he blushed out the remainder of Ms life.' By his defeat the whole of his large possessions were confiscated, and several records show that they remained in the Iring's hands for many years afterwards. Before his disgrace he gave the church of Walde to the nuns of ClerkenweU, and his lordship of Little Fraincham to the Ejiights Templars. Dugdale states that he had two sons, Henry and Hugh, and that his widow, Alice, a sister of Alberic de Vere, afterwards married Roger Fitz-Richard, lord of Warkworth in Northumberland, and of Clavering in Essex. (Baronage, i, 463 ; Brady, 302 ; Lord Lyttelton, U. 73, 76, 224; Leland, Hi. 410.) ESSEX, Eaels oe. See G. db Mandeyil ; G. Fitk-Petbe ; H. Botjechiee ; T. Ceom- WELL. EUSTACE (Bishop oe Elt), of whose parentege and early life no memorial re mains, was not improbably one of the clerks in Chancery. The appointment to accompany the Mng into Normandy, for the purpose of conducting such business of the Great Seal as might be required while he was abroad, would be the natural result of his official position ; and the deanery of Salisbury, which he held, in II96, -with the addition of the archdeaconry of Richmond, which was conferred upon him in the following year (Le Neve, 262, 324), would probably be the recompense to which he would be entitled from Ms standing in the court. Hoveden calls him 'sigillifer' and 'vice- chancellor ; ' but in the charters which he authenticated, the first of which is dated AprU 7, 1196, 6 Richard L (New Foedera, i. 65), he simply uses the tei-ms 'tunc gerentis,' or ' tunc agentis vices canceUarii.' He was raised to the bishopric of Ely on August 9, 1197, but was not consecrated till the 8th of March foUowing. There is no positive evidence of the actual time when he received the Great Seal as chan ceUor, but he probably was appointed to office before his consecration as bishop. Succeedmg Longchamp thus both in Ms ecclesiastical and his civil honours, Eus tace's name as chanceUor appears in a charter dated August 22, 1198, ' apud Rupem Auree Vail.' (Rymer, i. 67), aud he was officially present when a fine was levied at Westminster in the following year. (Hunter's Preface.) King Richard's death occurred on April 6, 1199, when Eustace's duties ceased. King John select ing his successor from among Lis own ad herents. 242 EVEEDON That John, however, appreciated his abilities and judgment is proved by his bemg sent in 1202 with Hubert de Burgh to the court of France, to demand from King PhiUp a safe-conduct on his sove reign's appearance there to answer the charge made agamst him of havmg mur dered his nephew. Prince Arthur. The ambassadors were told that then- Mug might come in peace, but that Ms return would depend on the result of the trial, a decision which John was not so foolhardy as to risk. In the subsequent troubles of that reign he was called upon to take a prominent and courageous part. Appointed in 1207, in conjunction with the Bishops of London and Worcester, to convey the papal re monstrance, they appeared before the king, and demanded of him the restoration of Stephen, the ejected Archbishop of Can terbury, The hardened monarch's angry and contemptuous refusal was followed by the bishops pronouncmg the solemn inter dict, which deprived the kingdom for so many years of the rites of religion. Warned by the Mng's threats, the bishops retired secretly from the Mngdom, and in! the fol lowmg year, by the pope's directions, ful minated the sentence of excommunication against the royal person. They remained in voluntary exile till the year 1212, when, the king having found it necessary to ob tain absolution from the pontiff', they ven tured to return ; and in the charter of sub mission afterwards executed a pecuniary compensation was made to them for their losses. During the short remainder of his Ufe Eustace was reconciled to his sovereign, and was one of his sureties to the barons for the redress of their grievances. He did not live to witness the grant of Magna Charta, but died at Reading on February 3, 1214, and was buried m Ms own cathe dral. He is described as well skilled in both sacred and profane learning, and as a pious and discreet prelate. To his church he was a consider.ible benefactor, and built the Galilee at the west end of it from its foundation. (Godwin, 254; Angl. Sac. i. 633 ; Madox, i. 29, 77 ; Rapin, ii. 429.) E'VEEDON, Silvestee de (Bishop op Caelisle), as one of the Mng's chaplains, appears as a witness to charters granted in 7 and 9 John. He had about that time presentations to the churches of Bulewell, Fremesfeld, and Tatham in succession. In all these he is called by his Christian name alone, and may possibly, therefore, not be the person who afterwards became bishop. In 8 Henry IH., 1224, however, Silvester de Everdon is expressly mentioned as a demandant of a virgate of lands, which he claimed as belonging to his church of EVEEDON Everdon in Northamptonshire, and it was probably on acqmrmg this preferment that he assumed the name. In the foUovring year he was evidently engaged in the kmg's service in the same way as the clerks of the Exchequer or Treasury frequently were, and is called ' clericus noster.' (Rot, Claus, i. 631, U. 53, 63.) It was no doubt in this character thathe had the custody of the Great Seal when the king, on May 5, 1242, confided to the Arch bishop of York the government of the king dom during his absence in Gascony. Soon after the Bishop of Chichester's death (Sir T. Hardy says on November 14, 1244) he was appointed either chancellor or keeper, and is stated to have been one most cun ning in the custom of the Chancery, In August 1246 he received the bishopric of Carlisle, and in November was succeeded m the Chancery by John Mansel, In 1251 and 1252 he acted as a justice itinerant in the counties of York, Nottingham, Derby, War'wick, and Leicester. When the bishops and nobles in 1253 went to the Mng 'with the conditions upon which they granted the aid he demanded, and the former were sharply reminded that their elevation was effected by the very causes of wMch they complamed, Matthew Paris relates that to SUvester de Everdon he addressed himself thus: 'And thou, Silvester of Carlisle, who, so long licking the Chancery, wast the Uttie clerk of my clerks, it is weU known to all how I ad vanced thee to be a bishop, before many reverend persons and able divmes.' He was killed by a faU from Ms horse on May 13, 1254, E-7EED0N, John de, was an officer of the Exchequer, and, like Ms feUows, was of the clerical profession. He was ap pointed in 30 Edward 1. to superintend the levying of the fifteenth in the counties of Oxford and Berks. In 1 Edward H. he was constituted a baron of the Exchequer on November 28, 1307, WhUe he held a seat on that bench he frequently acted as an assessor of the taxes charged on the city of London, and as a justice of oyer and terminer in various counties for the trial of offences connected -with the revenue and ite collection. He continued m his place till 1822 or 1328, In 4 Edward H, he was dean of the free chapel of St, Peter in Wolverhampton, and was certified as lord of that township in the nmth year. He held the chancellorship of Exeter from May 1308 tiU August 1309, and was afterwards a prebendary of Sai-um, which he exchanged for the deanery of St, Paul's, London, to which he was admitted on September 15, 1323. He died on January 16, 1386, and was buried in the church of St. Faith, under St. Paul's. (Le Neve, 89, 183.) EVEEDON, .William de, probably the EVESHAM Irother or nephew of the above John de Everdon, m 5 Edward IL, October II, 1311, was appointed treasurer's remem brancer in the Exchequer, and had a fee of forty marks per annum for himself and his clerks ; and in 10 Edward II, he had an additional grant of 20/. a year, de dono, for Ms good service, until the king should pro vide him -with an ecclesiastical benefice suitable to his degree. From that time there is no entry relative to him till July 18, 1324, 17 Edward IL, when he was raised to the bench as a baron, in which office he continued till the end of the reign, and was retained in it on the accession of Edward III. The date of his death is not recorded, but he was employed in II Fldward IIL to assist in levying money from the clergy of York for carrying on the French war, and is named as receiving a pension, or bribe, from the Knights Hos- pitellers so late as 1338, (Madox, U. 267 ; New Foedera, ii, 1005 ; Hospitallers in Eng land, 203,) EVESHAM, Thomas de, held some place in one of the departments of the court as early as 1818, 6 Edward IL, when he accompanied the kmg abroad. In 1319 he was appointed one of the attorneys for Rigand de Asserio, the pope's nuncio (N. Foedera, ii. 212, 899), and appeared as proxy for the abbot of Evesham in the parUaments of 16 and 18 Edward H, (ParL Writs, u. p. ii. 828.) He is first mentioned as a clerk in the Chancery in July 1828, 2 Edward IIL, and on the appointment of Sir Robert Bour chier as chancellor the Great Seal was placed in his hands under the seals of two of the other clerks, and so remained from December 16, 1340, to the 1st of January following. On the lOth of that month he was raised to the office of master of the Rolls, but it would seem that this was a mere temporary appointment, for he was superseded by John de Thoresby on Fe bruary 21, after only six weeks' enjoyment of the place. He immediately resumed his ¦duties as a clerk in the Chancery (N. Fcsdera, U, 745, 1172), which he con tinued io perform during the remainder of his life. He died in 1343, possessed of land at Weston Underegge iu Gloucestershire. His London residence was in 'Faytour Lane.' (CaL Inquis. p. m, ii. 108.) EVESK, Henet lb, had property^ in Cambridgeshire, which was all seized into the Mng's hands during the troubles of King John, On the accession of his suc cessor they were restored to him, and in 0 Henry III, he was one of the justices itinerant in that county and Huntmgdon- shire. (Rot Claus. i. 324, ii. 76, 146.) E'WENS, Matthew, was reader in the Middle Temple in autumn I69I, and took the degi-ee of serjeant in Hilary 1594, EYRE 243 when he was raised to the bench of the Exchequer, and his judgmente in that and the following years are reported by Savile and Coke. His death or resignation soon after occurred, as his successor, John Savile, was appointed m July 1598. (Dugdale's Orig. 218.) EXETEE, Dttkb op. See T. Beatjpoet. EYNEFELD, Henet db, was appointed, in 21 Edward I., 1293, one of two justices to take assizes, &c., in Cornwall and nine other counties, and was summoned among the judges to parUament till the twenty- fifth. One of his name was returned knight of the shire for Middlesex in 26 and 28 Edward I. (ParL Writs, i. 29, 52, 72-86.) EYSE, Giles, was of an ancient and distinguished Wiltshire family, which sup plied no less than three, and perhaps four, members to the judicial bench. Their common ancestor was Humphrey le Heyr, who accompanied Richard Coeur de Lion to the Holy Land. One of his lineal de scendants, Giles Eyre, settled at Brick- worth in Whiteparish, and had several children, one of the younger of whom emi grated with Ludlow to Ireland, and was the ancestor of Lord Eyre, of Eyre Court iu the county of Galway, a title which died with the grantee in 1792, The eldest son, named also Giles, succeeded to Brickworth, and represented Do^wnton in the parliament of 1660 and 1661. By his marriage ¦with Anne, daughter of Sir Richard Norton, of Rotherfield, Hante, Bart., he became the father of Sir Giles Eyre, the judge, who was adnUtted a member of LincoM's Inn in October 1654, and called to the bar in November 1661, Of his early life we have no further ac count except that he lost his first wife, Dorothy, daughter of John Ryves, of Ran- ston in Dorsetshire, in 1677. To her monu ment in Whiteparish Church he attached an inscription in anticipation of Ms own death, leaving the date in blank, with eight lines expressing the warmest affection for her, and implying the impossibility of his ever being united to another. Notwith standing this monogamistic resolution, we find that he afterwards married a second -wife, who occupied the same grave with her predecessor. In 1675 the corporation of Salisbury presented him with a tankard of 10/. value for Ms services in procuring their charter, being then their deputy recorder. He was afterwards elected recorder, but lost his place on the subsequent seizure of the charters. On the renewal of them in 1688 he was restored, and was elected represen tative of that city to the Convention Par Uament, He took part in the conference with the Lords as to the vote of abdication, and in aU the debates showed himself a hearty supporter of the new government. e2 244 EYEE He was immediately made a serjeant, and I on the settlement of the Court of King's Bench was constituted one of the judges of it on May 4, 1689, receiving soon after the honour of knighthood. After filUng this seat with great credit for six years, he died on June 2, 1696, and was buried in White- parish Church. The Christian name of his second wife was ChristabeUa; that of her family has not been discovered. She survived the judge, and took for her second husband Lord Glasford, a Scoteh Papist, from whom she withdrew in 1699, leaving him a pri soner for debt in the Fleet, where he died in November 1703. The judge left issue by both his wives. Some of the male re- presentetives of his family have had seats in parUament, and one of his female de scendants married Thomas Bolton, the nephew of Admiral Lord Nelson, who suc ceeded to that earldom in 1836. (Pari. Hist. V. 107, &c. ; Luttrell, i. 529, iv. 649.) E-YBE, Samuel, was the second cousin of the above Sir Giles Eyre, both having the same great-grandfather. He was the son of Robert Byre, of Salisbury and Chil- hampton, and Anne, daughter of Samuel Aldersey, of Aldersey in Cheshire, and was bom m 1633. As his father had done before Mm, he took the degree of barrister at LincoM's Inn in June 1661. He pursued his profession with considerable success, to which the patronage of the Earl of Shaftes bury, to whom he was reputed to be the confidential adviser, in some measure pro bably contributed, though the same cause in aU likelihood prevented his promotion in Charles's and in James's reigns. After the revolution he was created a serjeant on April 21, 1692 ; and from that rank was advanced, on February 22, 1694, to take his place, by the side of his cousin Sir Giles, as a judge of the King's Bench, Shortly after his appointment, Charles KnoUys, claiming to 'Be Earl of Banbm-y, who had been indicted for the murder of Captain Lawson, his brother-in-law, and had pleaded his peerage, brought the ques tion into the Court of King's Bench, where judgment was given in the defendant's favour in Trimty Term 1694. On the dis cussion of the claim of peerage nearly four years afterwards. Chief Justice Holt and Sir Samuel Eyre were called before the House of Lords and required to give their reasons for that judgment They resolutely and properly declined to do so, unless it came ¦joefore the house on a writ of error, and their lordships, after threatening the two judges with the Tower for then- refusal to answer, found it expedient to let the matter drop. Seven months after this incident Sir Samuel was seized with the colic, just upon finishing the circuit at Lancaster, where he died on September 12, 1698, E'YEE His body was removed to the family vault in St, Thomas's Church, Salisbury, a costly monument to his memory being erected at Lancaster. His wife, Martha, daughter of Francis, fifth son of Sir Thomas Lucy, of Charlecote in Warwickshire, brought him a large family, the eldest of whom was Chief Justice Sir Robert Eyre, (Lidtrell, ii. 427, iii, 278, iv, 343, 428, 436 ; 1 Lord Raymond, 10 ; State Trials, xU. 1179.) EYEE, Robeet, the son and heir of the above Sir Samuel Eyre, was bom in 1666, and, having entered upon his legal studies at Lincoln's Inn in April 1683, was admitted to the bar in February 1689. Before his father's death in 1698 he had succeeded his cousm Sir GUes in the re cordership of SaUsbury, and he represented that city m the last three parliamente of William HI, and the first four of Queen Anne, from 1698 to I7I0. He was swom queen's counsel m May 1707, and in Octo ber of the following year he was made solicitor-general. In March 1710 he was one of the active managers of the un-wise impeachment of Dr. SachevereU, and was afterwards engaged in the trials of the parties connected 'with the SachevereU riots, (Luttrell, vi, 166, 202, 263; State Trials, XV, 396, 622, &c.) The whig ministry by which he was appointed fell a sacrifice to this prosecution, but fortunately for him, before their dis missal, the death of Mr, Justice Gould occasioned a vacancy in the Court of Queen's Bench, which he was appomted to supply. He was sworn in on March 13 and knighted, and sat in that court during the remainder of Queen Anne's reign. On the arrival of George I. he was appointed chancellor to the Prince of Wales. As M duty bound, on the great question agiteted before the judges M 1718 as to the kmg's prerogative in regard to the education and marriage of the royal famUy, Sir Robert gave an opinion differing from the majority of his brethren, in favour of the prince his client. So sa tisfactory was his performance of his judi cial functions, and so high his legal reputa tion, that, not'withstanding this opposition to the royal claim, the king on November 16, 1723, promoted him to the head of the Court of Exchequer as lord chief baron; and eighteen months after, on May 27, 1725, raised him to the still higher dignity of lord chief justice of the Common Pleas. (Lord Raymond, 1309, I.38I ; State Trials, xv, 1217,) He maintained the reputation he had earned for the ten years that he continued to preside in that court, his whole career on the three benches extend ing over one-and-twenty years. Sir Robert, however, did not escape calumny. Some infamous and profligate persons brought a charge against him for EYRE visiting Bambridge, the brutel and cormpt keeper of the Fleet, when m prison, and of otherwise aiding and abetting him in his a.trocities. On a strict investigation, how ever, the committee came to a resolution that it was a wicked conspiracy to 'viUfy and asperse the chief justice, and that the informations against him were ' false, mali cious, scandalous, and utterly groundless.' (ParL Hist viii. 707, &c. ; State Trials, xvU. 619.) That Sir Robert was"' somewhat haughty in his demeanour may be inferred from the Duke of Wharton's satire. He vows con- .stancy to his mistress until the time 'When Tracy's generous soul shall swell ¦with pride. And Eyre his haughtiness shall lay aside. As a set-off against this, there is evidence of the general estimation of his character in the intimacy which existed between him and Godolphin, Marlborough, and Walpole ; and of his kind and generous disposition a testimony is afforded by a. legacy of 400/. bequeathed to his daughter by an old domestic, in grateful acknowledgment that he owed all his good fortune in Ufe to his deceased master. The chief justice died on December 28, 1785, and was buried in St. Thomas's Church, Salisbury, By his wife, Elizabeth, daughter of Edward Rudge, Esq., of Warley Place, Essex, he left a large .family. (Sir R. C. Hoare's South Wiltshire; Frustfield; Salisbury.) EYSE, James, was a descendant of the old Wiltshire family to which the three judges already noticed belonged, but it is uncertam of what branch of it. His great grandfather was of the medical profession, and died mayor of SaUsbury in 1685, His ¦brother, Dr. Thomas Eyre, was a canon in the cathedral of that city. The judge was born m 1783, and his father is described in the Lmcoln's Inn books as Mr. Chancellor Eyre, Having received his classical educa tion first at Winchester and then at Oxford, he commenced his legal studies at Lincoln's Inn in November l753, but two years after removed to Gray's Inn, by which society he was called to the bar in 1756, He purchased the place of one of the four city pleaders of London, and was for some time little known beyond the Lord Mayor's and Sheriffs' Courts. In them, however, his attendance was so regular, his manners so good, and his appearance so grave, that in February 1761 he was appomted deputy recorder, and in April 1763 recorder of the cor poration, being then scarcely thirty years of age. In the December of that year he was engaged as second counsel for John Wilkes m the action against Mr. Wood for entering into the plaintiff''s house, and seizing his EYEE 245 papers under a general warrant from the secretary of state. Though he acted m this case -with great energy and spirit, as thinking that it affected the liberty of the subject, yet, when a few years after, in 1770, the corporation, joining m the poli tical distractions excited by the cry of 'Wilkes and Liberty,' and the call for a new parliament, voted a remonstrance to the king, the recorder would not attend on its presentation ; but on another address in harsher terms being voted, he boldly pro tested against it as a most abominable Ubel, and again refused to accompany the cor poration to the palace. This was the occasion when Lord Mayor Beckford is supposed to have repUed to his majesty in the speech that appears at the foot of his statue in Guildhall, but the language of which is said to have been subsequently composed by Home Tooke, The common councU of course resented their recorder's resistance, and voted that he should no more be advised with or employed in the city affairs, he ' being deemed unworthy of their future trust and confidence.' But the court of St. James's looked upon his conduct in a different light, and took an early opportunity of rewardmg his loyalty, by raising him to the bench of the Ex chequer in October 1772, when he was knighted. On resigning the recordership he received the thanks of the Court of Alder men for the many eminent services he ren dered the pubUc, and was presented with a piece of plate with the city arms engraved thereon, as a grateful remembrance from the com-t for his faithful discharge of his duties. After sitting in the Exchequer as a pmsne baron for nearly fifteen years, he was raised to the head of it on January 26, 1787 ; and when Lord Chancellor Thurlow was removed in 1793, he was appointed chief commissioner of the Great Seal, an office which he held for seven months from June 16 to January 28, in the following year. On retiring from the Seal he was promoted to the chief justiceship of the Common Pleas, and at the end of the next year he was entrusted with the arduous duty of presiding at the memorable trials of Hardy, Home Tooke, and Thelwall for constructive high treason. These trials lasted eighteen days, and throughout them he acted with the greatest patience and impartiality, but in the opmion '_of many with too great forbearance to the irregu larities of Home Tooke. In his summmg up of the evidence m the different cases he carefully described the principles of the law, and in the most fair and unexception able manner explained the bearings of the evidence upon the charges. The resiUt was the acquittal of all the prisoners ; and the same verdict was given in 1796 in another 246 PAIEFAX trial before him of Crossfield and others for high treason in conspiring to make an instrument from which to shoot a poisoned arrow at the king. (State Trials, iv., v., vi.) With an extensive knowledge of law he united the greatest judicial qualities ; and to the unbiased integrity of the judge was joined a quickness of apprehension and a natural sagacity and candour that secured EALEISE to Mm the respect and esteem as well of his brethren on the bench as of the mem bers of the bar, whom he never mtermpted in their arguments, and towards whom he preserved an invariable and unaffected courtesy. He presided over the Common Pleas six years and a half, and died on July 6, 1799, at Ms residence, Ruscombe in Berkshire. F FAIEFAX, Girr, the third son of Richard Fairfax, of an ancient family seated at Walton in Yorkshire, by Anastasia, daughter and co-heir of John Carthorpe, received from his father the manor of Steeton in that county, where he afterwards built a castle, which continued the chief residence of his posterity till the beginning of the last century, when the family removed to New ton Kynie, about six miles distant from the castle, which is now the principal farm house on the estate. In 1435 he was a commissioner of array for the West Riding, and in 1460 he was joined with Sir 'WUUam Plumpton and others to enquire concerning the lands of Richard, Duke of York, attamted in the preceding parliament. (Plumpton Corr. Ui., Ixvi.) It may be presumed that he par ticipated in the mercy shown by the duke's son. King Edward, to his friend Sir Wil liam Plumpton, for in Michaelmas 1463 he was called serjeant from Gray's Inn (Y.B.3 Edio. IV. fo. 10) ; and in April 1468 the king appointed him one of his own Serjeants. In the following year he is noticed as being employed by Sir WiUiam Plumpton, and as receiving ten shillings for his fee, a sorry honoraiium to be offered to a king's serjeant. A few years afterwards, in an appeal carried on, as the judges sus pected, by the maintenance of Sir WilUam, in which they expressed their opinion that the men charged were not guilty, Fairfax ' said openly att the barre that he knew so, verily they were not guilty; that he would labor their deliverance for almes, not take- ing a penny;' whereupon Sir William's agent retained two other counsel, ( Corresn 23, 25.) ^ ^ He was appointed recorder of York in 1476 (Drake's York, 363), which he held about a year. The date of his elevation to the bench is not preserved, but he is flrst mentioned in the character of a judge of the King's Bench in Trinity Term 1477 (Y, B. 17 Edio, IV. fo. 4, b.) On the death of Edward IV., and again on the usurpation of Richard IIL, he had a re newal of his patent, and a few days before Richard's assumption of the crown he was made chief justice of Lancaster (Grants of Edw. V. 6') ; nor did the termmation of the tyrant's career make any change m his judi^^ cial position. For the first ten years of the reign of Henry VH, he kept his seat, and died in possession m 1495, leaving beMnd him the character of an able lawyer and a conscientious judge. By his marriage with Margaret, daughter of Sir William Ryther, he had six chUdren, one of whom. Sir WiUiam, is the next-men tioned judge. The viscounty of Fairfax of Elmley in Ireland, granted in 1628 to a descendant of William, the elder brother of Sir Guy, became extmct m 1772. (Biog. Peerage, iii. 249.) FAIEFAX, William, the eldest son of the above Sir Guy Fairfax, pursued Ms father's profession, and probably in the same school, Gray's Inn. He was elected re corder of York in 1489 (Drake, 368), and was engaged as counsel for Sir Robert Plumpton in 1490 (Corresjj, 101, 210), and in November 1504 he was called to the degree of the coif Soon after the accession of Hemy VIII. he was made a judge of the Common Pleas, the first fine levied before him being in Easter Term, I Henry "VIH,, April 1509. He died about the same season in 1514. By his wife, EUzabeth, one of the three daughters of Sir Robert Manners, ancestor of the Duke of Rutland, he had an only son, William, whose grandson Thomas was created Baron Fairfax of Cameron in Scot land by Charles I. in 1027. The parlia mentary general who defeated that unfor tunate monarch at Naseby in 1645 was the third lord, Bryan, the eighth baron, resi dent in America, proved his title in the House of Lords, May 6, 1800 ; but his de scendants have not claimed it, (Biog. Peer age, iii. 249; Notes and Quei-ies, Ist S, ix. 156.) FALEISE, William de, held a high and responsible office in the Treasury of Eng land. The only year in which he is men tioned as acting as a justicier is I John, 1199, when a fine was levied before hina. (Liberat 37, 71, 76, 99, 107 ; Hunter's Pre face.) FALLAN He was the custos of the honor of Gloucester for the first nine years of John's reign, and he and Maurice de TureviUe at a later period had the custody of the castle of Winchester. (Madox's Baron, AngL 59, 66,76.) He married Alice, the daughter of PhiUp de Linguire, and died in 1232, leaving a son, EUas. (E.vcerpt. e Rot Fin. i. 220.) FALLAN, "William, was appointed abaron of the Exchequer in 14 Henry VL, 1435-6. (CaL Rot. Pat. 278.) There is a curious account of his removal from the court, Richard Forde, one of the remembrancers, m a petition to the parUament of 33 Henry VL, 1455 (Rot ParL v. 342), stated that Thomas Thorpe having superseded Forde in the office of remembrancer, would not re store it to him unless he was made third baron of the Exchequer, and that Forde thereupon arranged with Sir William Fal- lan, clerk, then third baron, to resign on receivmg from Forde a bond to pay him 40 marks yearly for Ufe, unless otherwise pro vided for to tlie same amount, with a re markable condition, however, by Sir WiUiam FaUan, that such provision should not be ' any benefice havyng cure of soule.' The prayer of this petition, that this bond should 'be made void, was granted; so that the baron lost both his place and pension. FASTOLF, Nicholas, was of Great Yar mouth in Norfolk, for which town he was returned to parliament in 2 and 7 Edward H. In 18 Edward IL, 1824, he was ap pomted chief justice of the King's Bench in Ireland, and was still mentioned in that character in 1327, 1 Edward III. The pa tent of his successor in the office being dated m 1388, 7 Edward IIL, it may be pre sumed that Fastolf enjoyed it'till that time. If so, he must have been ou a visit to Eng land when he was added to the commission of justices itinerant into Derbyshire in 4 Edward III., 1330. (ParL Writs, ii. p. ii. 838 ; N. Fcedera, U. 709 ; Smyth's Law Offi cers of Ireland, 97.) FATJCONBEIDGE, Ehstace de (Bishop OE London), was born in Yorkshire, but his relationship to the noble family of that name is not distinctly traced. He appears m I John, 1199, among the justiciers be fore whom fines were levied at Westminster. In this capacity he regularly acted during the whole of that and for the first three years of the succeeding reign. (Orig. Jurid. 42; Abb. Placit 39, 116.) In 2 Henry III. he was appointed treasurer of England, a station which he held for the remainder of his Ufe, during the whole of which he was in the constant confidence of the sovereigns whom he served. Each of them employed him in embassies to the court of France, King John in 1204, and King Henry in 1223 and 1225, and from each of them he received various marks of favour. (Rot. FENNEE 247 Claus. i. 16, 32, 368, 447, 556, ii. 41, 47.) To Ms judicial duties he added those of an ecclesiastic, and held a canonry in the cathedral of St, Paul's; and in 1221, 5 Henry IIL, he was elected Bishop of London. His high character may be estimated by the foUowing distich, which was written on his being elevated in opposition to several other claimants : — Omnes hie digni, tu digaior omnibus ; omnes Hie plene sapiunt, pleiiius ipse sapis. He still continued actively to perfoi-m his duties at court, and was a frequent witness to charters and other royal documents until a fortnight before his decease. This occurred on October 31, 1228. He was buried in his cathedral, to which he had been a considerable benefactor, (Godwin, 179.) FA-UNT, William, of whom neither in the Year Books nor in any other records is the name to be found, is inserted by Dug dale as a justice of the King's Bench on April 4, 1338, 12 Edward IIL, and H, Philipps mentions two persons as his de scendants in 1684, one residing at Foston in Lincolnshire, and the other at Kmgs- thorpe in the county of Northampton, (Grandeur of the Law [1684], 220, 252,) FENCOTES, Thomas de, of a "Yorkshire family, was an adherent of Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, in the reign of Edward IL, and obtained his release from prison by a payment of 20/. (ParL Writs, U. p. ii. 208.) When John de Britannia, Earl of Richmond, was taken by the Scots in 16 Edward IL, Thomas de Fencotes was ap pointed one of his attomeys in England ; and on the death of the earl in 8 Edward III. he still represented him, and acted as custos of the estate till the death of the earl's successor, John, Duke of Brittany, in the fifteenth year. (N. Fcedera, U. 88, 524, 1159.) From the Year Books it appears that he acted as an advocate in Yorlfflhire as early as 2 Edward IIL, and as a justice of assize in the seventeenth year. He was appointed ajudge of the Common Pleas on January 14, 1348, and seems to have re signed about 1354. (Orig. Jurid. 45.) He received the order of knighthood when or soon after he was raised to the bench. In 24 Edward III. he gave certain tenements to the priory of the order of Mary of Mount Carmel to enlarge their house in Fleet Street ; and in 31 Edward III, he and his wife Beatrice endowed the convent of Egleston with the advowson of the church of Bentham in Yorkshire, (Cal. Inquis. p, m. U. 168, 203.) John de Fencotes, a serjeant-at-law in 40 Edward IIL, was probably his son. FENNEE, Edwaed, was the son of John Fenner, of Crawley in Surrey, by Ellen, 248 FERMBAUD the daughter of Sir WiUiam", Goring, of Burton. Dallaway (i. 16) traces the family for five generations higher, the earliest of which he calls John atte Fenne. He took his legal degrees in the Middle Temple, where he became reader in autumn 1576, In Michaelmas 1677 he was made a ser jeant-at-law, and on May 26, 1590, he was constituted one of the judges of the Court of King's Bench, in which he sat for one- and-twenty years, under EUzabeth and her successor. (Orig, Jurid. 218,) In 'the January before his appointment he, being a justice of the peace for Surrey, sat on the bench at the assizes when John Udall was brought up to receive sentence, and in kind and considerate Ian guage; assisted th e j udges in m-ging the prisoner to submit himself to her majesty, (State Tricds, i. 1297,) In 1695 an account was published of ' The ar raignment, judgement, and execution _ of three wytohes of Huntingdonshire, being recommended for matter of truthe by Mr. Judge Fenner ; ' and the Register of the Stationers' Company adds to the entry that the judge's note 'is layd up in the war den's cupbord.' (Notes and Quei-ies, 3rd S. i. 402.) He died on January 23, 1611-12, and was buried at Hayes in Middlesex. By a curious error, his name on his monument appears as ' Jenner ' instead of 'Fenner.' FEEMBATJD, or FEENYBATJD, Nicho las, was constable of Bristol from 22 to 33 Edward I. (Abb. Rot Orig. i. 82.) In 28 Edward I. he was appointed to peram bulate the foreste of Gloucestershire and the neighbouring counties (Pari, Writs, i. 898), and two years afterwards the custody of -the bishopric of Bath and Wells was entrusted to Mm during its vacancy. (Abb. Rot Orig. i. 121,) He is mentioned with William Inge as a justice taking assizes m 1305, and was also appointed a justice of trailbaston for Essex and ten other counties. (N. Fcedera, i. 970.) He possessed considerable pro perty at Wingrave and RoUesham in Buck inghamshire. (Ahh. Plaoit 222, 276.) JFEEEIBY, Thomas de, was a clerk of Thomas Plantagenet, Earl of Buckingham (afterwards Duke of Gloucester), in 6 Richard IL (KaL Exch. ii, 12.) It was not unnatural, therefore, that Henry IV., on ascending the throne, should advance him to be a baron of the Exchequer on October 14, 1399. But of the term of his continuance in the com't there is no account. FEETE, Ralph de la, so called from a town in Normandy, was a resident in Cum berland, In 17 John he was constable of Carlisle (Rot. Pcii!. 163); and in 3 Henry IIL, 1218, and several years afterwards, he was appointed a justice itinerant in that comity and in Westmoreland, (Rot. Claus. \L 77, 147, 161.) FIENNES FIENNES, Nathaniel, was the second son of WilUam, Lord Say and Sele, by Elizabeth, daughter of John Temple, Esq., of Stowe m Buckinghamshire. He was born about 1608 at Broughton m Oxford shire, and was educated at Wmchester and at Oxford, where he was admitted in 1624 feUow of New College, as founder's Mn. (Woods Athen, iu. 877.) He remained there about five years, and then spent some time abroad, ' in Geneva and amongst the cantons of Switzerland, where,' says Clor rendon, ' he improved his disincUnation to the Church, with which milk he had been nursed,' From his travels he returned through Scotland in 1639, at the time of the tumults there, which he assisted in fomenting. (Clarendon, i. 325, 510.) In 1640 he was elected a member of the Long Parliament for Banbury, and soon became a leader of the party called ' root and branch,' He strongly supported the bill against the bishops, and so little had the consequences been considered that, in a conversation with Clarendon, iu answer to the question what government they meant to introduce mstead, he said ' there woidd be time enough to think of that,' He was appointed of the committee to at tend the kmg on his journey to Scotiand in I64I. (^Ihid. 410, 494; Life, i. 90.) When the parUament took up arms m the foUow ing year, Fiennes not only undertook to find one horse and bring 100/. in money as Ms subscription towards the cause (Notes and Queries, 1st S, xU, 338), but accepted a commission of colonel of their forces. His first exploit, the defeated at tempt to surprise "\Vorcester (Clarendon, iii, 234, 626), did not speak much to the credit either of his courage or mUitary skill, and his conduct at Bristol in 1643 confirmed the bad impression he had made. Professing gi-eat zeal for the parUament, he had removed the former govemor on sus picion of disaffection, and had condemned and executed two prmcipal citizens on the charge of plotting to give up the place to the king ; and yet, after laying in stores of ammunition and provisions sufficient to sustain a siege of tM-ee months, no sooner had Prince Rupert mvested the city than he surrendered it to the royalists, to the great advantage of their cause in the west, and the infinite discouragement of the par liamentarians. On the colonel's return to parUament ' every one looked strangely on him with a discontented aspect;' so palpably showing their suspicion of either treachery or cowardice that he felt it necessary to make his apology openly in the house, conclud ing with a desire that his conduct might be examined by a council of war. This relation, being published by himself, was answered and exposed by Mr, Walker and FIENNES Mr. Piynne, in a book called 'Rome's Masterpiece,' for the pubUcation of which the -writers were summoned before the councU to make good their accusation. The consequence was that Colonel Fiennes was caUed upon to defend himself, and after a solemn trial, conducted most ably by Mr. Prynne, which lasted no less than nme days, he was convicted by the council of war, and condemned to lose his head. The sentence, however, was not put in execu tion; by his family interest and connec tions, and perhaps by the consideration of Ms great civil ability and the eminent ser vices and zeal he had previously sho-wn in the cause, the general was induced to grant Mm a pardon. His military career, for which he was totally unfitted, thus ended in infamy, and he quitted the kingdom to cover his disgrace, (Ibid. iv. 141, 848, 611; StaU Trials, iv 186-298.) Retuming "after some years' retirement, he resumed his attendance in parUament and almost his former ascendency. He was one of the committee formed for the safety of the kingdom in January 1648; and on December 1 he made a speech in favour of receiving the king's answers from the Isle of Wight as satisfactory. In con sequence he was one of the first victims of Pride's Purge, and, after being imprisoned for a short time, was secluded from the house. (Wliitehcke, 286.) In the parUament which Cromwell caUed after he' was declared protector in September 1664, and which was dissolved in January 1665, he was elected one of the members for Cxfordshire, In the following May Fiennes was a commissioner of the pro tector's privy seal, and on June 15 he was appointed lord commissioner of the Great Seal, on the secession of Whiteloeke and Widdrington, when they refused to carry into effect the ordinance concerning the Chancery. Fiennes is said to have been the author of the declaration issued by Cromwell iu the following October, vindicating the severity with which he had treated all the royaUste, making them suffer in money or in person for the plots against him, whether they were implicated in them or not, {Harries Lives, iii. 483-435.) In January 1656 he was united with Whiteloeke a,nd others in the negotiation of the ti-eaty with the Swedish ambassador. In the next parliament he was returned for the uni versity of Oxford, and confirmed as com missioner of the Great Seal, ( WIdtelocke, 632-649, 668,) In the endeavour to re move the scruples which Cromwell pro fessed to assuming the title of Mng he was one of the prmcipal speakers. This attempt being set aside, he bore the Seal at the solemn ceremony of the re-inaugu ration M June 1657. (ParL Hist ui. FINCH 249 1498, 1616.) Under the new constitution he was appointed one of CromweU's lords, and on the protector's death in 1658 as sisted in proclaimmg Richard as Ms suc cessor, and was reinsteted in the custody of the Great Seal, 'with his former colleague and Bulstrode WMtelocke. (Whiteloeke, 666, 676-6.) In the list of the members of the parliament called by Richard in January 1659 the name of Nathaniel Fiennes appears as member for Banbury (Pari. Hist, iii, 1533), which, as he was a member of the ' other house,' either must be a mistake, or some other person of the same name must be intended. He is not only mentioned as lord keeper in Richard's speech on the first day, as about to address the parliament on certain matters un touched by him (Ibid. 1540), but is named in April as gomg up to the bar of the ' other house ' to receive a declaration from the Commons, (Whiteloeke, 677,) Soon after the dissolution of the parliament on April 22 Richard's authority ceased, and with it Fiennes' office, the Long Parlia ment, which met again on May 7, appoint ing other commissioners, (Ihid. 678.) On the king's return Fiennes retired to Ms country seat at Newton Tony in Wilt shire, -where he died on December 16, 1069, and was buried in the church there, with a monument to his memory. However that memory might be cherished by his friends and family, the only claim to admiration by the public would be his undoubted talent and eloquence, of which his pub lished speeches afford ample e-yidence ; but in regard to his conduct either as a soldier or civilian, tainted in the former as it must ever remain with the suspicion of trea chery and the imputation of cowardice, and exhibiting in the latter so many proofs of changeableness and timeserving, he cannot but be held in the lowest esti mation. He married twice. His first wife was Elizabeth, daughter of Sir John Eliot, of Port EUot in Cornwall, by whom he had a son ; and his second was Frances, daughter of Richard Whitehead, Esq., of Siderley, Hants, by whom he had three daughters. His son William, by the death of his first cousin -without male issue, became third Viscount Saye and Sele, and the title remained in the family till 1781, when the viscounty became extinct, but the ancient barony survived in Thomas Twistleton, descended from the daughter of the eldest son of the first viscount. FINCH, John (Loed Finch oe Foed- wioh), TMs family originally bore the name of Herbert, and is said to have de scended from Henry Fitz-Herbert, cham berlain to Henry I,, and to have adopted the name of Finch in the reign of Edward I,, bemg that of a manor m Kent, which 250 FINCH came mto their possession by a marriage with the daughter and heir of its lord. After a long train of succession. Sir Thomas Finch, in the reign of Queen Mary, married one of the coheirs of Sir Thomas Moyle, of EastweU in Kent, and on his death by shipwreck, in 6 Elizabeth, he left three sons. Through two of them his connection with the law is worthy of remark, for he had one son, two grandsons, one great-grandson, and one great-great- grandson, aU eminent in Westminster Hall, besides two female descendants connected by marriage -with lawyers equaUy illus trious. Sir Thomas's second son, Sir Henry Finch, was an eminent advocate, and one of King James's Serjeants, and by his wife Ursula, daughter and heir of John Thwaites, was the father of this John Finch, who was born on September 17, 1584, and was admitted of the society of Gray's Inn in February 1600. Nearly twelve years elapsed before he was called to the bar, on Novem ber 8, I6II ; but in six years more, assisted by the patronage of Lord Bacon, he became a bencher, and was chosen autumn reader in 1618. In the meantime he had been elected member for Canterbury in 1614, and was chosen recorder of that city in 1617, The corporation rejected him in 1620, but being reinstated by the direction of the council (CaL St Papers [1619], 108-148), he held that office till 1621. Again representing that city in the first three of Charles's par liaments, he was chosen speaker of the last in 1628, Clarendon says (i. 180) that he had ' led a free life in a restrained fortune, and haying set up upon the stock of a good •wit and natural parts, without the super structure of much knowledge in the pro fession by which he had to grow, he was wilUng to use those weapons iu which he had most skiU.' The first effect of his endeavours was his knighthood, the next his appointment as king's counsel, and then attorney-general to the queen in 1626, (Rymer, xviU. 638, 866.) In his address to the king on his being elected speaker he showed some of the wit for which Clarendon gave him credit, and too much of the customary adulation. On the difficult subjects which agitated this parliament it was a difficult and delicate task to a man of Finch's disposition to avoid doing anything which might deprive him of the confidence of the Commons, or hazard the destruction of his hopes from the kmg. Through the flrst session he managed in his speeches to the throne to steer with tolerable safety ; and though, towards the end of it, he ran some risk by interrupting, ' with tears in his eyes,' a speaker who was about, as he Supposed, to fall upon the Duke of Buckingham, and requesting to 'withdraw, he redeemed himself by bring ing back a conciliatory message from the FINCH king. At the termination, however, of the- second session he lost all credit with the house, and incurred their censure by his- conduct. After delivermg a message from the king, ordering an adjoumment, he re fused to read a remonstrance against ton nage and poundage, proposed by Sir John ElUott, and left the chaU. Upon bemg forced to resume it, he had again recourse to tears, saying, ' I am the servant of the house, but let not the reward of my service be my ruin .... I wiU not say I wUl not, but I dare not.' Sir Peter Hayman, a kinsman and a neighbour, caUed him ' the disgrace of his country, and a blot to a noble family.' The door of the house was locked, the usher of the black rod domed admittance, and the speaker was compeUed to keep his seat whUe the resolutions were passed. Eight days after the Mng angrily prorogued the parUament. (ParL Hist, ii; 222-492.) But soon Sir John was to act a more prominent part. Noy, the attorney-general, who had invented or revived the tax caUed ship-money, died m the foUo-wing August, before the -writ for the imposition was issued ; the removal of Sir Robert Heath from the chief justicesMp of the Common Pleas, without any aUeged cause, took place iin September ; and on the I4th of October (1684) Finch, to the suiprise of all, received the latter appomtment. (Croke, Car. 875.) The wiit for ship- money being issued six days after natu rally induced the public to associate the removal, the substitution, and the -writ as in some way connected together. Lord Clarendon (i. 127, 130) says that Fmch 'took up ship-money where Noy left it, and, being a judge, carried it up to that pinnacle from whence he almost broke his own neck, having in his journey tMther had too much influence on his brethren to induce them to concur in a judgment they had aU cause to repent' Though he denied having known of the writ at the time of his appomtment, he acknowledged having collected his brethren's opinions on the sub- ject, and when the case of Hampden came under discussion he gave so absolute an opinion in its favour, and contended so strenuously against the argument of hia brother judges, Hutton and Croke, that he confirmed the general feeluig that he was elevated to the bench for the purpose of carrying , through the obnoxious impost, and, asLord Clarendon says, by the judg ment he deUvered he made it ' much more abhorred and formidable' than before. (State Trials, iii. 1216.) On his appointment in the place of Heath, and Sir John Banks succeeeding Noy as attorney-general, the foUo-wing specimen of bar wit was circulated ( Wood's Athen. ii, 584) :— FINCS No-y'a flood is gone, ' The Banks appear ; Heath, is shorn down, And Finch sings here. The prejudice against him was in no de gree dimmished by his heartless remark, when Mr. Prynne was brought up for sen tence upon his second Ubel : ' I had thought Mr. Prynne had no ears, but methinks he hath ears.' Thus noticed, the hair was turned back, and the clipped members ex posed, ' upon the sight whereof the lords were displeased they had been formerly no more cut off.' And the consequence was that the unfortunate gentleman was con demned to lose the remainder, which was done so cruelly and closely that a piece of his cheek was cut off with it. (State Trials, Ui. 717, 749.) Fmch's unpopularity in the kingdom tended to advance his favour with the king, and on Lord Coventry's death he was ap pointed lord keeper on January 28, 1640, (Rymer, xx. 864.) Having been previously ennobled with the title of Baron Finch, of Ford-wich m Kent, he opened the parliament that met in April (eleven years having elapsed since it had last assembled) with a fulsome speech, in which, alluding to the royal condescension in calUng them toge ther, he says that the king ' is now pleased to lay by the shining beams of majesty, as Phoebus did to Phaeton, that the distance between sovereignty and subjection should not barr you of that filial freedom of access to his person and counsels.' His majesty, however, felt it necessary to resume his beams in less than three weeks, and hastily dismissed the assembly on May 6. In the meantime the Commons had visited the lord keeper -with a vote declaring that his conduct as speaker at the close of the last parUament was a breach of privilege (Pari. Hist, iii, 628, 552, 671), and the offence was not forgotten when the kmg was com pelled to summon a new parliament in the foUowing November. Lord Finch, finding by the resolution then passed by the Com mons against ship-money and those who advised it, that preparations were making for proceeding against him personaUy, ap pUed to the house, desiring to be heard in his own defence before it came to a vote ; and, his request being granted, he delivered, on December 21, an artful and ingenious speech in his own vindication. But, not withstanding his grace of elocution, the Commons were not to be diverted from their purpose, a vote being immediately passed for his accusation before the Lords, and a demand for his committal. On the following mormng the message was deli vered ; but his lordship had taken advan tage of the interval to escape, and, first sendmg the Great Seal to the king, to sail for HoUand, The articles against him FINCH 251 charged him with endeavoming to subvert the fundamental laws of England, and to introduce an arbitrary tyrannical govern ment against law ; and comprehended, be sides others, his refusal to put the question as speaker, his soliciting the judges' opi nions on ship-money when chief justice, and his framing and advising the king's declaration after the dissolution of the last parUament, (Ibid. 626-698.) From a passage in Lord Clarendon's work (i, 525), originally suppressed, it appears that many of the ascendant party were not desirous of urging the charges against Lord Finch to extremity ; and their refraining from pressing for any further proceedings on the impeachment seems to warrant the assertion. His lordship remained quietly at the Hague, and the governing powers were content with receiving from him a composition of 7000/, (State Trials, iv. 18.) It does not appear when he returned to England, but he received two affectionate letters from Queen Henrietta Maria in 1640, and Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia, in 1656, sho-wing their continued interest in him, (Archeeologia, xxi. 474.) On Charles II.'s return to his throne. Finch was named in the commission for the trial of the regicides in October 1660, and when Thomas Harrison in his defence asserted that the authority under which he acted was not usiu-ped, but that it 'was done rather in the fear of the Lord,' Lord Finch interrupted him, and said, 'Though my lords here haye been pleased to give you a great latitude, this must not be suffered, that you should rim into these damnable excursions, to make God the author of this damnable treason committed,' In two or three of the other trials he also made some remarks, (State Trials, y, 986-1067,) He was then in his seventy-seventh year, which he did not live to complete, dying on November 20, 1660. He was buried in the ancient church of St. Martin, near Can terbury, in which parish his paternal seat, called The Moat, was situate; and a splendid monument to his memory was erected there by his widow. However highly Lord Finch's talents and eloquence may haye been spoken of, few have ventured to bear testimony to his independence as a judge or his wisdom as a statesman; and the general character that has with apparent truth been assigned to him is that of an unprmcipled lawyer and a timeserving minister. He was twice married, first to Eleanore, daughter of Sir George "Wyat, of Boxley iu Kent; and secondly to Mabella, daughter of Charles Fotherby, dean of Canterbury. As he left only a daughter (married to Sir George Radcliffe, of the privy council of Ireland), the title became extinct, (Hasted, xi, 162,) 252 FINCH FINCH, Hbneage (Loed Finch oe Da- VENTET, Eael oe Nottingham). What ever discredit the family of Finch sustained from the equivocal character of the above John, Lord Finch of Fordwich, was amply redeemed in the person of his relative, the Earl of Nottingham, by the admiration and respect he commanded among his contem poraries, and the reverence with which his name is ever mentioned in the present day. He was great-grandson of Sir Thomas Finch, the ancestor of Lord Finch, and son of Sir Heneage Finch, recorder of London, by his first wife, Frances, daughter of Sir Edmund BeU, of Beaufre HaU, Norfolk (a descendant of the lord chief baron in the reign of EUzabeth), He was born on De cember 28, 1621, and, after passing through Ms curriculum at Westminster School, was admitted as a gentleman commoner at Christ Church, Oxford, in 1636, four years after his father's death, Anthony Wood records no degree that he took, although he remained at the imiversity till he became a member of the Inner Temple in 1638. He was called to the bar in 1645, and must have soon obtained good practice in the courts, as his name frequently occurs in Siderfin's Reports during the Common wealth as a leader iu abstruse cases in the upper Bench, That he was no friend to the republican party may be inferred from his being selected for a prominent office immediately on the Restoration ; and it was no doubt from the reputation of his loyalty that he was employed before the Protector Richard's parliament in February 1659 for Mr, Street, who had been returned for Worcester, and was petitioned agamst as having borne arms as a cavalier. On this occasion we have the flrst reference to the eloquence ;for which he has been so famed, the opposing counsel acknowledging / that he had done the part ' not only of an ad vocate, but of an exquisite orator.' (Burton, iii. 428-484.) From his persuasive powers, he acquired the titles of 'the silver-tongued lawyer ' and ' the English Cicero,' and from his graceful action that of 'the EngUsh Roscius.' Evelyn speaks (U. 226) of his pleading ' most eloquently for the merchante tradmg to the Canaries ; ' and the gossiping Pepys (ii, 123, iv, 157) is in ecstasies when attending the court, exclaiming, ' So plea sant a thing is it to hear him plead.' Even the prejudiced Burnet (ii. 37) is obUged to concur, though he qualifies his praise by the depreciatmg remark that his eloquence was ' laboured and afi'eoted,' and that ' he saw it as much despised before he died.' ' He was returned to the Convention Par liament of April 1660, by two consti tuencies, those of St. 'Rlicbael's in Corn wall, and of the city of Canterbury, and, taking his seat for the latter, he was actively employed in all the steps adopted FINCH by the house to facilitate the king's re turn, A week after that event he was appointed solicitor-general and rewarded with a baronetcy. The trials of the regi- / cides were conducted whoUy by him, the attorney-general taMng no part in them, and the whole proceedings were carried on -with exemplary fairness and judgment. When the parliament met after the recess, he brought in the bill for keepmg the fast of King Charles's martyrdom, which, after an observance of two centuries, has been lately discontinued ; and in a debate -with reference to the attempted exaction of 150/. by the serjeant-at-arms for fees against Milton, he is reported to have said 'Milton was Latin secretary to Cromwell, and de served hangmg ; ' a sentiment which shocks our modem ears, and which has been ac cordingly stigmatised by over-mce critics, without making due allowance for the frantic loyalty of the time, and without remembering that little was then kno-wn of the great bard beyond his repubUcan -writings ; his ' Comus,' ' L' Allegro,' and ' II Penseroso,' and other minor poems, having had a very limited circulation. A new parliament met in May 1661, in which Sir Heneage represented the uni versity of Cambridge. Later in the year he became treasurer of Ms mn of court, and, being selected as autumn reader, he had the expensive satisfaction of reviving the splendid festivities which had been so long discontinued, and on the last day of the feast had the honour of entertaining the kmg. Sir Heneage resided, at this time and till his death, at Kensington, in the mansion which afterwards became the palace, his son having sold it to King WiUiam, At the tiial of Lord Morley for mm-der. Sir Heneage summed up the e-vidence hi an eloquent and impressive speech, wMch is fullyreportedm the 'State 'Trials.' (vi.778.) Lord Clarendon then acted as high steward, and in the following year was himself the subject of prosecution. During its progress Sir Heneage, as far as can be judged from the pubUshed reports, showed his disap proval of the proceedings, and did what he legaUy could m behalf of the fallen states man, (ParL Hist iv, 376, &c.) In 1670 y he succeeded to the office of attorney- general, which he held for three years and a half; and on the removal of Lord Shaftesbm-y from the chanceUorship, the^ Great Sefi was on November 9, 1673, placed in his hands, where it remained tiU his death, a period of nine years. Two months after his advancement he was raised to the peerage as Baron Finch of Daventry. For two years he was distmguished by the title of lord keeper only, but at the end of that time, on December 19, 1676, he was constituted lord high chancellor, and in. FINCH '1681 he was further honoured with the earldom of Nottingham. While he held the Seal he- presided as lord steward on three occasions — in 1678, on the trials of the Earl of Pembroke and of Lord Comwallis, both for murder ; and in 1680, on that of Viscount Stafford, impeached for compli city in the Popish Plot. In pronouncing sentence on that unfortunate nobleman he shows his belief in the existence of the plot ' beyond all possibility of doubting,' and even carries it back so far as the Fire of London, exclaiming, ' Does any man now doubt how London came to be burnt ? ' He, however, according to Roger North, discredited the -witnesses brought forward to support it, and pointed out the incon sistencies of their evidence. (State Trials, vi. 1310, vii. 143, 1294; North's Examen, 208.) Towards the close of the chancellor's life he suffered greatly from the gout, and was in other respecte so much affiicted that he often sat to hear causes when in great pain and more fit to keep his room. Frequently unable to perform his duties in the House of Lords, his place as speaker was supplied by Chief Justice North, with whom he preserved a cordial friendship. He died at the age of sixty-one at his house in Great Queen Street, Lincoln's Inn Fields, on De cember 18, 1682, and was buried in the church of Ravenstone in Bucks, where he had a seat, his son placing a splendid mo nument to his memory oyer his remains. In the various steps of his career, while party animosities were most violent and the whole kingdom was divided into factions, he carried himself with so much wisdom and steadiness, modesty and forbearance, that he appeared to be of no faction him self, and not only retained the good opinion of his sovereign, but escaped even the assaults, if not the censures, from which few were exempt, of his political opponents. As chancellor. Lord Nottingham is de scribed by Blackstone (iii. 66) as ' a person of the greatest abilities and most uncor- rupted integrity. . . . The reason and ne cessities of manMnd arising from the great change in property by the extension of trade and the abolition of military tenures enabled him in the course of nine years to J buUd a system of jurisprudence and juris diction upon wide and rational foundations.' Burnet (U, 67) calls him ' a man of pro bity, and well versed in the laws ... an incorrupt judge, and in his court he could resist the strongest applications even from the king himself, though he did it nowhere else ; ' forgetting his refusal to affix the Great Seal to Lord Danby's pardon, and the remark of the king on retummg it after he had himself used it for the pur pose, ' Take it back, my lord, I know not where to be.stow it betteV.' In the disposal FINCH 253 of his ecclesiastical patronage he was so particular that, not thinking Mmself a judge of the merite of the suitors for it, he charged it upon the conscience of his chap lain (Dr. Shaip, afterwards Archbishop of York) to make the closest enqmry and give the best advice, so that he might never bestow any preferment upon an undeservmg man. Tate, in the second part that he added to Dryden's 'Absalom and Achitophel,' descrilies him in encomiastic terms under the character of Amri ; and the Duke of Wharton, in the ' North Briton ' (No. 69), speaks of him in terms equally eulogistic. His character may be estimated by the reputation which has ever since been at tached to his name, by the frequent refer ences to his decisions as authority, and by the veneration -with which he is still re garded by those who practise in Westmin ster HaU, where his common appellation is ' The Father of Eqmty.' As a law reformer too he must hold the highest place, since to him we owe the most important and most useful act of the reign — the Statute of Frauds. He has been unfortunate in the con temporary reporters of his decisions, of whom there were three — namely, William Nelson, an anonymous author, and Sir Anthony Keck, the lord comnussioner of the Great Seal under William HI., none of whose publications are satisfactory or of much reputation. A few cases may be met with occasionally in other writers, and Lord Nottingham left a folio volume in manu script of all the judgments he pronounced, some of the most important of which have been given to the world by Mr. Swanston, the learned editor of our own time. While attomey-general he superintended the edi tion of Sir Henry Hobart's Reports (1671). The other publications in his name are principally his speeches and legal argu ments. In his private life there is not one story told to his discredit, ready as that profiigate age was to feed malice and deal M scandal. He kept up the dignity of his office with liberality and splendour, and was so far from being tainted with avarice that he gave up 4000/, a year out of his official allowances. He patronised largely learn ing and learned men. In the language of Bishop Warburton, ' he took into his notice and continued long in his protection every great name in letters and reUgion, from Cudworth to Prideaux.' He married early m life EUzabeth, daughter of Mr, William Harvey, who died seven years before him, having produced him fourteen children. His eldest son, Daniel, succeeded to a second earldom, that of Winchilsea, a title given to his great-grandmother, the widow of Sir Moyle Fmch; and m his 254 FINEUX descendants the double earldom of Win chilsea and Nottingham still survives. The chancellor's second son, Heneage, also au eminent lawyer and solicitor-general before his father's death till he was removed by James IL, greatly distinguished himself by his strenuous advocacy in the cause of the seven bishops. He received no office or other reward from King WiUiam, but when Queen Anne came to the throne he was raised to the peerage as Lord Guernsey, to which the earldom of Aylesford was added by George I., and has been enjoyed ever since by his descendants in ^regular succession, (Collins' s Peeracje, iii. 420; Athen. Oxon. iv. 66 ; Welshy, 61.)_ FINEDX, John, whose family was established at Swingfield in Kent, which Hasted says was bestowed on JohnFineaux by Nicholas Criol, in 3 Richard IL, in gra titude for saving his life at the battle of Poictiers, was one of three sons of William Fineux of that place, by a daughter of — Monyngs ; and, taking Fuller's authority that he was eighty-four years of age when he died, he must have been born about 1441, Fuller states also that he was twenty-eight before he took to the study of the law, that he followed that profession twenty-eight years before he was made a judge, and that he continued a judge for twenty-eight years. His legal studies, there fore, must have commenced about the year 1469, 9 Edward IN. The inn of court to which he belonged is not ascertained, nor does his name appear in the Year Books till I486, 1 Henry VH., when he was caUed serjeant-at-law; but David Lloyd states that he was steward of 129 manors at once, counsel to sixteen noblemen, and that he left behind him twenty-three folio volumes of notes, and 3602 cases he had managed himself. (State Worthies, 81-86.) The piotto he selected for his Serjeant's ring (the first recorded instance of its use) was, 'Suse quisque fortunae faber,' and one is in possession of a noble descendant of the judge. He owed his elevation to the bench to Ms bold opposition to the imposition of the tenth penny, ' Let us see,' said he, 'before we pay anything, whether we have anything we can call our own to pay,' The king, when Archbishop Morton resisted his advancement as being an encouragement of the factious, more wisely suggested that ' so noble a patriot would be an useful courtier, and that one who could do so well at the bar might do more at the bench.' He was accordingly made a judge of the Common Pleas on February II, 1494, and gave so much satisfaction in that court that in less than two years he was promoted to the office of chief justice of the King's Bench, ouNovem- ber 24 1495, During the remainder of the ;fishee reign, and for the first sixteen years of that of Henry VIII,, he retained his high posi tion with an unblemished reputation both as a lawyer and a man. He died in 1526, residing then in the manor of Hawe in the parish of Heme, which he had purchased ; and his remains were deposited in Canterbury Cathedral, He is represented as a person of great piety, though of a very cheerful temper and conversation. He was a considerable bene factor to the Augustin friars and the prioiy of Christchurch in Canterbury, and also to the abbey of Faversham ; and it teUs weU of his character that Archbishop Morton, who had opposed him, made him his executor, and that he was nommated to the same duty under the -sviU of Hem-y VII, The inn of Chancery now caUed New Inn is said to have belonged to Mm, and to have been let by him to the studente there when they first removed from St. George's Inn, at the rent of 6/, per annum, (Orig, Jurid, 230,) He was t-wice married. His first -wife was Elizabeth, daughter and heir of WU liam Appulderfeld, Esq., and by her he had two daughters, the eldest of whom, Jane, married Attorney-General John Roper, whose grandson was created in 1616 Baron Teynham. His second wife was EUzabeth, widow of WiUiam Cleere, and daughter of Sir John Paston, grandson of WUUam Pas ton, the judge in the reign of Henry "VI. From Ms only son by her descended an only daughter, who married Sir John Smythe, of Ostenhanger in Kent, whose son Sir Thomas in 1628 was created Vis count Strangford in Ireland, to which was added the EngUsh title of Baron Penshnrst in 1826, so that the chief justice was lately doubly represented in the House of Lords. (Fuller, i. 500; Hasted, vi. 141, vu, 122, ix, 87, 454.) FISHEBTJEN, Thomas de, was probably the son of Ralph de Fissebum, who in 42 Henry HI, paid a fine of one hundred shillings in Northumberland for marrymg Beatrice, the -widow of WiUiam the Coro ner, (Excerpt e Rot Fin. U. 278.) He was appointed justice itinerant in 21 Ed ward I., and assizes taken before him in Cumberland in the same reign are referred to in 2 Edward II. (Abb. Placit. 807, 309.) He continued to act as a justice of assize until 10 Edward II. FISHEE, John, is said to be descended from Osbernus Piscator, who held lands ui Bedfordshire in the time of Edward the Confessor, The first time his name occurs is when he was made king's serjeant-at-law in I486, From that period the Year Booksfrequently mention him as .on advo cate, till he was constituted a judge of the Common Pleas on November 3, 1501. In FITZ-AILWYN •the summer preceding he acted as a judge on the circuit at Nottingham and Derby (Plumpton Corr. 169, 161), as Serjeants then commonly did, and still frequently do, Fmes continued to be levied before Mm tiU the end of the reig'n, and he re ceived a new patent on the accession of Henry VIL, but died m the next year, FITZ-AIL'WYN, Henet. Considerable ¦difficulty frequently arises in tracing the famiUes to which individuals who are solely -designated in the records as 'filius Aluredi,' ' filius Bernardi,' ' filius Radulfi,' &c., be long; because, surnames not being at that period in general use, sons were often described by the Christian names of their fathers, their own Christian names being in turn assumed by their children. Thus the designation varied in the different .generations, until one of the family, by ac quiring possessions, or honours, or office, fixed his o-wn name, or some other he had assumed, permanently for his descendants. The difficulty is materially increased where both the CMistian names thus united were ¦pf common occurrence. In these cases two persons of different families not iinfre- -quently bore the same appellation, so that much confusion often occurs in investi- gatmg the facts and records of the time, by the impossibility to distingmsh the precise individual intended. The frequent occurrence of names of this •class (the prefix ' Fitz ' being substituted ¦for that of ' Filius ') renders these observa tions necessary, in order to account for the idoubt that is sometimes expressed as to their actual lineage. They will apply more forcibly to othera than to the individual now to be noticed ; but their introduction appeared more appropriate when the first example was to be considered. Henry Fitz-Ailwyn, called of London :Stone, was probably a lineal descendant of Ailwin Child, who founded the priory of Bermondsey in 1082, part of his family Icing buried there. In I Richard L, 1189, he was appointed mayor of London by the kmg, bemg the first who bore that title, and as such he is particularly mentioned to liave officiated at the coronation as chief butler of the kingdom. It was not tiU 10 -John, 1208, that the citizens obtained the power of annually electing a mayor for _ themselves. Their choice then fell upon Fitz-Ailwyn, who had presided over them from his first appointment, and whom they ¦annually re-elected till his death in 14 ¦John, 1212, so that he held the office for a period of twenty-four years. His name is inserted in this Ust of justi ¬ciers because he was one of those present ¦at Westminster in 8 John before whom a fine was acknowledged. Sir Francis Palgrave, in p. cv. of the In troduction to the 'RotuU Curiae Regis,'gives FITZ-ALDELM 255 a curious deed by wMch he grants a piece of land m Lim-Strete, in the city of Lon don, to William Lafaite. The considera tion is half a mark of silver ' in gersumiam,' and the annual rent reserved is twelve pence. He died in 1212, 14 John (Rot Claus. i, 124, 127), and was buried in the prioiy of the Holy Trinity, near Aldgate, By his wife Margaret, who survived Mm, he had four sons — Peter, Alan, Thomas, and Ri chard. FITZ-ALAN, Beian, was the son of Alan Fitz-Brian, a grandson of Alan, Earl of Brittany and Richmond, (Dugdale's Ba ron, i. 28.) At the end of John's reign he took part with the insurgent barons ; but his estates, which were thereupon seized, were restored soon after the accession of Henry III, (Rot Claus. i. 165, 838.) From 9 to 16 Henry III. he performed the duty of justice itinerant in the northern counties. (Ibid. U. 77, 151, 213.) From 18 to 19 Henry III. he was sheriff of Northumber land and from 21 to 23 Henry III, he held the same office in Yorkshire. (Fuller's Worihies.) The time of his death is not mentioned, but his son Brian succeeded him, and dying without male issue, the barony is in abeyance among the descend ants of his two daughters — Agnes, the wife of Sir Gilbert Stapelton ; and Katherine, the wife of John Lord Grey de Rotherfield. (Nicolas's Synopsis.) FITZ-ALAN, Thomas. See T. db Aehn- DEL. FITZ-ALAN, William, of Clun in SMop- shire, was the grandson of Alan, the son of Flathald, who received from "William the Conqueror the castle of Oswaldstre, and son of William of the same name. In 1 Richard I., 1189, he was one of the j ustices itinerant into Shropshire, Hereford, Gloucester, and Stafford. (Pipe Roll, 95- 248.) In the next year he became sheriff of Shropshire, and continued to hold that office through the remainder of the reign, and for the first three years of that of King John. (Fuller.) The manor of Chipping- Norton m Oxfordshire belonged to him, for a fair at which, and also at Clun, he obtained charters from King John. (Rot Chart 186.) He died about 15 John, 1213-14, and left two sons, the younger of whom, John, by his marriage with Isabel, one of the sisters and coheirs of Hugh de Albini, Earl of Arundel, acquired, in the partition of the estates, the castle of Arundel, which, with its appendant earldom, has remained m the family ever since, and is now held by his lineal descendant, the Duke of Norfolk, FITZ-ALDELM, William, or ALDELIN, sometirues also called de Burgh, was de scended from Robert, Earl of Moreton in Normandj', and Earl of Cornwall m Eng- 256 FITZ-ALDELM land, the uterine brother of WilUam the Conqueror. Earl Robert's son William succeeded him, and fighting against Henry I. was taken prisoner and confined for the rest of his life, and cruelly deprived of his eyes. He is said to have left two sons, the eider of whom was Aldelm, the father of the subject of the present notice. The younger was either the grandfather or father of the celebrated Hubert de Burgh. In 11 Henry II. WilUam Fitz-Aldelm is called one of the king's marshals, and in II77, and probably before, he was one of the dapifers. (Mado.v, 44-50.) It was no doubt in the latter character that he accompanied King Henry in his expedition to Ireland in October 1I7I. He was then sent with Hugh de Lacy to re ceive the allegiance of Roderick, King of Connaught, and on the king's return to England in the next year the city of Wex ford was committed to his charge, with two lieutenants under him. In ll78 Pope Adrian's bull granting the kingdom of Ire land to Henry was entrusted to the prior of WalUngford and him to exhibit before the synod of bishops at Waterford, and on the death of Richard de Clare, Earl of Pembroke, in 1176, the king appointed him deputy over the whole of that kingdom, and granted him the wardship of Isabella, the earl's daughter and heir. His government, which is represented as having been weak and negligent, did not last above a year. Prince John receiving a grant of the kingdom at the parliament held at Oxford in May 1177, Fitz-Aldelm himseU being present there. The city of Wexford, however, was restored to his charge, together with the province of Leinster. Luxurious, proud, .and covetous, harsh, unkind, and tyrannical to his officers, his impopularity was heightened by the disgust naturaUy felt by a brave people against one to whom was imputed a too careful avoidance of personal danger in the wars which he undertook. The complaints of the Irish deprived Mm for some time of Henry's favour, though they did not occa sion his removal. During his residence in Ireland he founded the priory of St. Thomas the Martyr at Dublin, Brady (i. 365) states that he was seneschal of Normandy, Poic tou, and some other of the king's dominions in France. After Henry's death he held the office of sheriff of Cumberland during the first °ii6 years of Richard's reign, and in the first year he was one of the justices itinerant in that county and iu Yorkshire, and in the former again in 8 Richard I. (Mado.v, i. 704, U, 236.) He afterwards returned to Ireland, ob tained a great part of the province of Con- FITZ-BEENARD naught, and while engaged in some cruel ravages was seized with an ilMess, of which he died in 1204. He married Juliana, the daughter of Robert Doisnell, and by her he had Richard de Burgo, surnamed the Great, lord of Connaught and Trim, who left two sons, Walter and William, Walter, by marry ing Maude, the heir of Hugh de Lacy, became Earl of Ulster in Ireland, and fromi him, by the maniage of the third earl's sole daughter and heir, EUzabeth, with Lionel, Duke of Clarence, third son of King Edward in., descended Richard, Duke of York, the father of King Edward IV. William was the ancestor of the present Marqms and Earl of Clanricarde m Ireland, who was created Baron SomerhiU in England in 1826, The same title, with that of Vis count Tunbridge, was given to Richard, fourth Earl of Clanricarde, in 1624, to which was added the earldom of St, Albans in 1628 ; but these became extinct in 1659, The Irish earldom then devolved on a cousin, from whom the present mar quis lineally proceeds. The Earl of Mayo also derives his Imeage from the same root. (Dugdale's Baron, i. 693 ; Lelands Ireland, i. 113, &c. ; Lord Lyttelton's Henry II, iii. 86, &c. ; Lingard, ii. 261.) FITZ-ALEXANDEB, Nigel, was one of the justiciers present in the Curia Regis in 31 Henry IL, II85, when a fine was levied there, (Hunter's Preface.) In the same year, and until 1 Richard I,, he was sheriff of Lincolnshire (Fuller), in which county he had considerable property. He gave a carucate of land m Bolebi to the priory of Sempringham in that county in pure and perpetual alms ; and it is a curious fact that in 29 Henry HI, the prior was ex empted from the scutage upon it, because the heirs of Nigel had then sufficient pro perty in the county to discharge it., (Madox, i. 672.) In I Richard I., also, he was one of the justices itinerant in the counties of Buckingham, Bedford, and Lin coln ; and by the roll of that year he ap pears to have been a justicier of the forest acting in Yorkshire. He died before 9' John, when his son Osbert was engaged in a suit relative to lands in Fulebec in Lin colnshire. FITZ-ALXTEED, Richaed, is only known by an entry on the Great Roll of 31 Henry I. In that record it is stated that he owed — i. e.,that he fined — fifteen silver marks that he might sit with Ralph Basset to hold the king's pleas in Buckinghamshire. He is^ ¦ called pincerna, or butler, an office which he pro'bably held under 'WUUam de Albini, , the king's chief butler, (Madox, i, 62. 457.) FITZ-BEENAED, Robeet, was among the eighteen justices itinerant appointed. at the council of Northampton, held on FITZ-BEENAED January 23, 1176, 22 Henry n.,to distribute justice throughout the kingdom. Robert Fitz-Bemard was placed at the head of the three to whom the counties of Kent, Surrey, Sussex, Hante, Berks, and Oxford were entrusted, he being at that time, and nntU 29 Henry U., sheriff of the first- named county. He had been sheriff of Devonshire also for six years from 1165. He died about 9 Richard H. (Madox, i. 120-138, 199 ; Fuller; Lord Lyttelton, iii, 93, 186.) FITZ-BEENAED, Thomas, was an officer of King Henry's household, and was twice subjected, in 1166 and II69, to the sen tence of excommunication pronounced against Mm by Becket, for the purpose of annoymg the king. His pretence was that Fitz-Bemard had usurped the goods of the church of Canterbury ; but the pope, on the king's representation that Fitz-Bernard and others were m attend ance on his person, took off the ban. In 1178, 24 Henry IL, and the two fol lowing years, he acted as a justice itinerant in several counties ; and in 1182 he is named as one of the justiciers and barons before whom fines were levied m the Curia Regis at Westminster, He was also justice of the forest, and from II78 to 1184 he held the sheriffalty of Northamptonshire, (Lord Lyttelton, U. 434, 506, iii. 404; Mado.v, i. 133-137 ; Huntei-'s Preface, xxi. ; Fuller.) FITZ-EENISE, Philip, was one of the justices itinerant appointed by the writ of Richard de Luci to make the assize for the county of Gloucester in 20 Henry IL, II74, (Madox, i. 123.) FITZ-GEEOLD, Henet, as one of the king's chamberlains, had a seat in the Curia Regis, and is one of the three 'justicise regis ' directing an exchange of lands at Canterbury between the Mng and one AtheUza. In 16 and 17 Henry IL, 1170-1, he was a justice itinerant into Kent. There can be little doubt that he was either the son or brother (probably the former) of Waiine Fitz-Gerold, the third lord mentioned by Dugdale, whom he succeeded in the office of chamberlam. (Madov, i. 146, 204.) FITZ-GILBEET, RicHAED DB, had a va riety of names. He was first called Richard Fitz-GUbert from his father, and after wards de Benefacta, from his estete of Be'nefield in Northamptonshire ; de Tun bridge, from that castle in Kent ; and de Clare, from the honor or earldom of that name in Suffolk, all of which were included in his possessions. He was the son of Gilbert Crispin, Earl of ,Brion and Ou, whose father Geoffrey was a natural son of Richard I., Duke of Normandy, so that he was second cousin FITZ-HENEY 257 to the Conqueror on his father's side ; and if his mother was, as one pedigree asserte (Manning and Bray's Surrey, i, xix.). Ar ietta, who was also mother of the Con queror, he was, on her side, that monarch's half-brother. He was a participator in the dangers of the field of Hastings. His share m the lands distributed among the Norman ad venturers was not a niggardly one. At the general survey he was found to be pos sessed (among others) of thirty-eight lord ships in Suirey, thirty-five in Essex, three in Cambridgeshire, and ninety-five m Suf folk, of which Clare was the chief, the name of which his descendante adopted, ¦ He exchanged the strong castle of Brion in ' Normandy, which he inherited, for the town and castle of Tunbridge, with a cir cuit round them, the extent of which was fixed by the same rope by which his own domains at Brion had been measured, com prehending three miles from every part of the walls. When King William went to Normandy in 1078 he was left as joint chief justiciary of the Mngdom with "William de Warenne, and during their rule they defeated Roger Fitz-Osberne, Earl of Hereford, and Ralph de Guader, Earl of Norfolk, who had headed a rebellion against the royal authority. After the Conqueror's death he at first took the part of his son Robert, but after wards adhered to William Rufus, and his successor Henry I. In the reign of the latter he was slain in an ambush, while marching to his property in Cardiganshire. He married Rohais, the daughter of Walter Giffard, Earl of Buckmgham, and by her he left five sons, the eldest of whom was Gilbert, who is generally spoken of as de Tunbridge, whose eldest son, Richard, was created Earl of Hertford, a title which was successively enjoyed (together with that of Clare) by his two sons Gilbert and Roger de Clare. Gilbert's second son, Gil bert, was created Earl of Pembroke by King Stephen, and this title devolved on the famous "William Mareschall by his mai-riage with this earl's grand-daughter. (Madox, i, 32 ; Dugdale's Baron, i, 206 ; Brady's England, &,c.) FITZ-HELTON, William, or FITZ-HELT, is named by Dugdale as one of the jus tices itinerant in 16 Henry H., 1170, but who have been shown to be commissioners of enquiry into the conduct of the sheriffs, &c, A family of that name is mentioned by Madox as paymg seventy shillings for scutage in Kent ; and by an entry on the Great Roll of I Richard I. (232) it appears that WilUam Fitz-Helte and 'William de Enema attested the account of the sheriff of that county for money laid out in the works of Dover Castle. (Madox, i. 630.) FITZ-EENBY, Rantjlph, whose family s 258 FITZ-HEEBEET eventuaUy adopted the name of Fitz-Hugh, and may be traced back to Bardolph, lord of Ravensworth in the time of William the Conqueror, was the son of Henry Fitz- Hervey, who died in I20I, 3 John. In 17 John, having shown symptoms of joining the discontented barons, he obtained a safe- conduct to go to the king to make his peace, which he effected on the payment of a fine of fifty marks. (Rot. Pat 168.) He mar ried Alicia, the daughter and heir of Adam de Staveley, and in 2 Henry III. fined forty marks for having Uvery of the lands held by his father-in-law in capite in York shire, (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. i. 14.) In 18 Henry IIL, 1284, he was appointed one of the justices itinerant then sent into Cumberland, He died, not as Dugdale states, m 1262, but before January 13, 1243 ; for on that day a writ was granted to Alicia, who ' was the wife of Ranulph Fitz-Henry.' (Ibid. 393.) He was succeeded by his son, Henry Fitz-Ranulph, from whose son, Hugh Fitz- Henry, the name of Fitz-Hugh was per manently adopted. The barony continued in male heirs till I6I2, smce which time it has been in abeyance. (Nicolas.) FITZ-HEEBEET, Mathew, a younger sou of Herbert Fitz-Herbert, who was chamberlain to Henry I., was attached to Kmg John's court, and is a frequent wit ness to his charters from the sixth year of his reign. (Rot. Chart. 140, &c,) From 12 to 17 John he was sheriff of Sussex, durmg part of which time he held the office of custos of the port of London (Rot. Claus. i. 146) ; and in 18 John the castle of Pontoise was delivered to his charge. His services and faithful adhe rence to his sovereign were not 'without reward : besides the lands of WiUiam Pont Arch in Gloucestershire, he received a grant of the manors of Wufrinton and Kinemesdon in Somersetehire ; and he possessed the manor of Chedelinton in the same county, for which he obtained a market. (Rot Pat 184, 194 ; Rot Claus. i. 17, 48, 368.) He married Joanna, daughter and heiress of William de MandeviUe and Mabilia Patric, his wife, and by her right had the land of 01- londe in Normandy. For the first thirteen years of the next reign he continued sheriff of Sussex, and acted twice as a justice itinerant, in 3 and II Henry IIL (Rot Claus. ii, 213,) He died in 1231. His son Herbert (called Herbert Fitz-Mathew) died in 1245, when his possessions devolved on his next brother, Peter, who also dying in 1256 was succeeded by John, the son of the third brother, Mathew, after whom the descent is doubtful, (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. i. 211, 480, 482, ii, 206,) FITZ-HEEBEET, Anthont, of Norbury, fitz-her5eet a manor in Derbyshire, granted in 1125 by WilUam, prior of Tutbury, to WilUam Fitz-Herbert, was the sixth and youngest son of Ralph Fitz-Herbert, the twelfth lord, by Elizabeth, daughter and sole heir of John MarshaU, of Upton in Leicestershire ; and by the death of all his brothers 'with out male issue he eventuaUy succeeded to the paternal estate, as fourteenth lord, Anthony Wood claims him as a member of the imiversity of Oxford, but is not able to say of what coUege ; and the place of his legal education is equally uncertain, though, from the insertion of his arms m the 'win dow of Gray's Inn Hall, that society evi dently adopts him. It is more surprising that there should be any difficulty in tracing the academical home of so emi nent and leamed a la-wyer, than that any school should desire to be considered as having guided his studies. Although his name does not appear m the courte tiU some time after he was called to the degree of seijeant in 1510, it is evident that he had been long mdustriously em ployed in the composition of his laborious work, ' The Grand Abridgment,' containing an abstract of the Year Books till his time, the first edition of wMch was published in 1614, In 1516 he was made one of the king's serjeante, and about the same time he received the honour of knighthood. In less than six years his elevation to the bench as a judge of the Common Pleas took place, in Easter 1622, He sat in tMs court for the remamder of his life, a period of sixteen years. Besides his judicial duties, he had fre quent occupation on the king's affairs. He was one of the commissioners sent to Ire land, and a -visitor of the monasteries ; and durmg the latter period of his career Ms name appears more prominently in con nection 'with the political events of the time. His signature is the last but one of the seventeen subscribers to the articles of impeachment against Cardinal Wolsey, and he was one of the commissioners appointed on the trials both of Sir Thomas More and Bishop Fisher. Notwithstanding the dis gust which the conviction of these two exceUent men universally excited, Fitz- Herbert's reputation sustained no blemish, the world knowing that his being joined in the commission was an act that he could not prevent, and that his interference with the will of 'the arbitrary despot would have been both useless and dangerous. His ju dicial character had been raised by his having allowed bills for extortion against Wolsey while in the height of his power to be found before him at York, for which he suffered the cardinal's rebuke (Slate Trials, i. 377-398; Hall's Chron. 685); and his legal reputation had continued to increase, not only from the sound judg- FITZ-HEEVEY ments he pronounced, but from the seven useful and leamed works with which he followed his early undertaking, showing that his labours were not confined to pro fessional enquiries, but extended to subjects of general interest, and aimed at instructmg all mankind. Sir ¦ Anthony died, as appears by his epitaph m the church at Norbury, on May 27, 1638, In his last moments it is said that he enjoined his children, by a solemn promise, never to accept a grant or to make a purchase of any of the abbey lands. He was twice married. By his first -wife, who was Dorothy, daughter of Sir Henry Wil loughby, of WoUaton, Notts, he had no issue. By his second -wife, Matilda, daughter and heir of Richard Cotton, of Hampstall- Ridware in Steffordshire, he left several children, Norbury, after a regular descent of more than seven hundred years, is still in possession of a lineal representative of the family. The Fitz-Herberts of Tissington in Derbyshire are of a different but equally ancient family, which, however, became connected with the Fitz-Herberts of Nor bury by marriage with one of the descen dante of the judge, FITZ-HEE-VEY, Henet, was probably the father of Osbert, noticed in the next article ; but the early history of the family is involved m some obscurity. If so, he ¦attended King Richard in his expedition to the Holy Land, and was much esteemed by King John, In 9 Richard I., II97, he was one of the justices itinerant who fixed the tallage in Cumberland (Madox, i. 704) ; and in 10 John, 1208, he was present as a justicier when fines were acknowledged at Carlisle, King John confirmed to him his lands at Hinton m Richmond, in Scorton, and other places ; and the forest in Teisedale, as his ancestors held it, and authorised him to fortify his house at Cudereston, He married Alice, the daughter of Henry .Fitz-Yvo. When he died is uncertain, but ¦he survived Osbert, his eldest son. FITZ-HEEVEY, Osbeet. Osbert Fitz- Heryey's name appears as one of the jus- ¦ticiers of the King's Court at Westmmster 'for a period of twenty-five years — viz., from ,28 Henry IL, 1182, tiU 7 John, 1205-6— in : almost every year of which he was present when fines were levied there (Hunter's P-eface), and frequently he performed the ¦duties of a justice itinerant. JoceUne de Brakelonda (26) records that he was sub- sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk. He was a descendant of a younger son of Hervey, Duke of Orleans, named Robert, who accompanied William the Conqueror in his enterprise against England, and re- • ceived part of the territorial spoil in reward for his sendees. The name of Osbert's FITZ-JAMES 259 father vvas Henry, probably the justicier last noticed, and Ms mother was Alice daughter of Henry Fitz-Yvo. He married Dionysia, daughter of Geoffrey de Grey, aud died in April 1206, leaving an only son Adam, who married Juliana, the daughter of the justicier John Fitz-Hugh,. and their descendants through a long succession of years were conspicuous in the senate and the field.. One of them. Sir WiUiam Hervey, wa,s created by James I. baron of .Ross in the county of Wexford, and by Charles I. Lord Hervey of Kidbroke in Kent, 'but on his death without male issue in 1642 his titles became extinct. Another representa tive of this distinguished family was raised by Queen Anne to the peerage, by the title of Lord Heryey of Ickworth in Suffolk, and by George I, he was advanced to the earldom of Bristol, The fifth earl was created Earl Jermyn and Marquis of Bristol by George IV, on June 30, 1826, (Brydges' Collins' s Peerage, iy,'I40, &c,) FITZ-HUGH, John, was among the jus ticiers before whom fines were acknow ledged in 10 John, 1208. (Hunter's Pre face.) He was of a Yorkshire • family, and was high in the Mng's employment, beiug constable of Windsor Castle,' in. the custody of which he is noticed through out the whole of the reign, and in that of Henry III. In 10 and 12 John he held the sheriffalty of Sussex, and during the three following years that of Surrey, and in some, of these years was concerned in the receipt of the tallage from the Jews, and m the collection of the customs of woad and wine, (Madox,, i. 12,3, 774.) Among the mandates ad dressed to him, he is commanded on August 1212 to send the great crown, with all the regalia which he had in his custody, to the king at Nottingham. (Rot Claus. 'i. 122.) He was a firm adherent to King John, and was present with Mm on the expedition to Ireland (Ibid. 126), and durmg his sub sequent conteste with the barons. (Wen- dovei; iii. 301.) He died on Moi-ch 7, 1222, 6 Henry IIL, leaving by his wife a son, who died young, and a daughter Juliana, who mamed Adam Fitz-Hervey, son of the last-noticed Osbert Fitz-Hervey. FITZ-JAMES, John, so far from Lord Campbell's assertion that he was 'of ob scure birth' (Chief Just. i. 160), was of very good parentage and ancestry. The name, in connection 'with the county of Somerset, is as old as the reign of Edward HI. (Cal Inquis. -p. m.ii. 163.) His grand father is steted to have been James Fitz james, who acquired the estate of Redlynch in that county, and considera'ble other pro perty, by his marriage with Eleanor, the daughter and heir of Simon Draycott ; and his father is described as John Fitz-James, s2 260 FITZ-JAMES whose wife was Alice, daughter of John Newburgh, of East LuUworth in Dorset shire (Godwin, 190) ; and the Draycotts and Newburghs were second to none of the gentry of England in possessions and high blood. (Athen. 0.von. U, 720 ; Hutchins's Dorset, U. 337, &c,) The last-named John was the father of three sons — 1. John ; 2, Richard, who was Bishop of Rochester, Chichester, and Lon don in succession ; and 3. Alored, the an cestor of the Lewesden branch of the family. The eldest son, John, has by aU writers been Mtherto considered to have been the chief justice ; but, on a full investigation of the famUy records, he is proved to be the father of the chief justice, who therefore, instead of being the elder 'brother, was the nephew of the bishop. No evidence whatever exists of the place of Fitz-James's early education, and Lord Campbell is silent as to the authority on -which he says that 'he made his fortune by his great good humour, and by being at college with Cardinal Wolsey.' If this were so, the cardinal was rather backward in his patronage ; for Fitz-James's first pro motion m the law was not till many years after Wolsey had attained supreme power. Lord Campbell adds, ' It is said that Fitz- James, who was a Somersetehire man, kept up an intimacy with Wolsey when the latter had become a village parson in that county, and that he was actuaUy in the brawl at the fair when his reverence, havmg got drunk, was set in the stocks by Sir Amyas Paulet.' It would have been more satisfactory to his readers if his lordship had informed them where the facts he has thus announced are to be found. Though Anthony Wood did not know it, Fitz-James may possibly have been at Oxford ; though Redlynch, Fitz-James's home, is at least sixteen miles from Lymington, Wolsey's parish, the inti macy between them may have existed ; and though Fitz-James was very near the time of his solemn reading at the Temple, it is not impossible that he might have joined in the drunken brawl; yet all these cir cumstances, new and extraordinary as they appear, are of such interest in the lives both of the judge and the cardinal that a refer ence seems necessary, in order to decide whether their original relater is worthy of credit. The same enquiry will be made as to the authority on which his lordship states that Fitz-James at his inn of court 'chiefly distinguished himself on gaudy days by dancing before the judges, playin"' the part of the Abbot of Misrule, and swear ing strange oaths ; ' that ' his agi-eeable man ners made him popular . . . although very deficient in moots ; ' and that ' he was in deep despair' for want of clients tiU Wolsey, ' his former chum, . . , was able to throw FITZ-JAMES some business in his way in the Court of Wards and Liveries,' "Whatever may be the source from whence these curious par ticulars are extracted, the little dependence that should be placed on it may be esti mated by the fact that the Court of Wards and Liveries was instituted, not only after the death of Wolsey, but even after that of Fitz-James, ten years later, (Ellis's Letters, 1st S, i, 176,) He studied the law at the Middle Temple, where he sufficiently distinguished himseU' to be caUed to the bench of that society, to^ be made reader in 1606, and treasurer in 1509. He was recorder of Bristol m 1610' (Cal St Papers [1509], 157), and succeeded' to the office of attomey-general on January 26, 1619, more than three years after Wolsey had become chancellor, and seven or eight years after he had acquired a com plete ascendency over the Mng. In Trinity Term 1521 he was caUed to the degree of the coif, and on the 6th of the foUowing Februai-y was constituted a pmsne judge of the King's Bench, and two days afterwards chief baron of the Exchequer (Dugdale's Orig. 215, 221), a fact of which Lord Campbell does not seem to be aware. Judging from .-lU appearances, he performed the duties of both offices at the same time, for which there were numerous precedents from the reign of Henry IV., -with the slight variation that m former instances the^ judgeship was m the Common Pleas, He is named as cMef baron m the -wiU of Lord Zouche, dated October 1525, (Test Vetust. 620.) When he had occupied tHs honourable position for four years he was promoted to the pTe.sidency of the Court of King's Bench on January 28, 1526, having been in the meantime serviceably employed to negotiate a marriage for Lord Percy, whose previous conti-act 'with Anne Boleyn stood in the way of the Mng's desires.- (Lingard, -yi. 112.) He sat as chief justice for thirteen years, during a very trying period of the reign for one in his prominent position. There can be no doulit that he participated m the- craveu subserviency to the royal tyranny -with which every one of his brethren was chargeable ; but, in expressing disgust at the general failing, care must be taken not to^ visit on any one more than history justifies. Lord Campbell gives no authority for his assertion that Cardinal Wolsey incurred considerable obloquy by Fitz-James's ap pointment, or that the new chief justice- was thought to be 'not only wanting [in gravity of moral character, but that he had not sufficient professional knowledge for such a situation.' The prejudice also which his lordship displays against the chief jus tice renders it necessary to look 'with caution on his description of Fitz-James's conduct in the three great events in which he in- FITZ-JAMES troduces his name— the disgrace of Wolsey, and the trials of Sir Thomas More and Bishop Fisher. In reference to Wolsey, his lordship's endeavour to prove Fitz-James guilty of base ingratitude loses all its potency from the total want of evidence that the cardinal had been his benefactor. With this view, however, he makes the chief justice the active organ of the proceedings against the cardmal, chargmg him with having 'joined in the cry agamst him and assisted his enemies to the utmost,' and -with havmg ' declared his readiness to concur m any pro ceedings by which the proud ecclesiastic ... . might be brought to condign punishment;' and he further represents Fitz-James as the suggester of Judge SheUey's argument to the cardmal 'with Inference to the aUenation to the Mng of the archiepiscopal palace of York House (now Whitehall). These are serious charges, ¦and surely reqmre more authentication than his lordship has afforded before they are admitted on the page of history. In addi tion to these. Lord Campbell describes the chief justice as the adviser and dictator of the articles adopted in the House of Lords against Wolsey, for no other apparent reason than that the name of ' John Fitz- James' appears as the last of the seventeen persons who subscribed them. The sig nature, even if his, is merely a formal one, and the articles no more ' indicate a pre existing envy and jealousy' in Fitz-James than they do in Sir Thomas More, who sighed at the head of all. There was, how ever, another John Fitz-James, of the Middle Temple, who might have held some office in the House of Lords. Lord Campbell next introduces this 'recreant chief justice,' as he calls him, as one of the commissioners on the trial of Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, of which the lord chancellor was the head, and, though the chief justice is not personally mentioned in any one account of the proceedings, his lordship names him the spokesman on -every occasion. Professing to quote verbatim fi'om the ' State Trials ' the answers of the court, which consisted of thirteen persons, nine of whom were lawyers, he includes within the marks of quotation with which he cites them the name of Chief Justice Fitz- James, instead of the words which are actuallyused— viz., 'some|of the judges,' and 'the judges and lawyers;' the word 'judges' evidently applying to aU members of the commission. Surely this mode of writing history cannot be defended. His lordship would have shown more charity, as there was clearly as much Ukelihood, if, in re cording from the same report that ' some of the judges lamented so grievously ' _ as to shed tears, he had suggested the possibility that Fitz-James was one of them. FITZ-JAMES 261 At the trial of Sir Thomas More, Lord Campbell says that Fitz-James's conduct was ' not less atrocious,' adding that ' no one can deny that he was an accessory to this atrocious murder.' These are hard words, but the guUt must be divided among all those who sat in judgment. Fitz-James is mentioned once only in the report, and then an expression is put into Ms mouth which may well raise somethmg more than a doubt whether he was satisfied of the jus tice of the proceedmgs. When Audley, the lord chancellor, who conducted the trial, ' loath to have the burden of the j udgment to depend upon himself,' openly asked the advice of the Lord Fitz-James whether the indictment was sufficient or not, the chief justice answered, 'My lords all, by St. GiUian (that was ever his oath) I must needs confess that if the act of parUament be not unlawful, then is the indictment iu my conscience not insufficient,' thus evading- the very point raised by Sir Thomas More, which was that the act of parUament, being repugnant to the laws of God, was in sufficient to charge any Christian man. (Roper's More [Singer}, 88.) H he had not been previously overruled on that point, as the ' if ' seems to infer, he was no doubt intimidated, as all his brethren were, by the fear of the consequences, of which they saw too many examples. On the conviction of Queen Anne Boleyn Lord Campbell pursues the same course. He represents that ' the opinion of the judges was asked' whether the sentence upon her could be in the alternative, to be burnt or beheaded at the king's pleasure, and he pute a cruel speech into Fitz-James's mouth arguing agamst ite being in the dis junctive, and consequently enforcing the former as the legal punishment of a woman attainted of treason. The sole words in the authority quoted, upon which this supposed speech is founded, are, ' The judges coin- plained of this way of proceeding, and said such a disjunctive m a judgment of treason had never been seen' (State Trials, i. 418; Burnet's Reformation, i. 407) ; and Lord Campbell not only translates 'the judges' into ' Fitz-James, C. J.,' but adds within inverted commas an argument as spoken by him on the occasion. It does not appear, however, that there was any opinion asked, or any pubUc discussion on the subject, but, on the contrary, the above passage is merely a remark in Judge Spelman's Common- Place Book, and evidently shows nothing more than the judges' private doubte on the introduction of the precedent. Deeply as aU Englishmen must feel the dreadful degradation of the law at this period, and disgusted as they must be at the despicable weakness of ite professors, they would deem themselves guilty of injustice similar to that which was then admmistered if 262 FITZ-JAMES they convicted any mdi-vidual on evidence concocted as this is. But the most curious part of the story remains to be told. The whole of the proceedmgs agamst the un fortunate queen are preserved in the ' Baga de Secretis,' and from them it is manifest that Fitz-James was not present at all. His name does not occur in any one of the writs, and Baldwin, the chief justice of the Common Pleas, was the prmcipal judge in aU of them. (3 Report, Pub. Rec, App. U. 243.) Is it not improbable that Fitz-James partook of those faults which pervaded the whole bench at the period in which he flourished; but they were faulte arising more from that awful dread of majesty which the Tudors inculcated than from any personal cruelty or deUnquency. Of Fitz-James nothing is told to distmguish him m this respect from the rest of the group, and certainly nothmg to justify his being brought forward as a special object of vituperation. Indeed, if any credit is to be placed on David Lloyd (State Wor thies, II^t-118), who wrote little more than a century after the chief justice's death, he left a character behind him very different from that with which, two centuries later. Lord Campbell has depicted him. This author states that Sir John ' was so fearful of the very shadow and appearance of corruption - that it cost his chief clerk his place but for taking a tankard after a signal cause of 1500/. a year, wherein he had been serviceable, though not as a bribe, but as a civiUty.' The following remarks in one of the additional MSS. (1623, f. 64) in the British Museum, wMch are either the foundation of or extracts from David Lloyd's sketch, convey also a pleasing picture : — ' Two maine principles y' guide humane nature are conscience and law ; by y" for mer we are obUged in reference to another world, by the latter in relation to this. "What was law alwaye, was then a resolu tion. Neither to deny, nor defer, nor sell justice. When his cozen urged for a kindnesse, " Come to my house, (saith the judge,) I will deny you nothing; come to the king's court and I must do you justice." ' ' He would attend each circumstance of an evidence, hearing what was impertinent, observing what was proper, saying, " We must have two soules as two sieves, one for the bran, and the other for the flowr; one for the grosse of a discourse, and the other for the quintessence," ' Fitz-James, however, did not escape those attacks from which even the best judges are not exempt. Sir R, Torres, the wi-iter of a ' slanderous complaint agamst him, exhibited to the kmg in a written book,' was condemned to pay a fine to stand m the pillory, and to lose his ears. FITZ-JOHN His retirement from his high office on January 21, 1539, arose probably from bodily inflrmity ; for in his wiU, which is dated in the previous October, he describes himself as 'weke and feble M bodye.' That he lived above two years afterwards may be presumed from the fact that the will was not proved tiU May 12, 1542. He was buried at Bruton, near to his manor of Redlynch, and a fine monument to his memory is in the parish church there. His will contains a direction that his ' great book of Statutes in vellum or parchment . . . shall remayn to the bowse [Redlynch} as an implement to the saide howse ; ' and Ms bequeste in behalf of his poor neigh- ¦ hours and dependants are unmistakable proofs of his considerate benevolence. FITZ-JOEL, Waeot, was one of the four justices itinerant sent in 8 Henry IIL,. 1224, to Dunstable (Rot Claus. i, 631), whosejudgments agamst Faukes de Breaute led to such fatel consequences to that tur bulent baron. In 1225 he went as justice itinerant into ComwaU; a fine was levied before him in Easter, In October he was sent with Thomas de Muleton on a special commission into Norfolk, to enqmre into certain robberies commilted on the mer chants of Norway; and in the following January he acted as a justice itinerant m Hampshire and other counties. FITZ-JOHN, Thomas, was a justice itinerant in Cumberland in 18 Hemy IH,, 1234. He had a grant in 17 John of the lands of PhUip Fitz-John, m Yorkshire, during [pleasure, and in 10 Henry IH, was one of those appointed to assess the quin zime in Westmoreland. (Rot Claus. i. 245, ii. 147.) He may possibly have been a second son of John Fitz-Geoffrey (the son of Geoffrey Fitz-Peter, Earl of Essex, by Aveline, his second ¦wife), who m the same year was sheriff" of Yorkshire. (Dugdale's Baron, i. 706,) FITZ-JOHN, Eustace, appears on the^ Ancient Roll of 31 Henry I, as holding pleas on the northern circuite established by that king, m all of which he was united with Walter Espec, They seem to have taken some offence in Yorkshire, inasmuch as on the same roll it is recorded that they fined that they should not be any longer judges or jurors there. By the roll it is evident that he had held the office for at least two years. He and Pain Fitz-John (next men tioned) were the ] sons of John de Burgo, called Monoculus, from having lost an eye, and the nephews of Serlo de Burgh, baron of Tonsburgh in Normandy, and founder of Knaresborough Castle, both of whom accompanied the Conqueror on his invasion of England. The latter dying without issue, Eustace succeeded as his heir, and thus became a powerful baron in the FITZ-JOHN north, receiving very large additions to his Mheritance from the bounty of King Henry, and being appointed governor of Bamburgh Castle in Northumberland. He held a high place in the confidence and favour of that king, and had the reputation of a wise and judicious counsellor. On the death of Henry, the usurper Stephen took from him the custody of Bamburgh Castle, and on suspicion of a treasonable correspondence with David, Kmg of Scotland, seized his person and kept him for a considerable time in con- fmement. On obtaining his release, he joined with Robert, Earl of Gloucester, in aiding the Empress Matilda ; making good for her the castle of Malton, and raising a powerful force from his own vassals in support of the Scottish king's invasion. He held a command at the memorable battle of the Standard, fought at North- aUerton on August 22, 1188, when the Scottish forces were entirely defeated. He must afterwards have made his peace with King Stephen, for in 1147 he founded the abbey of AMwick in Northumberland, and m 1160 the priory of Walton in York shire, In 3 Henry II,, 1157, he was slain m battle with the Welsh, whom the king had attacked in a narrow and difficult pass in FUntehire, He was twice married. His first wife was Beatrix, the daughter and sole heir of Yvo de Vesci, which name was afterwards assumed by Eustace's son William, who - succeeded to the barony, which became extinct in 1297 by the death of William de Vescy, a justice itinerant in the reign of Edward L, without heirs. His second wife was Agnes, daughter and heir of WilUam Fitz-Nigel, baron of Ilalton, and constable of Chester, to both of which he succeeded. By her he had a son named Richard Fitz-Eustace, one of whose grandsons, Robert Fitz-Roger, was a justicier in the reigns of Richard I. and John, and another, Roger de Laci, was also a justicier in the latter reign, (Madox, i. 146, 457 ; Monasticon, vi, 867, 970 ; Lord Lyttelton; Rapin; Nicolas's Synopsis, 664.) FITZ-JOHN, Pain, brother of the above- mentioned Eustace Fitz-John, was also a favourite baron and one of the chief coun seUors of King Henry, in whose household he held the office of groom of the chamber (cubicularius). It was his duty to provide a measure of wine every night for the king, which, as it was seldom required by his majesty, Fitz-John and the pages genera,lly drank. On one occasion the king-,_ being thirsty, called for his wine, and it was gone; but, instead of being angry, he ac lmowledged that one measure was too Uttie for both, and good-humouredly di rected that the butler should supply two meiisures for the future, one for himself FITZ-NIGEL 263 and one for Fitz-John. (Mapes, De Nugis Curialium, 210.) In the roll of 31 Henry I. he is mentioned as a justice itinerant in the counties of Gloucester, Stafford, and North ampton. Besides his lands in Oxfordshire, Gloucestershire, and Norfolk, he likewise possessed the whole territory of E-wyas in Herefordshire. His castle of Caiis, in 34 Henry I., was attacked in his absence by the Welsh, who burned it to the ground, and massacred all its inhabitants ; and two years afterwards, in 1136, he himself was slain with 3000 of King Stephen's troops in a battle fought with the same enemy near Cardigan, By his wife Sibyll he had a son and two daughters, Cecilia, the elder daughter, married Roger, the son of MUo of Glou cester (afterwards Earl of Hereford), his coadjutor as a justice itmerant; and Agnes, the younger daughter, married — de Montehensy. His son Robert took the name of Fitz-Payne, and his male descen dante were summoned to ParUament until the reign of .Edward IIL, when the title became in abeyance in the female line, and at last devolved on the Earls of Northum berland, but became extinct in 1670, (Madox, i. 146; N. Foedera, i. 10; Lord Lyttelton; Hasted; Baronage, i. 90, 572; Nicolas.) FITZ-JOHN, William, in 9 Henry H,, 1163, held pleas in the county of Hereford, and in II68 he amerced Samuel, the priest of Pilton in Somersetshire, (Madox, i. 627, ii. 218.) He held some office about the court, and when Richard de Humet, the chief j usticiary of Normandy, was sent to England by King Henry in 1170 to arrest Becket, with a view to save him from the mischief which he anticipated from the sudden absence of four of Ms knights, William Fitz-.John and Hugh de Gundeville were despatched by Humet to Canterbury for the purpose; but before their arrival the archbishop's fate was ac complished. (Loi-d Lyttelton, iii, 2.) FITZ-MAETIN, William, who had land in Hampshire, was a justicier or baron act ing in the Exchequer both in 4 and 16 Henry IL, II70, He is also one of the twelve commissioners, whom Dugdale calls justices itinerant, who m the same year were sent to enquire into the conduct of the sheriffs in the several counties of the kingdom, (Madox, ii, 253 ; Pipe Roll, 172.) fItZ-NIGEL, or FITZ-NEALE, WiLLIAM, is named among the commissioners ap pointed in 1170 to examine into abuses of the sheriffs, &c., whom Dugdale erroneously calls justices itinerant. He was sheriff of Kent in 1184, 30 Henry IL, and m the certificate returned by the Bishop of Chichester for the aid on marrying the king's daughter iu 12 Henry IL, 1166, he 264 FITZ-NIGEL mentions WilUam Fitz-Neale as holding one knight's fee under that church. It is not improbable that he was a son of Nigel, Bishop of Ely, and brother of the next-mentioned Richard Fitz-Nigel, Bishop of London, (Madox, i. 215, 676; Fuller.) FITZ-NIGEL, or FITZ-NEALE, RiCHAED (Bishop of London), must have been bom before the canon requiring the celi bacy of the clergy was strictly enforced, because he seems to have been openly brought forward by his father Nigel, Bishop of Ely (who will be subsequently mentioned), and acknowledged as his son. He was educated in the monastery of Ely, and was then placed in the Exchequer, at the head of which his father held the office of treasurer, Brought|up to the Church, as most of the other clerks in those times were (whence indeed the derivation), his suc cessive ecclesiastical preferments in Henry's reign were canon of St. Paul's ; archdea con of Ely, II69; and dean of Lincoln, by which latter title he is described in 30 Henry IL, II84, (Madox, i. 216; Le Neve.) In his early youth he was the author of a work called ' Tricolumnus,' from its being arranged throughout in three co lumns. It was a tripartite History of England under Henry II, — the first column treating of the transactions of the Church of England and the rescripts of the apo stolical see ; the second of the remarkable exploits of the king, which he says exceed all human credibility; and the third, of many affairs both public and domestic, and also of the court and its judgments. (Madox, U. 846.) His dUigence and erudition, and the capacity he displayed for the conduct of the public revenue, soon justified his father in recommending him as his successor in the office of treasurer. He was accordingly appointed in 1165, but, as no royal favour was in those days conferred without an equivalent, Nigel was obUged to pay to the king four hundred marks for his son's nommation. (Ibid. i. 44, 118.) He con tinued in the office for the remainder of that reign, and managed the revenue 'with so_ much care and adroitness that, not withstanding the continual wars in which the counti-y was involved, King Richard found on his father's death uo less a sum than one hundred thousand marks in the Exchequer, That monarch's appreciation of his merite was evidenced, not only by retaining his valuable services, but by raising him, soon after his coronation, to the bishopric of London on December 31, 1189. During Henry's reign he frequently shared in the duties of a justice itinerant, and from the time when fines were introduced FITZ-OSBEENB into the court — namely, about 28 Henry II. — his regularity of attendance is particular ly observable, for there is scarcely one until the end of that reign in which his name does not appear. So also after Eng Richard's retum from the Holy Land tiUthe year before his o-wn death. (Ihid. 79-215.) Under the regency of William de Long champ, Bishop of Ely, he possessed consider able infiuence, and it was by his interference that Geoffrey Plantagenet, Archbishop of York, when seized and impri,soned by the orders of the chief justiciary, was liberated. He left a most valuable legacy to his successors in the 'Dialogus de Scaccario,' copies of wMch are preserved both in the Black and the Red Books in the Exchequer. It is printed by Madox (ii, 831^52) at the end of his leamed history of that court; and in a preUminary dissertation he has satisfactorily estabUshed the claim of the bishop to the authorship, in opposition to that of Gervas of Tilbury, to whom it was for many years attributed. It was composed in the 23rd or 24th Henry H., and describes the Exchequer, with all its officers and their duties, and the forms of proceedmg and their origin ; a treatise of inestimable value as well to historians and antiquaries as to lawyers. He died on September 10, II98. One of the monks of Winchester (Angl. Sac. i. 304), in describing this event, havmg desig nated Ms office of treasurer by the word ' apoteearius,' an author has been led to commit the somewhat absurd blunder of making Mm the Mng's medical adviser, (Godmn, 179 ; Wendover, iu. 39.) FITZ-OGEE, Ogee, the son of Oger the Dapifer (afterwards noticed), was sheriff of the united counties of BucMngham and Bedford from 33 Henry II. to I Richard L inclusive. In the next year he was made sheriff of Hampshire, and filled that office also in 6 Richard I. (Fuller.) From 7 Richard I., II95-6, to the end of the reign, his name often appears as one of the justi ciers before whom fines were acknowledged at Westminster, and m the first of those years he acted as a justice itinerant into Devonshire. (Hunter's Preface; Madox, i. 113,502.) He married Amy, one of the daughters and coheirs of William de Scheflega. FITZ-OSBEENE, William (Eael of Hbrbfoed), was the son of Osbeme de Crepon, and grandson of Herfastus, who was the brother of Gunnora, first concubme, and then wife, to Richard I., the third Duke of Normandy, and great-grandfather of WU liam the Conqueror. He was consequently connected by distant relationship with the young prince, and was brought up with him from uifancy. On his father's death he suc ceeded to the office of steward or dapifer in the ducal household, and was Count of FITZ-OSBEENE .BretteviUe m Normandy. He aided Duke WUliam m quellmg every civil commotion of his Norman subjecte ; and in the invasion of England he equipped forty of the ships at Ms own expense, and commanded one of the three divisions at the battle of Hastings. Ha-dng contributed to the conquest of England, he assisted greatly in the main- tonance of the acquisition by his valour and good counsels. To his vigilance was en trusted the erection of a castle at Winches ter for the purpose of overawing the in habitants, and when, in the year after the 'Conquest, the king returned to Normandy, to him and to Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, the go vemment of the realm was committed as ¦chief justiciaries. The southern division Was appropriated to Odo, and the northern to Fitz-Osberne, on whom the earldom of Hereford and the office of constable or marshal (magister militum) were also conferred, '¦ Besides presiding over the Curia Regis during the king's absence, they also managed the king's revenue ; but their conduct was so arrogant and rapacious that the indigna tion of the English was roused. The efforts of the people, however, to relieve themselves were so ill-concerted that they were easily subdued, and the regents were rewarded, in stead of being punished for their oppression. In 1069 Fitz-Osberne assisted his sove reign in the suppression of various insurrec tions in England, and was employed by the Mng in aiding Queen Matilda in the defence of Normandy, In 1072 he proceeded to Flanders to assist Arnulph, the heir of Baldwin, its earl, in resisting the invasion of the disinherited Robert de Frison, by whom he was surprised, and perished through Ms careless security. To his zeal, courage, and wisdom King William was greatly indebted for his suc cess, and he was rewarded accordingly. Besides the grant of the county of Here ford, he received the Isle of "Wight and vai-ious other possessions and advantages. But, notwithstanding the rich gifts which were lavished on Mm, his prodigality al ways left him in poverty, which King WilUam, with whom he was a great favourite, at once chided and supplied. Quarrels, however, would now and then occur between his sovereign and him. On one occasion, being steward of the house hold, he had set upon the royal table the flesh of a crane scarcely half-roasted, when the Mng in his rage aimed a severe blow at him, which, though it was warded offby Eudo, another i'avourite, so offended Fitz- Osberne that he resigned his office. Though brave and generous as a soldier, he was severe and oppressive in his govern ment, and was looked upon as the pride of the Normans and the scourge of the Fnglish. FITZ-PETER 265 He was twice married. His first wife was Adeline, daughter of Roger de Toney, a great Norman baron, standard-bearer of King WilUam; and the second was Ri- child, daughter and heir of Regmald, Earl of Hamauit. By the former only he had children, three sons and two daughters; but the family and titles soon became extinct, (Dugdale's Baron, i, 67 ; fVill. Malmesbury, 396, 431; Madox, i. 31-78; Chauncy's Herts, 121 ; Turner, &c.) FITZ-FETEE, SiMON, was one of the 'assidentes justicise regis,' before whom a charter or contract was executed at the Exchequer in II Henry IL, 1165, and is the first of four after whom are the words 'marescallis regis,' Whether, as Madox (i, 44) seems to infer, these words apply to all the four may perhaps admit of question. If, however, he were not one of the mar shals, it is clear he held .some office in the court, since his property was exempted on that account from the Danegeld and other assessments so early as 2 Henry IL (Pipe Roll, 7.) From that year to the sixteenth he was sheriff of the latter county ; and as Geoffrey Fitz-Peter, the great justiciary in the next reign (whose father is not men tioned in Dugdale's ' Baronage '), was en trusted with the same sheriffalty for many succeeding years, it does not seem an im probable conjecture that this Simon was his father, Simon Fitz-Peter acted also for four years, commencing 2 Henry IL, as deputy to Henry de Essex, the sheriff of the coun ties of IBuckmgham and Bedford. It was probably at a later period that he was a justice itinerant in the latter county, when his name is mentioned in connection with the case of acertain canon of Bedford, named PhiUp de Brois, who ha-ymg been convicted of manslaughter before his bishop, was merely condemned to make pecuniary compensa tion to the relatives of the deceased. In the open court at Dunstable, the judge, al luding to the case, called him a murderer, whereupon a violent altercation ensued, and the priest's irritation drawmg from him ex pressions of insult and contempt, the king ordered him to be indicted for this new offence. (Urngard, ii, 213 ; Lelands Collect. iii, 424.) This was one of the grounds for Henry's attack on clerical privileges. FITZ-PETEE, Geofeebt (Eael op Es sex), was not improbably the son of the above Simon Fitz-Peter, for the reason sug gested in his life. Dugdale commences his history without any mention of who his father was, and, independently of the sheriff alty of Northamptonshire, and also of the name, it is apparent that he had been brought up in the court where Simon had also fiUed some office. In 31 Hemy II. he was one of the jus tices of the forest, the duties of which he 266 FITZ-PETEE continued to perform till the death of King Henry (Madox, i. 547, ii. 132) ; and in 1 Richard I. he acted as a justice itinerant in various counties. (Pipe Roll, 35, &c.) Ejug Richard compelled him to pay a fine for not joinmg the crusade (Ric. Divis. 8), but at the same time showed the esti mation in which he held him by appomting hini one of the council to assist Hugh Pu sar, Bishop of Durham, and William de Longchamp, Bishop of Ely, in the govern ment of the kingdom, and in the subsequent disputes directing Mm, in conjunction with Walter de Constantiis, the Archbishop of Rouen, and others, to act independently of the chancellor. About this time he became sheriff of the united counties of Essex andHertford, being probably so named on account of the property to which he had succeeded in right of Ms wife, Beatrice, one of the daughters and co-heirs of William de Say, by Beatrice, the sister of Geofi'rey, father of the deceased Earl of Essex. His continued employment as a justicier during Richard's reign is shown by his being present when fmes were acknowledged at Westminster (Hunter's Preface) ; and in July 1198, 9 Richard I., he was placed m the Mgh office of chief justiciary of the kingdom. His military talents were imme diately caUed mto exercise against the Welsh, whose king, Gwenwynwyn, he com pletely defeated. On Richard's death in the following year, being continued m his office, he induced the nobles to take the oath of fealty to King John at Northampton. On the day of the coronation he was created Earl of Essex, His performance of the duties of his office was marked with exemplary activity, and he exerted himself with considerable energy in exactmg the taxes which King John im posed. At the same time he appears to have joined in the king's amusements, as a payment of five shiUmgs was made to him ' ad ludum suum,' and to have been not averse from the pleasures of the table, as he paid for eating flesh with the king on a fast- day. (^Cole's Documents, 248, 272, 276.) During the contest with Rome he sup ported his royal master, but was compelled to be a witness to the disgraceful document, dated May 16, 1213, 14 John, by which the cro'wn was surrendered to the pope. In a few months after this event this great man terminated his career, dying on the second ide of the following October, He was buried at the priory of Shouldham in Norfolk, which he had founded. For twenty-eight years he had fiUed a judicial position, fifteen of them as head of the law, and principal minister of the king dom. Invested with extraordinary power, the absence of complaint in such difficult times is a proof that he used it without barshness ; skilful in the laws, he seems to FITZ-EALPH have administered them with firmness, and the lengths to which the Mng soon after resorted appear to show that the royal im petuosity had been previously checked by his prudence. Matthew Paris says that the . Mng hated, but feared, him, and that upon his death he exclaimed, ' Per Pedes Domini, nunc primo sum rex et dominus Anglise.' How the infatuated monarch used his free dom the history of the remainder of his affords a lamentable display. So large were the various grante made to him that when his son did homage on suc ceeding him, the sheriffs of no less than seventeen counties were commanded to give- possession of the lands he held in each of them, (Rot. de Fmihus, 602.) By Beatrice, his first 'wife, he left three- sons, two of whom succeeded to his title,, which contmued in the fanuly, tMough fe male channels, tiU the year 1646, when it became extmct. Geoffrey Fitz-Peter's second ¦wife was Avelme, by whom he had a son named John,. lord of the manor of Berkhampstead in Hertfordshire, who was made justice of Ire land, (Dugdale's Baron, i. 703 ; Wendover, iii. 49, &c, ; Royal Tribes of Wales, 71 ; Turner's Engl.) FITZ-EALPH, Geeold, whose Imeage has not been traced, was one among the twelve inqmsitores in II70, 16 Henry H,, whom Dugdale has mistakmgly caUed justices itinerant, FITZ-EALPH, William, sometimes written Ranulph, and sometimes Randulph, for they are all tMee one and the same name, succeeded to the lordsMps of Alfre- ton, Norton, and Mamham, m Derbyshire, on the death of his father, Robert Fitz- Ranulph, who is supposed by some to have assisted in the assassination of Archbishop Becket in the year II70, and to have founded the priory of Beauchief, in that county, in expiation of his crime. The fact that he retired about that time from the sheriffalty of the counties of Nottingham and Derby, which he had held for the four preceding years, in some degree gives weight to this opinion. His son, this William, was then placed m that office, and held it for the eight foUo'wing years. (Fuller.) Whether the father was gmlty or not, the son was certainly not excluded from the court, but continued to be employed in places of trust up to the reign of King John. In 20 Henry II, , 1 174, he was, as sheriff of Nottingham and Derby, joined with God frey de Luci, oue of the king's justices, in setting the assize of those counties ; and in the six next years he sat in the King's Court, m which he seems to have held a high place, as his name often appears thus : ' Per Wil- lielmum filium Radulfi et socios sues,' with out noting who those companions were. During those years, also, he went as one of FITZ-EANULPH the justices itinerant into fourteen several counties, (Madox, i, 94, 123-138,) In II80 he was appointed dapifer or se neschal of Normandy, iu right of which he had the custody of the castle of Caen, for which a livery of 300/, per annum was aUowed him. (Ihid.166.) This office, which comprehended that of justiciary, he con tmued to hold fr-om that time till his death m 1200. When Richard I. went to the Holy Land he committed AUce, the King of France's sister, to the custody of WUliam Fitz-Ralph, who resolutely refused to de liver her up to her brother, notwithstandmg his repeated demands. In 2 John he is mentioned on the Norman RoU as being present in the King's Court at Caen with the other justices and barons there. (Ibid. 53-169.) AccordingtoDugdale's 'Baronage' (i, 678), he had, by his wife Agnes, one son, Thomas, who succeeded Mm and died without issue, and three daughters, who thus became his heirs. FITZ-EANULPH, Ralph, was the son of the under-named Ranulph Fitz-Robert, and a descendant, therefore, from Ranulph de GlanviUe, (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. ii. 147.) Dugdale mtroduces Ms name among the justices itinerant into the northern coun ties in 46 Henry IIL, 1262 ; but it is ap parent that this iter was only for pleas of the forest. He died about April 1270. His wife's name was Anastasia, and he had by her three daughters. FITZ-EEGINALD, Ralph, was three times a justice itinerant — viz., in 14, 16, and 18 Henry IIL, 1229-1234. From these appointmente, which are evidently not re ferable to any local property, it seems pro bable thathe was connected with the courts of law. He had been a partisan of the barons against King John, but on the acces sion of Henry III, Ms forfeiture was re versed on returning to his allegiance. FITZ-EEINFEID, RoGEE, is mentioned in 1176, 22 Henry IL, as a justice itinerant, in which capacity he acted occasionally to the end of that reign. During this period he visited no less than thirteen counties, an extent of circuit sufficient of iteelf to show that he was a regular justicier in the King's Court, from whence these itinera emanated. But examples of pleas before him in the Exchequer at Westminster are men tioned from 25 Henry IL, II79 (Madox, 83-736), and fines were levied before him as late as 10 Richard I, It was then a common custom for some of the judges to be m personal attendance on the Mng, and accordingly his name is attached to the charter, dated at Oxford in May 1177, by which the grant of the Mng dom of Cork to Robert Fitz-Stephen and Milo de Cogan was confirmed, and he was also one of the witnesses to the will of FITZ-EOBEET 267 King Henry, dated at Waltham, in II82, (Lord Lyttelton, iv, [3], [14],) He was- sheriff of Sussex for eleven years from 25 Henry II,, and of Berkshire in I Richard I. (Fuller.) The estimation M which he was held is evidenced by his being appointed one of the council to assist the two chief justicia ries who were left in the government of the kingdom during King Richard's absence in the Holy Land. (Madox, i. 34.) He married Rohaise, niece of Ranulph,. Earl of Chester, and widow of Gilbert de Gant, Earl of LincoM, by whom he had a son Gilbert, who was a favourite of King John, FITZ-EICHAED, William, was sheriff of the counties of Buckingham and Bedford from 16 to 25 Henry H. He was pre ceded in this office by a Richard Fitz- Osbert, who probably was his father. According to the practice then adopted, he was appointed, as sheriff, one of the justices itinerant to fix the assize for those coun ties in 20 and 28 Henry II, (Madox, i. 124, 132,) Nothing further occurs as to this William Fitz-Richard during Henry's reign, and it is difficult to ascertain whether facte sub sequently related in connection with the same name refer to the same individual. The Christian names Richard and William were common in those times, and scarcely a roll occurs which does not mention several bearing the same designation in dif ferent and distant counties who are evi dently not the same person, FITZ-EOBEET, John, was the son and heir of the after-noticed Robert Fitz-Roger, lord of Clavering in Essex, and Wark worth in Northumberland, Soon after his father's death, in 14 John, he was appointed to the sheriffalty of Norfolk and Suffolk, which he held for the next two years. He then joined the insurgent barons, and was one of the twenty-five to whom was en trusted the enforcement of Magna Charta. He obtained restitution of the possessions he then forfeited soon after the accessioni of Henry IIL, and m subsequent years re ceived several marks of royal favour. He held the sheriffalty of Northumberland for four years, commencing in 9 Henry HI., and in 10 Henry III. was nominated one of the justices itmerant for Yorkshire. There is a writ in the Exchequer in 1238 which bears the appearance of his then acting as a baron of the Exchequer. His first wife was Joane, and his second Ada de Baillol, who, on his death M 25 Henry HL, 1241, fined two thousand marks for the custody of his lands and heirs, Hugh and Roger. The former of these, dying during minority, was succeeded by Roger, whose grandson assumed the name of Cla vering, (Dugdale's Baron, i, 106; Rot. Pat. 268 FITZ-EOBERT 186-180; RoL aaus. i. 316-618, U. 83- 185; Excerpt e Rot Fin. i. 337, 342; Madox, ii, 317.) FITZ-EOBEET, Philip, was among the justices itinerant who fixed the tallage in the county of Lincoln in 10 Richard I., 1198-9 {Madox, i. 705), being the only time he is noticed in that character. The roU of the following year, I John, contains a curious entry of his paying a fine of 200/., and one hundred bacons and one hundred cheeses, for the grant of the wardship and land of the heir of Ivo de Munby till he was of age. (Rot. de Oblatis, 24.) FITZ-EOBEET, Ranulph, was the gi-and- son of that Robert Fitz-Ralph who married the daughter of Ranulph de Glan-ville, He Mmself married Berte, the niece of Ranulph de Glanville, and succeeded to a third of Ms property with the representatives of that great man's two other daughters. (Rot. de Finibus, 387, 369.) In 12 John he accom panied the king to Ireland, but before the end of the reign took part against him in the contest with the barons. Returning, however, to his aUegiance before the king's death, his manor of Saxtorp m Norfolk, of which he had been deprived, was restored to his possession. Little further is re counted of him, except that he twice fiUed the office of a justice itinerant — once in 10 Henry HL, 1226, for Lancashire, and another time in 15 Henry IIL, 1230, for Yorkshire. His death occuiTed before De cember 25, 1252, 37 Hemy IIL, when his son and heir, Ralph (who has been men tioned in a former page as Ralph Fitz- Ranulph), did homage for his lands in Norfolk, paying fifty shillings for his relief. FITZ-EOBEET, or DE -WELLS, SmoN (Bishop of Chichestbe). Many of the -charters of the earlypart of the reign of King John are concluded with the words ' Dat. per manus Simonis Archidiaconi Wellensis et J, de Gray,' both of whom some writers have therefore designated keepers of the Seal under the Chancellor Hubert, Arch bishop of Canterbury, As in no instance Lave their names, or those of others who appear in the same manner, any addition ¦designating that office, such as ' vice-oan- ¦cellarius,' or ' tunc agens vices canceUarii,' as in the reign of King Richard, it admits of considerable doubt whether this character is properly assigned to them', especially as in every case the persons so introduced are known to have held some other office in the court. They were officers of the treasury of the Exchequer, where the Great Seal was usuaUy kept. The flrst date on which these two names appear is September 16, II99, I John ; and they continue to sign together till June in the foUowing year, after which Simon the archdeacon's name alone is appended to numerous charters for a long period, endmg FITZ-EOBEET in June 1204, 6 John. (Rot Chart 28, 74- 185.) In March 1203 he was provost of Beverley, and in June 1204 he was conse crated Bishop of Chichester. Le Neve, in his Ust of archdeacons of Wells, caUs him Simon Fitz-Robert, and in that of the Bishops of Chichester intro duces Simon de Wells (Le Neve, 43, 66), evidently not being aware that the two names belonged to one and the same person. God-win also calls the bishop Simon de_ Wells. That his actual surname was Fitz- Robert is proved by two curious charters (Rot Chart 86, 88), by one of which King John, on February 7, 1201, conflrms to him, by the name of ' Symoni fllio Roberti,' arch deacon of Wells, a grant of certain lands in Stawell in Somersetshire, with the advow son of the church there, which had been estreated in consequence of the felony of Alice, the wife of Robot de Wattelai, in killing her husband, for which she was con demned and burnt ; and by the other, dated the 22nd of the same month, the kmg grants to him the land of Burgelay in the manor of Melebum, which the said Robert de Wattelai and Alice his wife had held as of her inheritance, but which had beenforfeited by the same felony of wMch she had been convicted. No doubt, therefore, that the Robert of whom Simon was the son was the murdered man Robert de Wattelai, and that the grants were in fact a restora tion of the property which he would have inherited but for the crime committed by Robert's 'wife. It was not uncommon in this age for an ecclesiastic to discard his family name, and adopt that of the place of his birth, education, or preferment. It is certain that this bishop is generally known as Simon de WeUs; but, masmuch as he had not discontinued the name of Fitz- Robert at the time when these grants were made, the assumption of the new name may possibly, in this instence, have been influenced by the tragical events recorded in them. That Bishop Simon after his elevation continued to enjoy the royal favom- is shown by the king in January 1207 giving him letters ' ad dominum S. de Male Leon,' de siring all honour should be shovm to him, ¦with letters of protection during his ab sence, (Rot Pat. 68.) In the com-se of that year he died. (Godmn, 504,) FITZ-EOBEET, Waltee, was the grand son of the before-noticed Richard Fitz- Gilbert, caUed also Benefacta, and son of Robert, steward of King Henry L, by his wife Maud, the daughter of Simon de St. Liz, Earl of Huntingdon. He was probably very young at his father's death, as no mention is made of him, beyond the usual assessments on his property, until 22 Henry IL, II76, when he IS recorded as one of the three justices FITZ-EOBEET itinerant appomted by the council of North ampton to go into the eastern counties of England. In this employment he was en gaged for several following years, during which time, and perhaps before it, he took his share in the judicial duties of the Curia Regk. Madox mves several instences from that time till 5 Richard I., II98, in which he was present as one of the barons .and justiciers there. (Madox,'}., 94-137, ii. 20.) His knightly pursuite were not forgotten in the performance of his civU duties. He supported WiUiam de Longchamp, Bishop of Ely, the governor of the realm, during King Richard's absence M the Holy Land, in his contest -with John, the king's bro ther ; and in 6 Richard I., 1194, he joined the expedition into Normandy. He died in 1198, and was buried m the choir of the priory of Dunmow, which his father had founded, and to which he Mm self had given divers churches and lands. His two -wives were, first, Maud, daughter of Richard de Luci, the cMef justiciary; and, secondly, Margaret de Bohun. He left several sons, of whom Robert, the eldest, succeeded Mm, and was called Robert Fitz-Walter, His prowess as a warrior procured for him the addition of ' the Valiant ; ' and, as leader of the barons confederated against King John, they stjled him ' Marshal of the Army of God and the Holy Church,' His grandson was regularly summoned to parliament in 23 Edward I. To the title of baron Fitz-Walter an earldom of Sussex was added m 1629, and other titles ; but these becoming extinct in 1756, the barony fell into abeyance among the five daughters of Thomas Mildmay, Esq., whose wife Mary was sister to Ben jamin, the fourteenth baron. (Dugdale's Baron, i. 209 ; Nicolas,) FITZ-EOBEET, Waltee, was forester of the county of Huntingdon, and for some offence in the exercise of his office was im prisoned in 14 John, and did not obtain his liberty without a fine of two palfreys. He afterwards joined the barons against the ¦ king, but retumed to his duty at the com mencement of the next reign. His appoint ment as one of the justices itinerant in Huntingdonshire in 9 Henry IIL no doubt arose from his continuing to hold the above office. (Rot Claus. i. 120, &c., n, 75, &c,) FITZ-EOGEE, Robeet, was the son of Roger Fitz-Richard, a grandson of the be fore-noticed Eustace Fitz-John, He married Margaret, the daughter of WiUiam deChes- ney, and widow of Hugh de Cressi, and obtaining with her considerable property in Norfolk, he became sheriff of that county and of Suffolk in 3 Richard I,, and held the office at inteivals tUl 14 John, (Fuller.) In 3 Richard 1., II91, he was present m the Ciuia Regis as a -witness to a final concord then made there; and in 1197 he FITZ-SIMON 26^ was a justice itinerant in Norfolk, and was present in the followmg year on the ac knowledgment of fines at Norwich. Other • fines were levied before him in 3 John, 1201, (Madox, 704; Hunter's Preface.) King John granted him a charter of con firmation of his inheritance of the castle and manor of Warkworth in Northumber land, of which county he held the sheriffalty from 3 to 14 John, He founded the priory of Langley in Norfolk about the end of Richard's reign (Monast. vi, 929), and dying in 14 John, left by his widow, Mar garet, a son, the before-mentioned John Fitz-Robert. After three generations the family assumed the name of Clavering, from a manor so called in Essex, which belonged to this Robert. John de Claver ing, who was summoned to parUament by the first three Edwards, died in 1332, leaving only female issue. (Dugdcde'sBaron. i. 106 ; Nicolas.) FITZ-EOGEE, William, was one of the justices itinerant appointed for York and Northumberland in 3 Henry IIL, 1218. (Rot. Claus, i, 403.) If, as it seems pro bable, he were of Lincoln, he married Agnes de Scotney. (Madox, i. 488.) FITZ-EOSCELIN, "William, is mtroduced by Dugdale as one of the justices itinerant for Norfolk and Suffolk in 9 Henry HI,, yet, being ill at the time, he did not act ; but on several occasions he had been named with others to take assizes of novel disseism in Norfolk ; and in II Henry III, he was the flrst named in a commission mto that county to try two prisoners of the Bishop of Ely, who were charged with murder, and for whom the bishop had not a gaol suffici ently secure, (Rot. Claus. i. 562, 633, 665, ii, 72, 77, &c.) In 16 John he was so far m the confldence of the court as to be em ployed as one of the commissioners ap pointed to enquire into the losses sustained by the clergy in the diocese of Nor-wich ; and he obteined a licence not to be placed on any assize or jury m the county, except in cases in which the king was concerned. (Rot Claus. i, 154^165,) Before the end of that reign he either fell off from his allegiance, or was suspected of intendmg to do so, as his son Andrew, and his grand daughter Alice, were placed as hostages for him in the custody of the constable of Orford Castle, and he flned two hundred marks. On the accession, however, of Hemy III. he procm-ed full restitution. (Ibid i. 257, 332 ; RotFin.589.) His wife's name was Lecia or Alicia, FITZ-SIMON, OsBEET, is inserted by Dugdale in his List of Fines as a justicier before whom one was levied in 7 Richard 1., October 1196 (Orig. Jurid. 41), but Mr. Hunter omits his name. FITZ-SIMON, Richaed, in I Henry HI. paid 100 shilUngs for having seisin of the 270 FITZ-SIMON lands which his father, Simon Fitz-Richard, forfeited in 17 John, situate in the counties of Leicester, York, Huntingdon, Norfolk, ^Suffolk, and Essex. He was one of the justices itinerant in 9 Henry IIL for Essex ¦and Hertfordshire, and in the two follow ing years was a commissioner to collect the quinzime and to assess the tallage there, and in Cambridg-e and Huntingdon. He died in 17 Henry IIL (Rot Claus. i. 246-324, ii. 76-208 ; E.vcerpt e Rot Fin. i. 212, 234.) FITZ-SIMON, Tttesiin, held some office in the Exchequer so early as 4 Henry II. (Pipe Rolls, 144, 160), and after the murder ¦of Becket he was one of the custodes of the archbishopric of Canterbury, (Madox, i, 309, 681.) In 1173 he was a justice itinerant for setting the assize or tallage in Gloucester shire, and having been selected in 1176 as one of the eighteen justices appointed to administer justice throughout the kingdom, his pleas are recorded, in that and the two following years, on the rolls, not only of the four counties at flrst appropriated to him, iDut also of six others. In II77 he is mentioned as holding pleas in the Ex chequer. (Ibid, 127, &c.) In I Richard I. he had the custody of the castle of Ludlow. (Pipe Roll.) FITZ-STEPHEN, Ralph, was an officer in the Chamber of the Exchequer from 3 to 19 Henry IL, 1157-1173. He possessed lands in the counties of Warwick, Leicester, Northampton, and Gloucester, and the she riffalty of the latter county was entrusted to him in conjunction with his brother WilUam Fitz-Stephen in 18 Henry IL, and from that time till 1 Richard I. either one or the other occupied the office. For that county also he acted as a justice itinerant in 1I7^4, and having been appointed m 1176 at the head of one of the six divisions into which the circuits were then arranged, his pleas are recorded in the roUs of that and of the four following years in twenty-four different counties. (Madox, i. 128-187.) In 1182 he was one of the king's chamberlains, and his name appears as a -witness to the king's will executed at Waltham in that year. (Lord LytteUon, iv, [14].) In II84 he was among the justiciers and barons before whom a fine was levied in the King's Court, and in 1187 he was ap pointed custos of the abbey of Glastonbury, and so remained till 8 John. (Madox, i. 635 ; Rot Cancell 195 : Abh. Plac 12.) He died in or before 6 John, as Godfrey de Albini then paid a thousand marks, his fine for having his land. (Rot. Claus. 9.) FITZ-STEPHEN, William, the brother of the last-mentioned Ralph Fitz-Stephen, flUed with him the office of sheriff of Gloucester from 18 Henry IL, 1I7I, to 1 Richard I., 1190, He was (like Ralph Fitz-Stephen) placed at the head of one of FITZ-STEPHEN the six circuits arranged by the councU of Northampton in 1176, and his pleas are re corded in that and the four followmg years, not only in fourteen counties, but 'ad Scaccarium' also, (Madox, i. 127-139, 211.) His name likewise appears as a justice itmerant in Shropshire in 1 Richard I., II90, (Pipe Roll, 96,) There are many grounds for identifying the sheriff and justicier with a remark able man of the same name who flourished at the same period ; I mean William Fitz- Stephen, the author of ' The Life andPassion of Archbishop Becket,' in which is intro duced the description of the city of London printed in Stow's ' Survey.' Several circumstances in the career of the latter render it far from improbable that he should have been selected for judi cial employment. He himself says that he was a fellow-citizen -with Becket, one of his clerks, and an mmate of his family; that, being by express m-yitation called to his service when chanceUor, he became 'in CanceUaria ejus dictator' [qu. remem brancer?], or, as another reads, ' scriba in CanceUaria AngUse ; ' that when Becket sat to determine causes he was a reader of the instruments, and upon his request sometimes an advocate. (Dr. Pegge's Dis sertation, 8.) All this must have occurred before 1162, when Becket resigned the chanceUorship, and, from the expressions used, no doubt can exist that he was at that time established in some office in the Chancery, or in the Exchequer, where the business of the Chancery was usuaUy tians- acted. There is nothmg to show -that he did not rem am m his office after Ms patron's resignation of the Great Seal, and it is certem, from his o^wn relation, that, though he was present -with the archbishop on his trial at Northampton in 1164, he escaped being involved in the subsequent banishment of Becket's friends, in conse quence of Ms having been the author of a rhymmg Latin prayer, which he had once presented to the Mng m the chapel of Bru- hull in Buckmghamshire. (Biog. Brit. Lit 363.) The flrst two lines wiU be a sufficient specimen of ite style : — Eex cunctorum s.-ecnlorum, rex .ircis setheriffi ; Eector poli, rector soli, regum rex altissime. That he was present at Canterbury, and was an eyewitness of Becket's murder, forms no objection to the presumption that he was a servant of the court, because itis to be recollected that the archbishop was then, at least nominally, reconciled to the king, and it could be considered no other than an act of decent respect for Fitz- Stephen to visit his former patron on his return from a long exile. After the mur der had been accomplished King Henry would naturaUy be anxious to disconnect FITZ-TOROLD Mmself from its perpetration, by carefully -avoiding any act wMch might be construed into a punishment of those who had ad hered to the troublesome prelate, inde- -pendently of his being too wise a prince to -deprive himself of the services of a learned and useful man, who had never made him self personally obnoxious. It would therefore be far from unlikely that a person so situated should not be interfered with in his office; indeed, the reasons adduced would rather operate to promote his further advancement, as tend ing to remove the suspicions which then certamly attached to the kmg. Accord ingly, his nomination as sheriff of Glouces tershire in the following year can excite no surprise, especiaUy as it was most usual in those times for officers of the Exchequer, or of other branches of the court, to be ¦entrusted with such appointments, and the same reasons would account for the selec tion of such a man, palpably well expe rienced m the law, as one of the justiciers in 1176, That the termination of the -sheriffalty and the last acte of the justicier both occur about 1190 or 1191, the period assigned for the death of the biographer, ¦are curious circumstantial corroborations of the conjecture thus ventured. Fitz- Stephen's Life of Becket offers nothmg to contradict the supposed identity; but, on the contrary, it is remarkable for being written in a calmer style than that of other partisans, and for not attempting to impUcate the king in ^authorising the murder. Fitz-Stephen had travelled to France to complete his education, and on his re turn, Ms erudition, which was conspicuous both as a scholar and a divine, recom- xpended him to the notice of Becket, with ¦whom he eventually became on terms of familiar mtercourse. He is said to have -been a monk of Canterbury, and is fre- I quently called Stepbanides, FITZ-TOSOLD, Nicholas, was one of ¦those selected by the council held at 'Wmdsor m 26 Hemy H,, II79, as a jus tice itinerant in one of the four divisions then established for the purpose of ad- ¦ ministering justice throughout the kingdom, (Madox, i. 79, 139.) His name occm-s as a justice itinerant in the following year, and he probably acted subsequently, be^- cause, among the pleas of Godfrey de Luci and his companions in Berkshire, entered on the RoU of I Richard L (181), there is an entry which seems to have reference to his misconduct in office — viz,, 'Nicholas fiUus Turoldi redd. Comp, de 45/, I3s. 4d. pro falsa p'sent. plac, Corone et pro false •clam, de averus detentis.' FITZ-'WAEINE, FuLCO, is introduced by Dugdale as a justicier of the bench, and in -the chronicle of WUUam de Rishanger (38) FITZ-'WILLIAM 271 it is asserted that WilUam de WUton and Fulco Fitz- Warine, 'justiciarii regis,' were slain at the battle of Lewes, May 14 1264. There is no doubt that both these persons met their death at that battle, nor that the former was a justiciary; but Fulco Fitz-Warine, who was a Shropshire baron is never mentioned even as a justice itine rant. One of his descendants, John Bour chier, was created Earl of Bath, a title which became extinct in 1654. The barony then fell into abeyance among the daugh ters of the fourth earl, ; (Dugdale's Baron. i. 448; Nicolas.) FITZ-'WAEINE, William, a younger brother of the above-mentioned Fulco Fitz-Warine, was in the early part of John's reign greatly in the Mug's favour, receiving a grant of the manor of Dilun in Herefordshire in 6 John, and in 9 John obtaining royal ' literas deprecatorias ' to Gila de Kilpec, urgmg her to marry Mm 'without delay. For this intercession on his behalf he presented the kmg with an entire horse and a palfrey. (Rot Claus. i, 25, 28, 43 ; Rot de Finibus, 376.) On this lady's death he was again indebted to royalty for a wife, paying a fine of fifty marks, m 2 Henry IIL, for permission to marry Agnes, one of the sisters and coheirs of John de WahuU, and widow of Robert de Bassingeham. He was at this time sheriff of Lincolnshire, (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. i. 3, 7; Rot Claus. i. 880.) In 9 Hem'y and several following years he was appointed one of the justices itinerant in many other counties, in most of which he had property; and in Easter, 12 Henry IIL, his name appears upon a fine levied before him, in consequence of which Dug dale has introduced him among the regular justiciers of this reign, but he is not sub sequently noticed in a judicial capacity. (Rot Claus. ii. 77-218.) The castle of Rockingham was entrusted to him as constable in 10 Henry IIL, in which year he sent five hundred Welsh to Prince Richard, the king's brother, in Gas cony. (Ibid. 110, 130.) In 13 Henry HI. he was sheriff of Worcestershire, and exe cuted the same office in Herefordshire in 16 Hem'y III. and the two following years. During the rest of his Ufe he sustamed the part of a loyal kmght, assistmg his sove reign as one of the lords of the Marches, and attending the king in 37 Henry IIL m his expedition to Gascony, He left an only daughter, AsseUna, who married Thomas Lyttelton, ancestor of the eminent judge m the reign of Edward IV. FITZ-'WILLIAM, Adam, forfeited Ms property in the county of Hertford in 17 John for his adherence to the barons ; but on that king's decease he returned to his allegiance, and was restored to his lands, (Rot Claus. i. 229, 246, 318.) He appears 272 FITZ-'WILLIAM in a judicial character from 9 to 21 Henry III. as a justice itinerant and one of the regular justiciers at Westminster, (Ibid. U. 76, 147; Wendover, iv. 469; Orig. Jurid. 42.) There are numerous man dates addressed to him from 18 to 20 Henry III. as one of the king's escheators, (Exceipt e Rot Fin. i. 260-303,) FITZ-'WILLIAM, Httoh. There are so many persons of the name of Hugh Fitz- WilUam who lived about the same period that, without a better clue than has been obtained, it is impossible to decide which was the justice itinerant so called, who, in 30 Henry IH., 1246, was appointed with five others to -visit the northem counties. From 16 John to 43 Henry III. there are four persons so named on the rolls, all m different counties, and with diff'erent wives. (Rot de Oblatis, 471 ; Excerpt e Rot. Fin. i. 132, ii. 36, 293.) FITZ-'WILLIAM, RoBEET, was a knight of Nottinghamshire, who, ha-ving got into trouble in 17 John, when he was taken in arms against the Mng m the castle of Beauveer (Belvoir), was compelled to pay a fine of sixty marks for the restoration of the royal favour, (Rot Pat. 162, 168 ; Rot de Finibus, 591.) In 9 Henry III, his name appears among the justices itinerant in Nottingham and Derby, In the follow ing year the sheriff of Cumberland is com manded to cause a successor to be elected in the place of Robert Fitz- WiUiam, one of the coroners of that county ; and there is every probability that this was the same person, as in ll Henry III, Ralph Fitz- Nichol paid 100/. for the custody of his lands and heirs, the sheriff of Nottingham and Derby being commanded to give him seisin of those which were in his baiUwick, (Rot Claus. ii. 77, 119; Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. i. 157.) FITZ-'WILLIAM, OsBEET, in the last year ofthe reign of Richard L, 1198-9, was one of the justiciers before whom a fine was levied (Hunter's Preface), but his name does not appear M any fine of a sub sequent date. He was, perhaps, therefore, merely an officer of the court, which is rendered more probable from his being sheriff or fermer of the county of Devon in 2 John, and of Hereford in 8 and 9 John, FITZ-'WILLIAM, Otho, from 28 Henry IL, _ II83, to 2 Richard I., 1190, was sheriff of the united counties of Essex and Hertford. In 1194 he acted as justice itinerant in the same counties, and in that or the previous year he was one of the justiciers before whom a fine was le-vied at Westminster, (Madox, ii. 20 ; Hunter's Preface.) FITZ-'WILLIAM, Ralph. The first two justices of trailbaston whose names appear were Ralph Fitz- William and John de Barton, Their commission was dated FLAMBAED 1304, and was for Yorkshire, where they both resided, and of which the former wa» the king's lieutenant. (Hemingford, ed. Heame, 208.) In the next year new com missions, in which neither of them were named, were issued for aU the counties of England, except those in the home district (N. Foedera, i. 970), showing therefore that the offences which these commissions were intended to suppress were found to be of a more serious nature, and more uni- versaUy extended, requiring^larger powers and more experienced judges. Ralph Fitz-William was a son of William Fitz-Ralph, of Grimsthorp m Yorkshire, by Joane, daughter of Thomas de Grey- stock. In 26 Edward I, he was one of the barons summoned to jom the Mng's armies in Scotland. He served -with so much zeal and valour in those wars that he was con stituted capitaneus of the garrisons and foi-tresses in Northumberland, Ueutenant of Yorkshire, and lord of the Marches, in which character, no doubt, the commission of trailbaston was directed to Mm. In 28 Edward I, he was present at the siege of Carlaverock, and was engaged m the Scottish wars to the end of the reign. Under Edward H, he was employed in the same manner, and was made govemor of Berwick-upon-Tweed and of Carlisle, was one of the ordamers to regulate the king's household and govemment, and was frequently appomted, in 8 Edward H,, to take inquisitions as to -wrecks and other- -wise. He died about November 1316, and was buried in Nesham Abbey, Durham. The barony of Greystock was settled upon him by his mother's nephew, John, the last lord of that name, upon whose death, in 1305, he succeeded to it. By his wife Margery, the daughter and one of the coheii-s of Hugh de Bolebecj and widow of Nicholas Corbet, he had two- sons — William, who died in his father's lifetime, and Robert, who succeeded him, and died in 1317. His descendante assumed the name of Greystock, and held the barony till 1487, when, the then lord. dying without issue male, it was, by the marriage of his granddaughter, united to that of Dacre of GUlesland till 1569, when it fell into abeyance among the sisters of George, the fifth Baron Dacre. (Dugdale's Baron, i. 740 ; Nicolas.) FLAMBAED, Ranulph (Bishop op- Dueham). TMs extraordmary man was a Norman, whose father was au obscure- priest, and whose mother had the reputa tion of being a witch. He followed the- court of the Conqueror into England, and, having entered into holy orders, obtained from that prince the church of Godalming- in Surrey, in which his name appears as^ Flambard, According to Domesday Book (fo. 80, 51), he had, besides one Mde of FLAMBAED the king's land in BUe in Hampshire, three tenements which WUliam held in Guildford, belonging to the church of Godalming, After receiving many pluralities, he became chaplain to Maurice, Bishop of London, but left his service because that prelate refused him the deanery of the church of St Paul, He probably held an office in the Chancery under Maurice ; and Malmesbury's descrip tion of him, as'invictuscausidicus,'shows he was connected with the courte. He is next found in 1088 and 1098 as one of the king's chaplams (Monast. i. 164, 174, 241) ; and it was not longbeforehe contrived to ingratiate himself with Rufus, and soon discovered his sovereign's profuseness and extravagance, Unprmcipled himself, he did not hesitate to suggest measures which, however op pressive to the people, or disreputable to the crown, would produce the desired object of filling the royal coffers. By his Msti- gation, new off'ences were created for the sake of the fines which followed them ; a price was set on crimes by substituting a pecuniary payment for the punishment; the forest laws were loaded with severe penalties ; and the impost on the land, so lately established according to the entries in Domesday Book, was disturbed, and rendered more oppressive by a new survey of the kingdom. Not content with this, he drew down upon himself the deepest indignation of the clergy, by suggesting to the king that on the death of any dignitary of the Church, whether bishop or abbot, the temporaUties devolved to the crown tiU the vacancy was supplied. The king was not slow in actmg upon this advice ; and the injurious effect on the ecclesiastical revenues may be easil}' conceived ; since the parties to whom the Church lands were entrusted in the mterim, ha-ving paid largely for their use, and knowing how precarious was their tenure, could not be expected to neglect any means, however detrimental to the property, of making the most of their bargaM, Flambard, as may be supposed, obtamed the custody of several of these vacant bene fices. In 1088 the abbey of Winchester, in 1089 the archbishopric of Canterbury, and ia 1092 the bishopric of LincoM and the abbey of Cherteey were severally entrusted to him ; and by the spoil of their churches and the pressure of their tenante, both rich and poor, he did not fail to enrich himself To these modes of imposition he added another device to supply the royal wants. When any of these vacancies were at last filled, he made a simoniacal contract for the Mng with the candidate for the clerical honour, compelUng Mm to pay a large sum before he was instituted, WUUam looked more favourably upon Ms minister on account of the impopularity FLAMBARD 273 which resulted from these proceedings, say ing that he was the only man in his domi nions who regarded not the hatred of others so that he pleased his master. His approval was manifested during the remainder of his reign by raising him to high office in the state. What the precise nature or title of his office was it is difficult to determine. Dug dale introduces him into his Ust of chief justiciaries. The only historian who gives him that title is Ordericus Vitalis, whose words are ' Summiis regiarum procurator opiim et justitiarius factus est,' Henry of Huntingdon and Roger de Hoveden style him ' placitator et exactor totius Anglise ; ' by the former of which titles, Madox says, may be meant chief ju.sticier, and by the latter, intendant of the revenue, or treasurer. Roger de Wendover caUs him by the names of ' placitator' and ' procurator regis.' The only authority of any importance who describes him as chancellor is Spelman ; but there is evidently no foundation for sup posing that he held that office. He refers to Malmesbury, who says nothing like it ; and to Godwm, whose language has been palpably misunderstood. That author, after saying, from Malmesbury, that Ranulph became 'totius regni procurator,' merely adds this explanation : ' Unde illam om- nem authoritetem videtur consequutus, qua hodie potiuntur canceUarius, thesaurarius, et nescio quot alii,' The office of cMef justiciary seems scarcely yet to have been completely esta blished ; but, by whatever title Ranulph was distinguished, he was clearly the king's chief minister. The oppressive nature of his exactions naturally caused frequent complaints against him, which being unre dressed, the instigator of them became the object of popular indignation, and narrowly escaped the fate that was prepared for him. Being inveigled, by a pretended message from the Bishop of London, into a boat on the river, he was forced into a ship, and carried out to sea, A storm arising, and his intended murderers quarrelling among themselves, Ranulph took advantage of both, by working upon the fear and grati tude of Ceroid, the principal of them, who had formerly been a mariner in his service, and they were prevailed upon to release him, and put him on shore. The terror and amazement of his enemies when, three days afterwards, he appeared m his usual place at court may well be imagmed. His appomt ment to the bishopric of Durham immedi ately foUowed, m June 1099, three years and four months having elapsed smce the death of WilUam de Carilefo, its last in cumbent. The king, however, benefiting by the lessons his mimster had taught, made him feel the effect m his own person, by compelling him to pay one thousand pounds for his advancement. 274 FLAMBARD On the death of William Rufus, one of the first acte of Henry was to satisfy the clamours of the people by imprisoning the hated Flambard in the Tower of London, to which he was committed on August 15, 1100. But even in this extremity his good fortune did not desert him. Out of -the al lowance of two shilUngs a day which he received for Ms subsistence (equal to thirty shillings now), with the additional help of his friends, he kept a sumptuous table, and by his affabiUty and Ms wit captivated his keepers. Encouraging them in their habits of intemperance, he lulled their watchful ness ; and on the 4th of the foUowing Fe bruary, taMng advantage of their excess at a feast he had provided, he contrived to escape by means of a rope which his friends had concealed in the bottom of a pitcher of wine, not, however, without cutting his imgloved hands to the bone m the adventure. He succeeded in obtaining shippmg to Normandy, where he instigated the Duke Robert to pursue his claim to the English cro-wn, and accompanied Mm on his in vasion. By the settlement which the policy of Henry then effected, Ranulph, on the retirement of the duke, was permitted to return to his bishopric, and obtamed a charter restoring all its immunities. From this time it does not appear that he interfered further in politics, though Dugdale, on the authority of Matthew Paris, places him in the list of treasurers to Henry I. The completion of his cathedi'al, the erection of Norham Castle, the fortification of the walls of Durham, and numerous other works, among which were the endowment of the college of Christchiu-ch, where he had been dean, and the foundation of the priory of Mottisford, near LincoM, not only are ample proofs of his munificence, but seem sufficient occupation for the remamder of his life. He filled the see rather more than twenty-nine years, and died on Sep tember 5, 1128. The character of Flambard may be col lected from the incidents of his life. There can be no doubt that he was an able, artful, and uncompromising minister ; that he had considerable eloquence and ready wit ; and that he was convi-yial in his habits and generous in his expenditure. It is evident also that he was anibitious, crafty, prodigal, and rapacious ; but some abatement should be made from the unfavourable colouring with which he is painted by the historians, who, -writing near his time, and being mostly ecclesiastics, would look with a jaundiced eye on one whom they considered to be the adviser of measures oppressive to the Church. (Godwin, 732 ; Madox, i. 32, 78 ; Wendover ; Malmesbury ; AngL Sac; Turner; lAngard,) FLianNG FLANDEENSIS, or LE FLEMING, Ri chaed, was one of the justiciers before whom fines were levied at Westminster in the last year of Richard's reign, 1198-9, and the first three years of that of King John, II99-I202. In 3 John and the two followmg years he held the sheriffalty of Cornwall and was connected with the receipt of the king's revenue m Devonshire. His property was in the latter county ; and he and Wil liam Fitz-Stephen in 7 John gave two pal freys for the grant of a market at Dartmouth. In the same year the kmg, in consideration of six hundred marks and six palfreys, granted to him, and Ms four sons after him, the custody of the lands m that county and eight others, and the wardship and marriage of the heir of Richard de GremviUe. (Rot. de Finibus, 221, 295, 362.) Either he or his son Richard, it would appear, was with the Mng m Ireland in 12 John, and the land of a Richard Flandrensis, in Gloucestershire, was given away by the Mng m 18 John, evidently havmg been for feited iu the rebelUon. (Rot Claus. i. 281, 283.) But the name being by no means uncommon at the time, it is impossible to say that either of these is of the same family. FLEMING, Thomas, was of a family long settled in Hampshire, and many of ite mem bers, from the early part of the thirteenth century, held high office in the to'wn of Southampton, He was the son of John Fleming, estabUshed at Newport m the Isle of Wight, by his wife Dorothy Harris, and was born there m April 1644, In May 1567 he became a member of Lmcoln's Inn, and, having been called to the bar m June 1574, he arrived at the bench of that society m 1687, and was elected reader in Lent 1590, and double reader m Lent 1594, on his re cei-ying the degree of the coif Before the end of the foUo-wing year he was designated as the successor of Sir Edward Coke m the office of soUcitor-general, and even Bacon, who was mtrigumg for it, acknowledged that he was an able man for the place. In order to hold it, however, it was then deemed ne cessary that he should vacate the degree of seri eant, when he was replaced as a govemor of LincoM's Inn. (Dugdale's Orig. 254r-262; Bacon, xvi. App. LL.) He attained sufficient eminence in Ms pro fession to be brought forward as a candidate for the recordership of Loudon, a post to which, though he then missed it, he was elected in 1594, but resigned it in 1595 on bemg made solicitor-general. (Maitland's London, 1206.) In I60I and in 1604 he was retm-ned member for Southampton; and, having been knighted, was on October 27, 1604, raised to the office of chief baron of the Exchequer, Such was the reputation for integrity he had acqmred in the House of Commons, that on the meeting after their FLEMING adjournment it was resolved that, notwith standing his elevation to the bench, he should stUl continue a member, (Duthy's Hants, 888,) When advanced on June 26, 1607, to the chief justiceship of the King's Bench, he vacated his seat, and his son was •elected for Southampton in his place. One of the first duties as chief baron was to sit on the trial of the gunpowder con spirators, but he appears to have been quite a silent commissioner. Not so, however, on the great case of impositions by royal au thority, which, so important in its ultimate consequence, was tried in Michaelmas 1606, There, after expressing something like in- •dignation that a subject should presume to plead that an act of the king was ' indebite, injuste, et contra leges AngUse imposite,' he concluded a long; argument which, though -certainly most leamed and ingenious, was ¦anything but conclusive in favour of the crown. The only other important case in which he is recorded to have been engaged is that in which the refusal of the Countess of Shrewsbury to answer interrogatories re lative to the marriage of Sir William Sey mour -with Lady Arabella Stuart, and her connivance m their subsequent escape, was considered before the privy council. It was a prelimmary enqmry as to this being an offence m law, and whether it was cognisable in the Star Chamber, and the chief justice's speech, in favour of the affirmative, is curious as contaming a recital of the privileges at tached to the nobUity, and the consequent duties which they are therefore peculiarly ¦called upon to perform. (State Trials, ii. 159-770.) After presiding over the Court of King's Bench for six years, he died suddenly at Stoneham Park, on August 7, 1613, and was buried in the church of that parish, under a •stately monument, on which he is repre- ¦sented in his official costume, 'with an in scription that he had fifteen children, of whom eight were then li-ying, by his -wife, Dorothy, otherwise Mary, daughter of Sir Henry Cromwell, of Hitchinbroke, who was the aunt of the protector, (Duthy's Hants, 385.) A prejudiced account of him is given by Lord Campbell (Cli. Justices, i. 237), who calls him a ' poor creature ; ' but Sir Edward 'Coke (10 Reports, 34), who knew him some what better, describes Mm as discharging all his places ' with great judgement, integrity, and discretion,' adding that ' he well de served the good will of all that knew him, becaue he was of a sociable and placable nature and disposition,' The male branch of the family failed in the early part of the lost century, when the Hampshire property, including the Stone- ham estate, devolved on the descendants of the great antiquary Bro-wne WilUs, who had married a daughter of_ the house. These FOUOT 275 assumed the name of Fleming, and the pre sent possessor long represented the county in parliament. FLO'WEEDE'W, Edwaed, son of John Flowerdew, Esq., of Hetherset, Norfolk, after being educated at Cambridge was admitted a member of the Inner Temple in 1552, appointed reader in 1669 and 1577, and treasurer in 1679, (Dugdale's Orig. 166, 170.) He held a high character as a lawyer, and was the confidential ad viser of the dean and chapter of Norwich, having also several annuities granted to him for his good and faithful counsel and advice, all charged on the estates of his clients. In 1580 he was called to the degree of the coif, and was appointed steward or recorder of Great Yarmouth, In 1564 he had purchased Stanfield Hall, at Windham in Norfolk, and taken up his residence there, so that probably Ms prin cipal practice was M the country, which would account for the omission of his arguments from the Reports. On October 23, 1584, he was raised to the bench of the Exchequer as third baron, and in the fol lowmg February he was one of the judges appointed to try Dr. Parry for high treason, being the first baron of the Exchequer whose name appears on a similar com mission. (Baga de Secretis; App. 4 Report Pub. Rec. 273.) At the assizes held at Exeter on March 14, 1686, when a con tagious and mortal disease broke out, which spread from the prisoners to many of the leading gentlemen of the county, Baron Flowerdew was one of those who were seized -with the distemper, of which he died about AprU II, and was buried in Hetherset Church. His -wife was Eliza beth, daughter of WilUam Foster, of Wind ham ; and then- daughter married Thomas, the son of Sir Robert Shelton, knight. (Blomefield sNorfolk,i. 721-732 ; Ath. Can tab. U, 6 ; Weevei; 864 ; HoUnshed, iv, 868.) FOLIOT, HiTGrH, Dugdale inserts among the justiciers before whom fines were ac knowledged at Westmmster in 3 Henry IIL, 1219, the name of H. Abbot of Ramsey, whom he also notices as a jus tice itinerant in the same year. This was Hugh Foliot, who, from being prior, was elected abbot of Ramsey in June 1216. (Mitred Abbeys, 154.) It seems probable that he is the same man who is called archdeacon of Salop in a record dated January 16, 1215, bemg a pressing appU cation by the Mng to the Bishop of Here ford relative to the church of St. Da-vid's in his behalf, m wMch he is designated as a man ' magnee honestatis et scientia et moribus bene omatum,' (Rot. Claus. i. 208.) The archdeacon was raised to the bishopric of Hereford in November 1219, which would account for his no longer acting as a justicier ; but the doubt whether t2 276 FOLIOT ihe abbot and the bishop were identical arises from the discrepancy between the dates given of their deaths, the abbot being steted by Bro-wne Willis to ha-ve died in 1231, and the bishop by Godwin (484) on July 26, 1234, FOLIOT, "Waltee, was settled in Berk shire at the beginning of the reign of King John, whom he accompanied to Ireland in the twelfth and fourteenth years of his reign. (Rot Miscp, 178, &c.) In 16 John he was summoned to attend with horses and arms at the castle of WalUngford, in which, by the king's order, the chamber appropriated for the royal wardrobe -was as signed for the accommodation of him and bis wife and family. Several other entries show that he was either the governor of that castle, or held some other high office in connection with it, and with the county of Berks, In 3 Heni-y III. he was a justice itinerant into Wiltshire, Hampshire, Berk shire, and Oxfordshire, and sheriff of the latter county in 9 and lO Henry III. He died about June 1228, 12 Henry IIL, and was succeeded by his son Richard. (Excerpt e Rot Fin. i. 172, 426-443.) FOED, William (not Fulford, as Prince erroneously calls him, nor in any manner connected with the Devonshire family of that name), was, according to the only authentic information that exists about him, constituted a baron of the Exche quer in 8 Richard IL, 1384, reappointed on the accession of Henry I"V",, and ceased to act, whether from death or removal, between 1403 and 1407, the entries of the intervening years not having been found, FOETESCUE, John, is one of the wor thies of the county of Devon, of whom it ¦may be justly proud. In Westminster Hall his name is still regarded with re verence, and his principal work, ' De Lau- dibus Legum Angliie,' after more than three centuries, is referred to as the first treatise that entered minutely into the histoi'j' of our legal institutions and de scribed the professional education and habits of the period. The works of his three predecessors, GlanvUle, Bracton, and Hengham, were no doubt more useful to the legal student and forensic practitioner ; but that of Fortescue offered greater at tractions to general readers by its popular form and its historical details; and the consequence is that, while the former have become almost obsolete, the latter is stUl read with interest by the curious and philosophical enquirer. The family traces its origin, without the loss of a single link, to the knight who bore the shield before WiUiam the Norman on Ms invasion of England, the assumed name commemorating the fact. His son .Sir Adam, who was with him in the battle, received as the reward of their joint ser- FOETESCUE vices, among other lands, the manor of Wimondeston or Winstone in the pai'ish of Modberry, Devon. King John confirmed the grant, and it remained in possession of the family till the reign of Queen Elizabeth.. Two accounte are given of the judge's' actual parentage ; but, discarding that which makes him the son of Sir Henry Fortescue, the chief justice of the King's Bench in L-eland from June 1426 to Febmary 1429, who was really his brother, the most pro bable seems to be that his father was Sir John Fortescue, knighted by Henry V, for his prowess in the French wars, and made' governor of Meaux, which he had helped to' reduce. This knight was a second son of William Fortescue of Winstone, and was himself seated at Shepham, He married Joan, the daughter and heir of Henry Nor- reis, of Norreis in the parish of North- Huish in Devonshire, by whom he had several children, the two elder being the above-mentioned Sir Henry, the Irish chief justice, and Sir John, who obteined the- same rank in England. John Fortescue is supposed to haye been bom at Norreis, the estate of his mother. The date of his birth must have been about the close of the fourteenth century. He received Ms education at Exeter College,, Oxford, and pm-sued his legal studies at LincoM's Inn, where he was a governor of the house from 1424 to 1429. (Dugdale's Orig. 267.) In Michaelrhas Term of the latter year he took the degree of a serjeant- at-law, and from that time Ms arguments frequently occur in the Year Books. In 18 and 19 Henry VI. he acted as a judge- of assize on the Norfolk Circuit (Kcd. Exch, iii. 381), and at Easter in the latter year, 1441, he was named one of the king's' serj eants. So conspicuous were his merits that he was', without taMng any intermediate step, raised to the office of chief justice of the- King's Bench on January 26, 1442. In that court we have proof from the Year- Books that he presided till Easter Term 1460, and no new chief justice is recorded until Edward IV. a few months afterwards- seized the throne. His .salary on his appointment was 180 marks (120/.) a year, besides 5/, 16s, lid. for a robe at Christmas, and 3/, 6s, 6d, for another at Midsummer. In addition to this he received in the following Febmary a grant for life of one dolium of wine an nually, to which a second was added in the next year. These two dolia (tunnes) of wine ai-e expressly reserved to him by the act of resumption in 34 Henry VI, In Mm'ch 1447, 40/. a year was granted tO' him beyond his former allowances, (Ry mer, xi. 28 ; Rot Pari v, 317,) It has been a question how far Sir John Fortescue was justified in calUng himself,. FORTESCUE ias he does in the title to his work ' De Laudibus,' CanceUarius AngUse, a title which he reiterates m his retractation of what he had written against the house of York, by making the interlocutor in the ^alogue say to him, 'Considering that ye were the chief chancellor to the said late Mng.' (Selden's Prejmie.) Let us then follow him in his career, .and see at what time he could have re ceived the office after Easter 1460, up to 'which time he acted m the King's Bench, The fatal battle of Northampton was fought on July 10, 1460, and three days .before it the Chancellor 'Waynflete resigned the Seals in the king's tent on the field. Fortescife was clearly not appointed then, for the Seals were in the custody of Arch- ibishop Bourchier on the 26th of that month, when the king delivered them to George Neville, Bishop of Exeter, the new ¦chancellor. A parliament was held in the foUowing October, which was opened by that prelate as Chancellor of England. Fortescue does not appear in that parlia- jnent in his usual place as a trier of peti tions; but neither does Prisot, the chief justice of the other bench. Of the four judges who were among the triers of peti tions, only one, John Markham, was of the Court of King's Bench (Rot ParL v, 461), of whom there is no evidence whatever to show that he became chief justice till the next reign. Neither is he named among the judges who were called upon, and re fused, to give their opinion on the claim of the Duke of York, Henry continued under the control of his enemies till February 17, 1461, the second battle of St, Albans, and his reign practically expired on March 4, when Edward assumed the throne. At the battle of Towton on Palm Sunday, March 29, Fortescue was present, and when the field was lost fled with King Henry, That unfortunate monarch went first into ¦Scotland, then into Wales, and afterwards .lay concealed in the north of England until he was betrayed and taken to the Tower of London in June 1465, There he remamed in durance till his temporary restoration in October 1470. During this period the 'Great Seal remained in the hands of Bishop NevUle till June 1467, and then was trans ferred to those of Bishop StiUington; so that, without its possession, any appoint ment of Sir John Fortescue would have been merely iUusory, and in fact could only have been legitimately recognised if made between February 17 and March 4, 1461, During the six months of Henry's renewed reign, from October 1470 to AprilT47I, it is certain that Fortescue did not -hold the post, as NeviUe, then Archbishop of York, IS expressly mentioned as chanceUor, (Ry mer, xi, 672.) It must therefore^ be con cluded that his title was a nominal one. FORTESCUE 277 given durmg the exUe of Henry, and that the dictum of CMef Justice Finch, rather oddly introduced into his argument upon ship-money in the reign of Charles I., is cor rect, that Fortescue was never actual Chan cellor of England. (State Trials, iii. 1225.) In the first parUament of Edward IV. Fortescue was attainted of high treason as one of those engaged in the battle of Tow ton, and all his possessions were forfeited to the king, who granted part of them to Lord Wenlock, (Rot ParL v. 477, 581.) He clearly was at some time m Scotland, going there probably 'with King Henry, fur in his petition to King Edward some years afterwards he refers to the works he had written against his title to the crown ' in Scotland and elleswhere.' (Ibid. yi. 69.) About 1463 he was with the queen and prince, but -without the king, 'at Seynte Mighel in Barroys' (in Lorraine), from which place he addressed a letter in De cember to the Earl of Ormond, then in Portugal, in which he describes himself, not as chanceUor, but simply as one of the knights who were there with the queen. They must all have been much straitened for the means of living, for he says, ' We buth all in grete poverte, but yet the queue susteyneth us in mete and drmke, so as we buth not in extreme necessite,' He re mained in Lorraine for some time, and it was probably while there that he composed his learned work 'De Laudibus Legum Angliie ' for the instruction of the young prince. During the whole of this time Sir John was energetically negotiating for the re storation of King Henry, and did not retum with the queen to England tiU April 1471, after the battle of Barnet. His age did not prevent him, as we learn from Wark worth, from being present at the battle of Tewkesbury on May 4, 1471, where he w.is taken prisoner ; but ii no doubt exempted him from suffering under the subsequent execution of the Lancastrians. His royal master aud his princely pupil being now both dead, no hope could remain for the party to which he had been devoted. Further opposition, therefore, to the ruling powers would have been fruitless, and the desire of peace for the short remainder of his life, and of obtaining a restoration of his property for his family was probably all that could now infiuence him. These feelings no doubt operated to produce the retractation, spoken of by Selden, of all he had previously written agamst Edward's I title, and this it is apparent on the record was one of the causes of that monarch's reconciliation with him, and of the re versal of his attainder m October 147-3, 13 Edward IV., when he was reappomted a privy councillor. How long he lived afterwards is very uncertam. The only further recorded 278 FORTESCUE notice of him is in Februaiy 1476, when he delivered into the Exchequer an assize that had been taken before him whUe chief justice. (KaL Exch. in, 8,) Over his re mains, at Ebrington m GloucestersMre, is a tomb on which he is represented at full length in his robes as chief justice. His seat there still belongs to the family. He married Isabella, daughter of John Jamys, Esq., of PhUips Norton in Somer setshire, not, as several biographers erro neously state, EUzabeth, daughter of Sir MUes Stapleton, From his grandson John descended Sir Hugh Fortescue, created in I72I Lord Clinton, and in 1746 Lord For tescue of Castle Hill, Devon, and Earl Clinton. In the latter barony he was suc ceeded, under a special limitation, by his half-brother Matthew, whose son Hugh was in 1789 advanced to the titles of Viscount Ebrington and Earl Fortescue, which still flourish. Besides Sir John Fortescue-Aland, already recorded as Lord Fortescue of Credan in Ireland, a third descendant was created in 1777 Earl Cler mont in Ireland, who is represented by the present Lord Clermont, under a new crea tion, whose handsome edition of all Sir John's works has recently been printed — we are sorry to add, for private circulation only. FOETESCUE, Lewis, was the tMrd son of John Fortescue, of Spurleston in Devon shire (descended from "WiUiam of Winston, the elder brother of Sir John, the father of the eminent chief justice), and AUce, daughter of John Cookworthy, his wife. His legal studies were completed at the Middle Temple, where he became reader in autumn 1536. On August 6, 1542, he was constituted fourth baron of the Exchequer, but only sat there for about three years. By his marriage with Elizabeth, the daughter and sole heir of John Fortescue, Esq., of Fallapit (lineally descended from Sir Henry Fortescue, the chief justice of Ireland), he acquired that property, which came in regular succession to Sir Edmund Fortescue, who received a baronetcy in 1664, which became extinct m 1682, (Dugdale's Orig. 216.) FOETESCUE, LcTED, See J. FoETESCUE- Aland. FOETESCUE, WiLLlAM, lineally descen ded from the celebrated judge Sir John For tescue, was the son of Hugh Fortescue, of Buckland FiUeigh, and Agnes, daughter of Nicholas Denms, of Bamstaple. He was admitted to the Middle Temple in Sep tember 1710, but removing to the Inner Temple in November I7I4, he was called to the bar by the latter society in July 1715, Sir Robert Walpole, when chaucellor of the Exchequer, made him his secretary, and he was returned to parliament as member for Newport in Hampshire at the beginning of the reign of George IL, and sat for that FOSTER borough till 1736. He became attomey-^- general to the Prince of Wales, and king'* counsel in 1730, and a baron of the Court of Exchequer on February 9, 1736. On July 7, 1738, he was removed to the Com mon Pleas, and after nearly six years' ex perience on both these benches he received the appointment of ma.ster of the Rolls oa November 6, 1741, and sat there tiU his death on December 16, 1749, when he was^ buried in the Rolls Chapel, Though considered a good lawyer, he i* better known for his intimacy with the -wits and literary men of the time. The friendship that existed between him and Pope appears in their correspondence, and he is reputed to have furnished the poet with the famous case of StradUng versus- Stiles in Scriblerus's Reports. His mother after his father's death married Dr. Gilbert Budgell, who by his first wife was the father of the unfortunate poet Eustace BudgeU, Mr. Fortescue married Mary, the- daughter and co-heir of Edmund Fortescue,. Esq., of Fallapit, and left an only daughter, (Collins' s Peerage, Y. 342; ParL Hist. viiL 619 ; Noble's Granger, iu, 296.) FOSTEB, Michael, was of legal descent, both Ms father and grandfather bemg at tomeys m the town of Marlborough, with the reputation, eminently deserved, of being honest lawyers. He was bom on December 16, 1689, and after attending the free school at Marlborough entered Exeter CoUege^ Oxford, in May 1706, and was caUed to tiie bar at the Middle Temple in May 1713- In 1720 he published ' A Letter of Advice to Protestant Dissenters,' to which class his family belonged. Little kno-wn in West minster Hall, he pursued his profession principally as a provincial counsel, first m his native town, and then at Bristol, to which city he removed after Ms marriage in 1726 with Martha, daughter of James Lyde, of Stantonwick in ite neighbom-hood. In 1735 he issued a learned tract entitled ' An Examination of the Scheme of Church Power, laid down in the Codex Juris Eocle- siastici Anglicfmi,' which went through several editions, and of course led to a con troversy on ecclesiastical law. In August of the same year he was appointed recorder of Bristol, and took the degree of seijeant in the foUo'wing Easter Term, In his character of recorder several very important questions came before him. Among others was the right of the city of Bristol to try capital off'ences committed within its jurisdiction, and the legalitjf of pressing mariners for the piibUc service. The forhier arose in 1741 in the case of the atrocious murder of Sir Dineley Goodere by his brother Captain Goodere, who was convicted, and the city authority fully esta bUshed, The latter was the case of Alex ander Broadfoot, indicted in 1748 for the FOSTER murder of Cornelius Calahan, who was Mlled in an attempt to press the prisoner. On tMs occasion therecorder deUvered a long opmion in support ofthe legality of impress ment, but directed the j ury to findBroadfoot guilty of manslaughter only, because Cala han had acted without any legal warrant. (State Trials, xvU, 1003, xviU, 1323.) On April 22, 1746, he was swom in as a judge of the King's Bench, and knighted, and for the long period of eighteen years he maintained the high judicial character he had established as recorder of Bristol. He was equally distinguished for his learning, his integrity, his firmness, and his inde pendence, Ihree of Ms contemporaries who practised under Mm, and afterwards gamed emmence as judges, have given testimony of his exceUence. Lord Chief Justice De Grey says of him, ' He may truly be called the Magna Charta of liberty of persons as weU as of fortune,' (3 Wilson, 203.) Sir WilUam Blackstone (Commentaries, iv. 2) aUudes to him as ' a very great master of the crown law;' and Lord Thurlow, in a letter written m 1768, describes his spirited conduct in the trial of an indictment for a nmsance in obstructmg a common footway tMough Richmond Park. (Life of Foster, 85.) The general impression of his dis position may be collected from the passage in Churchill's ' Rosciad' : — Each judge was true and steady to his trust. As Mansfield wise, and as old Foster just. He died on November 7, 1763, and was buried m the church of Stanton Drew. Besides the works mentioned above he published his ' Report of the Proceedings on the Commission for the Trials of the Rebels in 1746, and other Crown Cases,' in which the doctrines ofthe criminal law are very learnedly discussed. It is a work of very high authority, and two subsequent and enlarged editions have been issued under the superintending care of his nephew Michael Dodson, Esq., who was also author of a me moir of the judge's life, from which much has been extracted in the present sketeh, FOSTEE, Thomas, was born about 1549, He belonged to the family of Foster in Northumberland, one of whom was gentle man usher to Queen Mary, and another. Sir John Foster, his second cousin, was made a knight banneret at Musselbm-gh for his valour in defeatmg the Scote. (Gent Mag. Ixxxiv. pt. i, 341.) He entered the Inner Temple in 1571, described as of Hunsdon, Herts, and became reader m autumn 1696. He being one of the persons designated by Queen Elizabeth to be Serjeants two months before her death, the writ was renewed by King James, and he assumed the coif in Easter Term 1608, and was afterwards counsel to Queen Anne and Prince Henry. On November 24, 1607, he was made a \ FOSTER 279 judge of the Common Pleas, and sat m that court for four years and a half, performing his duties in such a manner as to acquire the character of 'a grave and reverend judge, and of great judgment, constancy, and integrity.' (10 Coke's Reports, 285") He was nominated by Thomas Sutton to be one of the first governors of his hos pital — the Charterhouse. He died on May 18, 161 2, and was buried at Hunsdon in Hertfordshire, under a mas sive arched monument of variegated marble, with an effigy of the judge in his robes. His town residence was in St, John Street, The under-mentioned Robert was one of his sons. FOSTEE, Robeet, the youngest son of the above Sir Thomas Foster, was born about 1689, Destined for his father's profession, he was called to the bar of the Inner Temple in January 1610, and M autumn I63I attained the post of reader. In May 1636 he was created a seijeant, and on January 27, 1640, was promoted to the bench as a judge of the Common Pleas, and knighted. He joined the king on his retiring to Oxford, and that uni versity conferred on him the degree of Doctor of Laws on January 31, 1643, Upon the execution of Captam Turpin in 1644, the House of Commons ordered the judges who had condemned him to be impeached of high treason, and proceedmgs were taken against Serjeant Glanville, who was in their power; but against the two chief justices and Justice Foster, who were also concerned in the trial, no further measures were adopted. The steady adherence of the latter to the royal cause, however, was not likely to go unpunished. An ordinance was accordingly passed on November 24, 1646, disabling him and four of his col leagues from being judges, ' as though they were dead,' and he was obliged to purchase his peace by compounding for his estate. ( Woods Fasti, ii. 44 ; Rymer, xx. 20, 380 ; Whiteloeke, 96, 181,) On the restoration of Charles II. he was immediately restored to his seat in the Common Pleas on May 31, 1660, and within five months, on October 21, was ad vanced to the chief justiceship of the King's Bench, During the three years that he presided in the court he was much engaged m the trials of the Fifth Monarchy men and other conspirators against the state, and also of the Quakers Crook, Grey, and Bolton, for refusing to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy. It would have been well if he had confined himself to these judicial duties, but his memory is tarnished by Ms conduct in Sir Harry Vane's case. When the prisoner was con victed, and both houses of parliament had petitioned for his life, which the Mng had promised, the ciiief justice is reported to 280 FOUNTAINE have urged his execution, saying ' God in tended his mercy only for the penitent.' Sir Robert's death occurred on October 4, 1668, while on circuit, and his remains were deposited under a handsome monu ment in the church of Egham, in which parish his family residence was situate, still called Great Foster House. (I Siderfin, 2, 153'; State Tricds, vi. 188.) FOUNTAINE, John. Alternately a royal ist and parliamentarian, this lawyer was commonly called Turncoat Fountaine. A monumental inscription m the church of Salle in Norfolk proves him to have been the eldest son of Arthur Fountaine, of Dalling in that county, one of the sons of another Arthur Fountame, of Salle. His mother was Anne, the daughter and heir of John Stan- how. (Pedigree in Heralds' Coll., Norfolk, ii, 82.) The Lincoln's Inn books confirm this description, and record his admission to that house on October 30, 1622, and his call to the bar on June 21, 1629. A. Wood'( J'as/i, i. 473, 497) has evidently mistaken for him a member of another family of the same name settled in Bucks. When the civil war broke out in 1642 John Fountaine showed his devotion to the cro'wn by refusing to contribute to the sub scription required by the parliament, where upon the House of Commons committed him 'to the Gatehouse' on October 12, and WMtelocke in stating the facts adds, ' But, afterwards, he and many others re fused, and again assisted on both sides, as they saw the wind to blow,' (Com. Journ. U. 804 ; Whiteloeke, 63.) He was still in confinement on December 20, when his petition to be bailed was refused. (Com. Journ. ii. 896.) His dis charge from custody was probably granted on condition of his leaving London, for Clarendon (86) mentions him in 1645 as assisting and counselling Sir John Stawel in forming the Association of the Four Western Counties, and oaUs him a ' lawyer of eminency, who had been imprisoned and banished London for his declared affection to the crown.' He is said to have joined Sir Anthony Astiey Cooper in a project to raise a third army to force both parties to put an end to the civil war. (Locke's Works [1768], iv. 284.) As long as the royal cause prospered Fountaine remained its staunch adherent, but as soon as he con.sidered it was hope less he deserted Oxford, and went over to the enemy under Colonel Rainsborough at Woodstock. The colonel announced his ' coming in,' and his being then at Ayles bury, to the Commons, who, evidently dis trusting him, ordered that he 'should be sent prisoner to Bristol, and that Major- Qeneral Skippon should take care to keep Mm in safe custody.' (Com. Journ. April 25, 1646; WIdtelocke, 202.) During the FOXLE fortnight he was at Aylesbury he published a ' Letter to Dr. Samuel Turner concerning the Church and ite Revenues,' urging him to advise the king, for the sake of peace, and to ' save what is left,' to concede all the parUament required, bishops and Church lands, and all. Dr. Richard Steuart wrote an answer (Wood's Athen. ui. 297), in which he calls the writer ' an Oxford Londoner,' and reminds him, in reference to his profession of ' reason and honesty,' of a sentence he was wont to utter, that ' when vessels do once make such noises as these, 'tis a shrewd sign they are empty,' On his release he appears to have re mained quiet for the next six yeai-i?, and so far to have satisfied the parUament as to be appointed in January 1652 one of the committee of persons, not members, to take into consideration what inconveniences existed in the law, and to suggest remedies. He was fully cleared from his former delinquency m March 1668, compounding for his estate at 480/. ( Whiteloeke, 520 ; Com. Journ. vii, 69-268.) He must have acquired some reputation as a lawyer, as he was made a serjeant-at-law on November 27, 1658, in the short reign of the Protector Richard, The Long ParUament, on ite restoration, selected him on June 3, 1659, for one of the three commissioners of the Great Seal for five months, but before that term ex pired the Committee of Safety superseded the commission. He, however, was replaced on January 17, 1660, on the Long ParUa ment again resummg the government, and with his colleagues contmued in possession of the Seal tiU ite commonwealth emblems were defaced, and the Broad Seal of the monarchy restored. On the return of Charles II, he resumed his old poUtical creed, and was immediately confirmed in his degree of the coif (Noble, i. 438 ; Whitdocke, 680, 698 ; I Siderfin, 8.) Pursuing his profession, he resided in Boswell Court, andsuivived the Restoration eleven years. He died on June 4, 1671, and was buried at Salle, the seat of his ancestors. His first wife died m 1642 ; his second was Theodosia, daughter of Sir Edward Haiiington, Bart. By both he left a family, among the descendants of whom were several eminent churchmen, Richard Baxter (Reliquice, pt. 3, 187) speaks highly of his piety, integrity, and liberalit}', and states that he received during the Serjeant's life an annuity of 10/, from the time of his being silenced, FOXLE, John de, had the custody of the temporalities of the vacant abbey of West minster in I Edward II., 1307, On Fe bruary 28, 1809, he was constituted a baron of the Exchequer, Besides performing the duties of that court, he was frequently named in commissions, and appointed to FRAMPTON take inquests by the parliament, and called upon to act as a justice of assize and of oyer and terminer m the provinces as late as 17 Edward IL He died in 18 Edward IL, possessed of •considerable property in the counties of JHante, Berks, and Buckingham, part of which was granted to him by the kmg. His wife's name was Constancia, (Madox, i, 314, u, 60 ; ParL Writs, U, 891 ; Rot ParL i, 298-845 ; CaL Inquis, p. m. i. 318 ; Abb, Orig. i. 199-288.) FEAMFTON, RoBBET, is mtroduced by Dugdale as a baron of the Exchequer in 1444, with no other authority than a MS. volume belonging to the keeper of the wardrobe. He was the son of John Frampton, of Morton in the county of Borset, by Edith, daughter of Sir Matthew StaweU, of Catherstou, Somersetehire. By his wife AUcia he left a son Robert, but this branch is said to have failed for want of male issue. (Ccd. Inquis. p. m. iv. 100, 271, 326.) FEANCHEVILL, William de, was lord of the manor of Garboldesham in Norfolk, of which his father, also named William, had a grant from Hugh de Montfort, From 8 to 11 Henry III, several man dates are addressed to him and other gen tlemen of the county to take assizes as to lands claimed by the Church, and as to the right of presentation. In 9 Henry III. he was one of the justices itinerant for Norfolk and Suffolk, (Rot Claus. i. 592, U, 77, 83, 167.) He left a son William, FEANK, John, was of a Norfolk family, and was probably the son of John Frank, of Norwich, and Alice his wife. (Acts Privy Council, ii. 149.) He was a clerk or master in Chancery in 2 Henry V., 1414, in which reign he was also clerk of the parliament, receiving 40/. a year as his salary for that duty, (Ibid, v, 106.) He was coUated ¦archdeacon of Suff'olk on November 10, 1421 (Le Neve, 221) ; and on October 28, 1423, was constituted keeper of the Rolls m Chancery, Dming the absence at Calais of the chancellor John Stafford, then Bishop of Bath and Wells, the Great Seal was placed in his hands for a month, from April 22 to May 28, 1433. He held the office of master of the Rolls tiU May 13, 1438, By his will he bequeathed 1000/, to purchase lands for the main tenance of four fellows of Oriel College, Oxford, from Somerset, Dorset, Wilts, and Devon. (Chalmers' Oxford, 79.) FEAUNCEYS, John le, or FEANCIGENA, as he is sometimes called, was the son of Hugh le Fraunceys. He was a servant of the crown, and acted as an escheator in the north of England. In 25 Henry IH., 1241, he was assigned with the sheriff of Cum berland to extend the lands of John do Veteri Ponte, deceased. Some other simi- FEAUNCEYS 281 lar entries occur in 29 and 31 Henry IIL (Exceipt e Rot Fin. i, 349, 427, U. 7.) In 27 Henry III, Robert de Veteri Ponte gave him the manor of Meburn m Cum berland, and he held the church of Cal- debec in that county, (Ahh. Placit. 120, 169,) He is introduced by Madox (i, 615, ii, 818) among the barons of the Exchequer from 27 to 42 Henry IH,, 1243-67. It is probable that for some short time he was one of the regular justices, as assizes were ordered to be taken before him m Cumberland and Norfolk, in July 1254, and July 1255, (E.vcerpt. e Rot. Fin. U. 192, 211,) He died in 52 Henry IIL, when his pro perty lay in the six counties of Lincoln, Bedford, York, Kent, Westmoreland, and Cumberland, FEAUNCEYS, JoHN, was probably the nephew of the above John le Fraunceys, but the various and discordant cUcum- stances mentioned in the entries connected with the name in the reign of Edward I, will give some idea of the difficulty in tracing any individual to whom it belonged. In the parliament of 18 Edward L, when Thomas de Weyland, the chief justice, was disgraced, there is a petition from one John Fraunceys, who had been imprisoned for a year and a half in the Fleet by that judge for a debt which Agnes de Valence claimed from Mm ; and he was ordered to be bailed. In the same parliament there is a petition which charges John Frauncies with a mur der, for which he had been acquitted, and a new trial is prayed for by reason of his kindred and his confederates having tried the appeal. In 35 Edward I. a John Fraunceys represents that he was taken in the battle of Rosslyn, had lost his horses, arms, and everything he had, and was detained in a Scotch prison for fifty- seven weeks, and only released on payment of a fine of forty marks ; and he therefore prays for the grant of certain land in Staf fordshire, the particulars of which are ordered to be reported to the Mng. And in the same parliament held at Carlisle, Master John Fraunceys, rector of Quel- dryk, is one of the proctors sent by the clergy of the diocese of York. (Rot. Pari. i. 47, 49, I9I-I93.) The last of these was probably the sub ject of the present notice, as the duty to which he was appointed was commonly peformed by some officer m the court. Master John Fraunceys was a clerk in the Chancery, and on May 12, 1310, 3 Edward IL, on the Great Seal being surrendered by the chancellor John de Langton, Bishop of Chichester, was one of the three persons under whose seals it was placed in the wardrobe, a proceeding which scarcely warrants his being included in the list of 282 FRAY keepers. He was among the ' dilecti clerici ' to whom, with others, the correc tion of the ordinances was submitted by the king in 5 Edward II. (Ibid. 447.) FEAY, John, so early as in the reign of Richard II. held the manor of Coldridge, or Codered, in Hertfordshire, for which county he was returned to parliament in 8 Henry V. (Chauncy, 67.) In 2 Henry VL, being then recorder of London, he was one of the commissioners appointed to enquire into the treasons of John Mortimer, He was raised to the bench as a baron of the Exchequer in 4 Henry VL, 1425 (CaL Rot Pat 273), and is men tioned in that character on July 16, 1428, (Rot ParL iv. 202, 384.) Dugdale does not introduce him into that court till Fe bruary 8, 1485, but that is the date of his advancement to be the second baron. (Acts Privy Council, iv, 295,) In every year after the seventh year he was sent' as a justice of assize into Norfolk (Ibid, iii, 283 ; KaL Exch. iU, 381), from which it may be inferred that he was a serjeant-at- law. He sat as second baron for twelve months only, being raised to the office of chief baron on February 9, 1436, and pre sided in the court for twelve years, till May 2, 1448. Two years afterwards we find him delivering a silver seal out of the treasury to the new chancellor, Cardinal Kempe, being described as ' deputatum Jaco"bi Fenys, militis,' the treasurer of England, In the same year an act was passed (Rot. ParL v, 196) for the resump tion of all the king's grants, from which was excepted 40/. yearly out of 100 marks given to him for life out of the ferm of London and Middlesex, with a yearly robe, vestm-e, and furrure. Among his possessions in Hertfordshire was the manor of Munden, in right of which he had the patronage of Rowheiny or Roweney nunnery ; which, by a licence in 37 Henry VL, he transferred to a chantry lie had founded in the church of the nun nery, to be called the chantry of St, John the Baptist of Roweney, for a perpetual chaplain to pray for the souls of the founders and for the good estate of the kiug, &c., and of John Fray, (Monast. iv. 342.) There is no other e-yidence of the part he took in the contest between the Roses, ex cept that he made a loan (perhaps a com- pulsoi'y one) of 200/. to King Edward IV, in his first year, (Rot. ParL v, 471,) At the close of that year, I46I, he died, and was buried in the church of St, Bartholo mew the Little in London, He left large estates in the counties of Bedford, Essex, and Hertford, which, as he had no sons, were di-vided among Ms flve daughters. His wife Agnes, or Annes, one of the daughters of John Danvers, of Cothorp, Northamptonshire, and sister of the judges FEISKENEY Sir Robert and Sir William Danvers, sur vived him till 1478, having since his death had two other husbands — viz., John, Lord "Wenlock, who was killed in the field of Tewkesbury m I47I ; and Sir John Say, knight, who also died before her. (CaL Inquis. p. m. iv. 309, 390 ; Morant, ii. 592 ; Test. Vetust 297, 347.) FEENINGHAU, Ralph de, held a ca nonry of St. Paul's, to which he was ap pointed m 1270. Fines were levied before him as a justice of the Common Pleas from 3 to 6 Edward L, 1275-8. (Dugdale's Orig. 21, 44.) He died in 15 Edward I,, and one of his descendants, residing at East Farleigh, was sheriff of Kent in 17 Edward II, (ParL Writs, i. 623 ; 3 RepoH Pub. Rec App. U. 209 ; Abb. Rot Orig. i, 279.) FEEVILLE, Geoege, was a descendant of a noble family of the fourteenth century. He was the second son ofRobert FreviUe, of Little Shelford in Cambridgeshire, and Rose [Peyton], his wife. Commencing his legal studies atBarnard'* Inn, he completed them at the Middle Temple, where he was tvrice reader, m 1558 and 1659, On the first occasion his duties. were performed by the celebrated Edmund Plowden, and the second occasion is remark able from the fact that on the 31st of the previous January Queen Elizabeth had con stituted Mm third baron of the Exchequer, thus affording an evidence that the degree of the coif was not yet a necessary qualifi cation for those who sat on that bench. He became second baron on April 28, 1564, and remained in that place tiU June 1, 1579. He was elected recorder of Cambridge in 1568, but was successfuUy opposed m 1659, when he was appointed a baron. (Athen. Cantab, i. 407, U. 92.) FEISKENEY, "Waliee de, whose name was derived from a parish so called in the county of Lincoln, is mentioned as a counsel in the Year Book of Edward H,, and m the fourth year of that reign was summoned, with six others, as an assistant to the par liament then held. He was added to several judicial commissions in his o-wn county m 7, 8, and II Edward II, He was constituted a baron of the Ex chequer on August 6, 1820, 14 Edward IL, and, besides being frequently employed as a justice in the country, he was one of those who were empowered to pronounce the judgment upon the Mortimers in 16 Edward II. On July 9, 1328, he was removed from the Exchequer and appointed a judge of the Common Pleas, Remainmg, as it seems evi dent, in that court till the end of the reign, he was reappointed to the same court sis days after the accession of Edward IIL, viz., on January 31, 1327, Ou Mai-ch 6 follow ing, however, he was placed in the King's Bench, where he sat till Trinity Term in the FROWYK second year, when the last notice of him occurs in the Year Book. (Pari. Writs, ii. p, U. 897.) FEO'WYK, Thomas. From the time of Henry HI. the records of the city of London afford evidence of the respectability and opulence of the family of Frowyk, In that reign the conduit in Newgate Street was buUt at the charge of Henry Frowyk and Sir Henry Basynges ; under Edward I, and n. Thomas and Roger were successively goldsmiths to the king, and Simon was an alderman. Under Edward III, one of the assessors of the subsidy m Mid dlesex was Henry de Frowyk, and an other of the same name gave lands for the support of four chaplams forthe chantiy in the chapel of ' St, Marie Gyhalle, Lon don,' In that reign also John de Frowyk was prior of St. John of Jerusalem in Ire land, and chanceUor of that kingdom, and Thomas de Frowyk was a justice of la bourers and coroner and clerk of the King's House of Merchants. In the reign of Henry VI, Henry de Frowyk was an al derman and twice lord mayor of London, and justiciary of the German merchants m that city ; and in the seventh year of Edward IY. Thomas Frowyk was a mem ber of the parliament then assembled. (Newcome's St. Albans, 384 ; Rot. Pari. i. 474, ii. 426, 455, iv. 303, v. 634 ; Palgrave' s Merchant and Friar, 1^40 ; CaL Rot. Pat. 166, 174, 285 ; Devon's Issue Roll, 122, 128 ; Abb. Rot Orig. i. 198, ii. 34, 229 ; Mait- lands London, II95.) The latter was probably the father ofthe chief justice, who w.is bom at the manor of Gunnersbury in the parish of Ealing, Middlesex, His mother was daughter and heir of Sir John Sturgeon, knight. Fuller states that the judge died before he was full forty years old, so that he must have been born about the year 1466, and in Keilwey's Reports his death is recorded to have occurred 'in florida juventute sua.' He was educated at Cambridge, and studied the law in the Inner Temple, From this society he was called to the de gree of serjeant at the end of Trinity Term 1494 (Y.B.9 Henry VII. fo, 23 b), and he attained such eminence in his practice as to be preferred, on September 30, 1602, to the high office of chief justice of the Court of Common Pleas, when he received the honour of knighthood. By a manifest error, an entry in the Year Books (15 Henry VII. fo, 13) would seem to flx his elevation three years earlier, as he is sub sequently mentioned as counsel. This ' oracle of the law,' as Fuller caUs him, presided in his court only four years, and dying on October 17, 1606, was buried in the church of Finchley. His wife's name was EUzabeth ; by her he left two daugh ters, between whom his estate was divided. FULTHOEPE 28a Elizabeth, the eldest, was married to th& after-mentioned Sir John Spelman. FEYSTON, Richaed, had the custody from March 7 to May 12, 1470, of the Great Seal during the absence of the chanceUor, Bishop StiUington. He was at that time a clerk or master in the Chancery, which office he had held since 1460, and continued to hold as late as 1472, 12 Edward IV. (Rot Pari V, 227-671, vi, 3.) Dm-ing the above two months bills in Chancery were addressed to him as keeper, and not to the chanceUor, although the latter still retained his office and received the Seal back from Fryston's hands on May 12, (Introd. Pro ceedings in Chancery, temp. Eliz. vol. i.) FULBUEN, William de, was no doubt a native of the place of that name in Cam bridgeshire. He held an office in the court in the reign of Edward IL, and was sent into that county and Huntingdonshire to instruct and assist the sheriffs in arresting the Knights Templars. Besides being em ployed in special commissions for the tiial of offenders, he was on June I, 1323, 16 Edward IL, constituted a baron of the Ex chequer, and having fllled that office during the remainder of the reign, was reappointed on the accession of Edward III, The latest occurrence of his name is in a commission dated May 11, 1328, 2 Edward III. (ParL Writs, U, 900 ; Rot ParL ii, 26, 208,) FULCON, Robeet, before whom frequent assizes were holden from September 1267, is not introduced into Dugdale's list until May 16, 127I, 65 Henry IIL, when he was appointed a justice of the Common Pleas, As he was clearly raised to the bench at the former date,itisnot improbablethathesatiu the King's Bench forthe intervening period. That he was continued in his oifice on the accession of Edward I. appears from fines being levied before Mm tiU about Michaelmas in the second year of this reign (Dugdale's Orig. 42), andhe is mentioned as a justice itinerant till 15 Edward I., pro bably retaining Ms position on the bench. (Rot ParL i. 4, 186; Abb, Placit 202.) FULTHOEPE, Rogee de, was the second son of Alan de Fulthorpe, of Fulthorpe, county Durham, where the famUy had been settled for several generations. He began his career as an advocate about 34 Edward IIL, 1366, and was made a king's serjeant in the thirty-ninth year. In 47 Edward HI. he was one of the three commissioners assigned to hear and determine the dispute between Henry Lord Percy and WilUam Douglas respecting the custody of the marches of the kingdom of England near Scotland. (Issues Exch. 196.) His eleva tion to the bench of the Common Pleas took place in the following year, on No vember 28, 1374, and, having been re appointed on the commencement of the new reign, he was knighted m 1386, and fines ¦284 FULTHOEPE were continued to be levied before him till Midsummer 1387. (Lelands CoUect, 185 ; Dugdale's Orig. 46.) In the following August he was sum moned to the council at Nottingham with the other judges, where, according to his own plea, he was compelled by the menaces of the Archbishop of York, the Duke of Ireland, the Earl of Suffolk, and Sir Robert TresiUan, to put his seal to the questions and answers already prepared by the latter, declaring the ordinance of the la.st parlia ment appomting eleven commissioners for the regulation of the kingdom to be iUegal, and denouncing the promoters of it to be gmlty of high treason. He and his col leagues were impeached for this act in the next parliament, and, notwithstanding the above excuse, were sentenced to death, which, however, was eventually commuted to banishment to Ireland for Ufe, -with for feiture of all their propertj'. Sir Robert was confined to the city of Dublm, and tMee miles round it, and he had au allow ance of 40/. a year. (Rot ParL Ui, 223-244.) It is somewhat surprising that the same measure of severity should be meted to him as to his colleagues, since it appears by his plea that he immediately communicated the act he had done under fear of his life to the Earl of Kent, so that it was through his means that the lords, who were likely to be endangered by this extra-judicial opi nion, had the earliest opportunity of secur ing themselves against the consequences. It was perhaps, however, on this account that in the same year an aUowance of 40/. per annum was made to his son William out of the forfeited estates durmg his father's life, and that two years afterwards many of Ms father's manors and lands were granted to Mm on a fine of 1000 marks, (Rot. Pat. iU, 246 ; Cal Rot Pat 219.) It would seem that Fulthorpe died in his •exile, probably in 16 Richard IL, 1392 (Cal. Inquis. p. m, iii, 161), for his name was not included among those who in the twentieth year were recalled from Ireland ; although he was mentioned in the pro ceedings of the next parliament, which reversed the judgment against the judges, and decreed the restoration of their lands to such as were living and to the heirs of those who were dead. Though the bene fit of this reversal was lost by its repeal in the first year of Hemy IV., the judge's forfeited lands were ultimately restored to his family, on the petition of his son William alleging all these facts in excuse for his father. (Rot ParL iU. 346, 868, 393.) By his first wife, Sibella, Sir Roger had the above-mentioned William, who was the father of the next-noticed Thomas de Fulthorpe, His second wife, also named Sibella, was the daughter and heir of Sir FUENELLIS Robert Salebury, and widow of Richard RadcUffe, of Ordsall, county Lancaster. (Surtee's Durham, iii. 126.) FULTHOEPE, Thomas, was the grand son of the last-mentioned Sir Roger Ful thorpe, and the son of Sir William, who was the knight of the retinue of King Henry IV. who, on the refusal of Sir WU liam Gascoigne, was assigned for the nonce to sit in judgment on Archbishop Scrope, the earl marshal, Ralph Hastmgs, and others in 1405, (Rot. ParL Ui. 633.) No evidence existe of Sir William haying acted as ajudge on any other occasion, and this was more a mUitary execution than a judicial trial. His mother was IsabeUa, daughter of Ralph, Lord Lumley. He was made a serjeant-at-law in 3 Henry VL, and often acted as a justice of assize, until he was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas, shortly before February 3, 1439, 17 Henry VL, when the first fine was acknowledged before him. The last fine was in November 1456, 36 Henry VL (Dugdale's Orig. 46.) He died between that date and May 3 in the foUowmg year, when his wUl was proved, (Surtees' Dur ham, iii. 126.) Among the patents of 27 Hem-y VL, 1448-9, is one declaring that ' pro salute sua ' he shaU not be compelled ' residere ' in his office of judge, and that he may take cognitions wherever they may be brought to him (Ccd. Rot Pat. 293) ; but it does not appear whether this privilege was accorded on account of a faUure in his health or of some personal danger which he apprehended, FUENELLIS, or FUENAUS, Alan de, does not appear to have acted as a judge previous to 1179, 25 Henry IL, when the kingdom was divided by the council held at "Wmdsor into fom- parte, and certain wise men were selected to administer jus tice in each. He was one of the six who were specially appointed to hear the com plaints of the people ui the Curia Regis itself, and different counties were also ap propriated to them for their circuit. The roll of I Richard L, II89, contains the entry of his death. He had been sheriff of Oxfordshire from 31 to 33 Henry II., and Cornwall also from 27 to 30 Henry II, The family, however, appears to have been more speciaUy connected with Devonshire, as a Geoffrey de Furnellis was sheriff of that county at the end of the reign of Henrj' I. and the beginning of that of Henry II. Alan himself was joined in that sheriffalty in 21 Henry IL, and Henry de Furnellis held it during the last nine years of the reign of Richai'd I. (Madox's Exch. i. 94, 139, 276, 328, U. 220 ; Fuller's Worthies; Pipe Roll, 68, 106, 106, 107, 118, 181.) FUENELLIS, or FUENAUS, Henet DE, FURNELLIS a relative and probacy the son of the last- named Alan, was according to Fuller sheriff of Devonshire during the last nine years of the reign of Richard L, though seemingly only under-sheriff, (Madox, i, 276,) In 3 John he accounte for Shropshire as the substitute of Geoffrey Fitz-Peter, then the sheriff of that county, (Rot. Canoed, 121,) There is littie doubt, there fore, that he held an office in the Exche quer, and it was probably in that capacity that he was present in I John, when his name appears among the justiciers before whom a fine was acknowledged, FUENELLIS, or FUENAUS, William DE, as well as the two last members of this family, was connected with the court, and in 6 John was one of the termers of the quinzime arising from merchandise m Eng land, (Madox, i. 771,) According to the custom of the time, he was like-wise of the clerical profession, and in the same year a royal mandate was directed to Geoffrey Fitz-Peter to give him ecclesiastical pre ferment to the extent of 40/, a year as soon as the other royal promises had been satisfied, (Rot. de Liberat. 69.) He was accordmgly in possession of the living of GALDEIC 285 Bromesgrove at the time of his death, in 1236, when the bishops gave it to the use of the monks of Worcester, (AngL Sacra i, 489.) ' He was present at Cambridge in 10 and II John, I208-I210, when fines were taken there before him, m which he is. called a justice itinerant. FUENELLIS, Simon db, was one of the justices itinerant for Essex and Hertford in 1284, 18 Henry III, ; but his name does- not again occur in the same character. He probably was a connection of the three- above-named persons, and, like them, held some office connected with the courts. _ FYNCHEDEN, William de, is men tioned as an advocate in the Year Books from 24 Edward HL, and was made a kmg's Serjeant in tho thirty-sixth year, being also employed as a justice of assize two years after. On October 29, 1865, 39 Edward IIL, he was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas, and was advanced to its head on April 14, 1871. His successor- was appointed on October 10, 1374, but whether the vacancy was occasioned by the death or retirement of Fyncheden does, not appear, (Cal Rot Pat. 1'80, 186,) G GAEEST, Hugh de, was a justicier ap pointed by the great council held at Wind sor in 1179, 26 Henry IL, when England was arranged into four judicial divisions. He must have been held in some consider able estimation, as he was one of the six to whom not only the northem counties were appropriated, but who were also assigned to hear the complaints of the people in the Curia Regis, (Madox, i. 98, 138.) GALDEIC. Dugdale erroneously calls this chancellor Baldricus, and places him in the reign of William I,, on the authority of a charter grantmg the church of St, Mary of Andover to the abbey of St, Florence, at Salmur, in Anjou. This charter, however, was evidently granted by WiUiam IL, though the gift of the church had been previously made by the Conqueror, That gift is recited in these Words : ' Noscant qui sunt et futuri sunt, quod Willielmus rex, qui armis Anglicam terram sibi subjugavit, dedit Sancto Flo- rentio ecclesiam de Andeura,' &c, (Mo nast vi. 992) — language which the Con queror himself never could have used, but which would be very natural M his son. But the date is placed beyond the possi biUty of doubt by the fact that the_ first witness to the charter is Robert, Bishop of LincoM, who was Robert Bloet, not raised to the bishopric till some years' after the accession of William H. ' Galdricus CanceUarius ' is the second witness to this charter, and he probably was the immediate successor of Robert Bloet as chancellor, on his resigning the Seal when he was appomted bishop m 1098 ; because there is sufficient testimony that WiUiam Giffard was restored to the office soon afterwards, and retained it with out interruption to the end of the reign. Ll the reign of Henry I. there was a chancellor described by the name of Wal- dric, and, considering that the letters G and W were often indiscrimmately used in speUing Christian names, as Gualterus, 'Walterus ; Gulielmus, Willielmus ; and also that there is only an interval of ten years between them, it does not appear improbable that Waldric was the same man. There is not, however, sufficient evidence to warrant a united notice, Galdric was one of the royal chaplams, and accompanied King Henry in 1106 to Normandy, where he distingmshed himself in the battle of Tenchebrai, fought on September 28, by takmg Duke Robert prisoner. He was rewarded for his ser vices with the bishopric of Laon, Laudu- nensis (Notes and Queries, 2nd S. v. 46),. not, as elsewhere said, Llandaff, Landa- 286 GANT vensis (Lingard, ii, 115), being elected, notwithstanding the protest of Anselm, dean of the cathedral. Incurring the hatred of the citizens, he was murdered in a field 'with seven of his prebendaries. A curious account of his episcopate is in book in. of Guibert of Nogent, ' De VUa Sua,' GANT, Robeet de. Philipot, foUo-wing Thynne, names a Robert as chancellor to Stephen, without any surname. Spelman adds the sumame, but neither Dugdale nor the author of the ' Lives of the Chancellors ' (1708) mentions him. Madox (n. 138), however, gives the copy of a charter _ of King Stephen, the first witness to which is Robert de Gant, chancellor. Another witness to this charter is WiUiam,_ Earl of Lincoln, who acquired that title in II42, and died about 1162. ' Robert the Chan cellor ' is also the first -witness to a grant of the church of Langeford made by that king to the Templars (Monast. vi. 320), which must have been dated between the years 1139 and 1I6I, There were two Roberte de Gant who were alive about this time, imcle and nephew. The former was the second son of Gilbert, the first baron of that name (son of Baldwin, Earl of Flanders or Gant), 'by AUce de Montfort ; the latter was the second son of Walter de Gant, the second baron, 'by Matilda, the daughter of Ste phen, Earl of Brittany and Richmond. In the absence of any decisive authority, the presumption to be drawn from facts and dates seems to be that the uncle was the chancellor. He preceded Becket as pro vost of Beverley (Ibid. 1307), and was dean of York m 1148. He was succeeded in the deanery in II53, which was doubt less the date of his death. The nephew lived tiU 1192, and was the ancestor of Maurice de Gant, the next-noticed justice itinerant. (Arch. Inst York ; Holy Tri nity, 69, &c, ; Dugdale's Baron, i, 402,) GANT, Matteice de, was the son of Ro bert de Berkeley (son of Robert Fitz- Harding), by AUce, daughter of Robert de Gant (above named) and Alice Pa- ganell, his wife. He attained Ms majority about 9 John, and soon afterwards assumed Ms mother's name, inheriting the large pos sessions she derived from her mother. In 16 John he married Matilda, the only child of Henry D'Oilly, baron of Hook- norton in Oxfordshire. He was one of the principal instigators of the contest between the king and the discontented barons, and thereupon suffered excommunication and lost all his lands, (Rot Pat 162-198; Rot Claus. i. 232, &c,) On the accession of Henry III, he continued to adhere to Prince Lewis of France, and was taken prisoner at the battle called the Fair of LincoM, on May 20, 1217, by Ra- GAEDINEE nulph. Earl of Chester,'m whose custody he remained for a year, and ransomed himself by the cession of two of his capital manors, those of Leeds and Bingley in Yorkshne. After the treaty with Prince Lewis, he was allowed to make his peace, and in the latter part of the second year of Henry's reign his lands were restored to him, (Rot. Claus, i. 368, 376.) His loyalty was thenceforward steadfast and active. In 9 Henry HI, he assisted William, the earl marshal, in fortifying a castle in Wales ; and although he had for tified Ms castle of Beverston in Gloucester shire -without the necessary royal licence, he obtained the royal confirmation of his act. And in August of the same year, 1227, he was nommated one of the justices itine rant for five counties. (Ihid. U. 180, 213.) In AprU 1230 he embarked with King Henry on his expedition into France, during which, in the foUo-wmg August, he died. (Excerpt e Rot Fin. i. 201.) After the death of Ms first -wife, Matilda, he married Margaret, the -widow of Ralph de Sumeri, who survived him ; but he left no issue by either. (Dugdale's Baron, i. 402.) GAEDINEE, Stephen (Bishop oe Win- chestee), is stated to have been an iUegiti- mate son of a bishop, who concealed his incontmence by making one Gardmer, an under-servant m his household, marry Ms concubine, and thus become the apparent father of 'the chUd of which she was preg nant. The actual father is represented to have been Lionel WoodvUl, brother of the queen of Edward IV., who was made Bi shop of Salisbury in 1482, and died in I486. He was born at St, Edmund's Bury m 1483. A -wiU has been lately published (Gent, Mag. May, 1865, p. 495), made by one John Gardener, a cloth-maker of Bury St. Ed munds, dated January 18, 1506-7, which bequeaths some valuable legacies ' to Stevyn my sone,' one of wMch is to be paid to Mm ' when he comy th to the fuU age of xxj years,' and another 'when he shall take commensement m the scole at the univer- site ; ' and it is inferred with great proba bility that this John was the father of the lord chanceUor. He was sent to Trinity Hall, Cambridge, where his perseverance and attainments secured to Mm a reputation which he mam- tamed through Ufe. Proceeding doctor in both laws in 1520 and 1621, he entered into holy orders, and in 1626 he was elected master of his college, eventually, in 1540, becoming chancellor of the umversity. At an early period, however, he had been re ceived first into the family of the Duke of Norfolk, and then into that of Cardinal Wolsey, who had made him his secretary. About the year 1526 the king, being on a visit to his minister, found Gardmer em- GARDINER -ployed in drawing up the plan of an alli ance projected by Wolsey with the kmg of France, which he did m a manner so satis factory, supporting his views with so much .-ability, and suggesting expedients with so much ease, that he at once acquired the royal confidence, and was soon admitted into the council. In 1628, when he and Fox were sent to the pope, to negotiate the question as to the king's divorce from Catherme of Arragon, he gratified Henry 'by obtainmg a new commission to Wolsey and to Cardinal Campeggio, and Wolsey • also by reconciling the pope to the endow ment of his two colleges at Oxford and 'Ipswich out of the revenues of some lesser monasteries which had been dissolved, as weU as by Ms arduous exertions to secure •the pontificate for the cardinal in the event of the pope's expected death. On Gardiner's return he received his first preferment in the Church, that of the arch- -deaconry of Norfolk, on March 1, 1529. In the following October his name ' Stephen "Gardyner' appears as 'counsellor to the 'king' in the record of the delivery up of the 'Great Seal by Cardmal Wolsey, (Rymer, xiv, 349.) Placed by the changes which took place on that event in the office of : secretary of state, it has been a question 'how far he exerted the great infiuence wMch be certamly had with 'the king in behalf of 'his fallen master, and it is generally ad mitted that Cromwell's conduct was more -generous, bold, and decided. A letter, how ever, from Wolsey to Gardiner, without ¦entirely attributing to his interference the -pardon which the king had consented to grant, seems to exhibit a firm reUance on 'his 'love and affection' in the preparation of the instrument. (Archeeologia, xviii. 67.) Gardiner was next employed in inducing "the university of Cambridge to make a de claration affirming the prohibition by the divine and natural law for a brother to ¦marry the relict of his deceased brother, TMs he and his coadjutor Fox, after some -'trouble, contrived by management to obtain (lAngard, vi, 386) ; and the king was_ not long m rewarding both. Gardiner received the archdeaconry of Leicester on March 31, 1631, and on the 27th of November in the same year he was consecrated Bishop of Wmchester, the patent for the restitution ¦of the temporaUties, dated December 6, describing him as 'om- principal secretary.' {Rymer, xiv. 429.) 'Throughout the remainder of Henry's reign Gardiner devoted himself to the Mng's •service, and until towards its close succeeded in preserving Ms ascendency m the royal councils. This he effected by accommoda ting himself to Henry's humours, whatever they might be. When the Mng's marriage was pronounced nuU and void, he went as ambassador to the French king. Bonner, GAEDINEE 287 who was joined in the embassy, complained loudly of Ms being obstinate and self--willed, and of his extreme jealousy of any inter ference in the management-of the busmess, or of any supposed assumption of an equality of rank. This spirit he soon after exhibited toward his ecclesiastical superior. Arch bishop Crammer, by raising every obstacle against the visitation which that prelate proposed to make in Ms diocese. Like all his brethren of the episcopal bench, he was compelled by the new statute to swear to the king's supremacy, which he not only appeared to do with the greatest readiness, but wrote strongly and ably in its support, although at the same time he was devotedly attached to the superstitious doctrines of the Romish Church, The kiug, though professing the same sentiments, was still desirous of introducing some reforms, and of permitting the Scriptures to be read in the vulgar tongue, but Gardmer vigorously opposed every step taken to promote the Reformation. He stiired up the king's zeal against those who denied the Real Pre sence, and seems to be justly chargeable with bringing Lambert and others to the stake for refusing to adopt the doctrine ; he procured, or at least promoted, the en actment of the bloody statute of the Six Articles, under the cruel provisions of which so many suffered ; and he plotted to get rid of Archbishop Cranmer, whom he hated as the gi-eat supporter of the Protestant party, by charges of an heretical nature. But in the latter he failed ; the king saw throuo'h his malevolent design, and from that mo ment ceased to have confidence m him. He did not improve the impression on the royal mind by the servile submission and ac knowledgment which he made in anticipa tion of a charge agamst himself of doubting the king's supremacy, although he obtained his pardon by an abject promise to reform his opinion. But he put a finishing stroke to the king's alienation from him by com bining with Lord Wriothesley in the en deavour to implicate Queen Catherine Parr in reference to these religious questions, Fi-om that time Henry not only -withdrew all. show of favour to him, but his name was struck out of the kmg's -vriU, of which he had before been appointed one of the executors. He was thus excluded from the council of regency. Strongly opposing all the means then taken to advance the Reformation, he was committed to the Fleet in September 1547, resisting aU the attempts of Archbishop Cranmer to brmg him round to the new opinions. From this imprisonment he was released, in consequence of the general pardon granted at the close of the session, on December 24. In the foUo-wing June, however, being commanded to preach be fore the Mng, his sermon was so Uttle satis- 288 GAEDINEE factoiy that he was sent to the Tower on the next day. The removal of the lord protector, whom he looked on as his great enemy, made no change in his state, and at the end of two years he was subjected to a sort of examination, and offered his freedom if he would subscribe to certain articles sub mitted to him. This he declined to do until he was discharged from his imprison ment. A special commission was then ap pointed to try him, when, persisting in his refusal, his bishopric was sequestered, but three months were given him for considera tion, at the end of which he was brought before a court of delegates, over which Archbishop Cranmer presided, and on February 14, I55I, he was deprived for disobedience and contempt of the king's authoritj'. His contemptuous behaviour towards the court led to an increased rigour in his confinement, which continued tiU the end of the reign. The accession of Queen Mary opened a brighter prospect to the determined prelate. On her public entry into the Tower on August 3, 1663, he made a congratulatory speech m the name of himself and his fellow-prisoners, among whom were the Duke of Norfolk, the Duchess of Somerset, the Lord Courtiiey, and Bishop TunstaU. The queen, in releasing them all, is said to have kissed them, and to have called them ' her prisoners.' Thus, after a confinement of more than five years, was he restored to liberty. He was immediately admitted to a seat in council, and -withm five days he exercised his episcopal functions, per forming in the queen's presence the obse quies of the late king. On the 23rd of that month the Great Seal was deUvered to him as chancellor, but it was not tiU Sep tember 21 that his patent was dated. He performed the ceremony of coronation on October I, opened the first parliament of the reign four days afterwards, and from that time during the remainder of his life acted as Mary's chief adviser in all civil matters, and, until the arrival of Cardinal Pole in November 1664, in the affairs of the Church also. The first difficulty which he had to -en counter was the necessary confirmation of the marriage of Henry VIIL with Catherine of Arragon, in order to remove the iUegi- timation of Queen Mary. Here, though he had been one of the principal promoters of the divorce, by his contrivance the whole blame was thrown on Archbishop Cranmer, The repeal of the laws passed in the last reign with regard to reUgion, and the re storation of aU the ancient Romish practices, were not delayed, but the measures adopted for this purpose, and the cruel consequences with which all opponente were visited, be long rather to theMstory of the period than to the biography of an individual. Suffice it GARLAND to say that several Protestant bishops were- deprived, others compelled to fly the coun try, the prisons were filled to overflo-wing, and after a short time innumerable victims^ suffered at the stake. With every desure- to give an impartial consideration to the^ arguments of those writers who attempt to palliate Ms conduct, it is impossible to ac quit Gardiner of originating the laws which authorised these cruel measures, and of cari-ying them into effect with their ex tremest severity, and conscientious as some may thmk Mm in his zeal for the ancient Church, none but the most bigoted can justify the means he adopted for its restora tion. That his old enemy, Archbishop Cranmer, who had already been tried, did not suffer at the same time -with Bishops- Ridley and Latimer, has been ascribed to his desire to succeed to the archbishopric,. with which he knew that Cardinal Pole would be immediately invested if his in trigues in the court of Rome against that- powerful ecclesiastic were not successful. Whatever were his motives for delaying the execution, it is difficult to ascribe them to- merciful considerations, since these did not operate to save the two other Oxford martyrs. During the mterval, however,. between the archbishop's trial and the execution of his sentence, Gardiner, after openmg the parUament on October 21, 1656, was seized with a mortal disease, the nature of which has been variously repre sented, of which he died at 'WMtehaU, on November 12, termmating a short ministry of two years and less than three months more disreputable than any other of simUar extent recorded in the annals of the Mng dom. He was bmied m Winchester Cathedral. Of Gardiner's leammg there can be no doubt ; but even in Ms contest -with Sir- John Cheke on the pronunciation of the Greek language he exhibited the obstmacy and tyranny of his disposition, visiting 'with punishment those who adopted the refor mation proposed by Ms antagonist. With very quick parte and great acuteness of mind, his early mitiation into business highly qualifled him for a statesman, and the measures which he took on the mar riage of Queen Mary to prevent foreign interference with the government of the Mngdom are sufficient proofs of his abiU ties as a poUtician. Hi^ work ' De Verft Obedientia,' 'written against the Papal supremacy, he was after wards obUged to retract by another caUed ' Palinodia Dicti Libri.' Besides these he published several other controversial pieces; and many of Ms sermons have been pre served. (Godwin, 286 ; State Trials, i. 651 ; Brit Biog. U, 202 ; Robertson's Hey- lin; Lingard; Bumet; &c,) GAELAND, John de, was one of the eus- GARROW todes of the bishopric of Winchester during its vacancy in 1189. (Pipe RoU, 5.) There is no doubt, therefore, that he held some office m the court. In 8 Richard I., 1196, he acted as a justice itinerant, setting the taUage for the united counties of Essex and Hertford. (Mado.v, i. 704.) GAEEO'W, William, one of the most successful advocates of his day, was bom on April 13, 1760, at Monken-Hadley in Middlesex, where Ms father, the Rev. David Garrow, kept a school, in which Ms son received the whole of his education. At fifteen he was articled to Mr. South- ouse, a respectable attomey residing in Milk Street, Cheapside, where he showed so much ability and quickness that he was strongly recommended by his master to aim at the higher branch of the law. His friends consenting, he was entered at LincoM's Inn in 1778, and was called to the bar on November 26, 1783. He attended the debating societies then estabUshed in the metropolis, and at Coach- makers' Hall and other similar schools he soon became a powerful debater, and his speeches were so admired for their elo quence and ingenuity that his presence at them was always welcomed. He assumed the gown, therefore, with a certain pres tige, which immediately secured him some business at the Old Bailey, where, so early as the January after he was called, he was fortunate enough so to distingmsh himself as to establish a sure foundation for his future success. A clever s-windler, Henry Aickles, was indicted for stealing a bill of exchange, which he had obtained under the promise of getting it discounted ; instead of domg which he had converted it to his own use. His counsel contended confidently that this was no felony, and it was con sidered a very doubtful point ; but the acuteness of Mr, Garrow's reply, and the readiness and cogency of his arguments, so far satisfied the judge that he left the question of fact to the jury, who con-yicted the delinquent; and on a reference to the twelve judges, they coincided with Gar- row's view of the law. His reputation thus established, Ms busi ness rapidly increased, not only in criminal but in civil cases. In the general election of the same year he was fully employed. First, he was chosen assessor to the sheriff of Hertford, in the county election; next, he was retained in the London scrutiny for Mr, Sawbridge ; and then he acted as counsel for Mr, Fox in the famous West minster scrutiny. In reference to the latter, when he was suddenly called upon to address the House of Commons, his unpremeditated speech was so forcible and luminous that it excited the applause, and he received the congratulations, of even the opposmg party. All this occurred in the GAEEO-W 289 first year after his call to the bar. He not only acquired the undisputed lead in the crown courte, but was also so much em ployed, both on the Home Circuit and in Westminster Hall, that in April 1793 he was appointed a king's counsel. His services were perpetually engaged in honourable contest -with the phalanx of eminent men who, during the twenty- four years that he remained at the bar -with a silk gown, graced the courts in London and the country, the principal of whom were Erskine, Gibbs, and Best. He was employed by the govemment in most of the state trials occurrmg during that period; and in many of them the sole management was entrusted to him. (State Trials, xxii.-xxxi.) In June I8I2 he was appomted solicitor-general, and knighted, having six years previously held the office of attomey-general to the Prince of Wales, before he was regent. In the next year he was raised to the same office as the Mng's attomey, and further promoted to the chief justiceship of Chester in March 1814. He entered parliament in 1805, and re presented successively Gatton, CoUington, and Eye ; but Ms senatorial harangues were not distinguished -with more success than is usuaUy attributed to members of the legal profession. After performing the duties of attomey- general for four years with exemplai-y for bearance and general commendation, he relieved himself from its responsibiUty by accepting on May 6, I8I7, a seat on the bench of the Exchequer. For nearly fifteen years he exercised the functions of a judge, when, prompted by the advance of age and mfirmity, he retired in February 1832, re ceiving an honourable reward for his ser vices by being made a privy counsellor. He lived nearly eight years afterwards, and died on September 24, 1840, at his house at Pegwell Bay, near Ramsgate, at the age of eighty. The mflux of business with which he had to cope from the very commencement of his career, although it made him an adept in the practice of the courte and in the superflcial questions of law, deprived him of the opportunity of studying the abstruser points. So conscious was he of his deficiency in the knowledge of the law of real property that he always in cases which touched that branch relied on the intelUgence of his junior. As a judge his former experience gave him considerable advantages in the ordinary cases of Nisi Prius, by enablmg him at once to pierce into the real merits of the question, and to detect any evasion or am biguity, and in Banco he had the discretion not to go beyond the Umits of his own learn- mg. He mamtained an intimate friendship -with those who were his forensic antego- 290 GAETON nists and rivals, and he closed his long life 'without a single stain on his moral cha racter, and with the respect and deep af fection of all who were closely connected 'vsdth Mm, By his 'wife, whom he lost iu 1808, he had two children — a son. Dr. David Gar- row, who died rector of East Barnet ; and a daughter, Eliza, who married the eldest son of the well-kno-wn Dr. Lettsom. GAETON, Thomas de, was a member of the clerical profession, and appointed in_18 Edward II. to assist the bishops in removmg foreign priests. Under Edward III. he held the offices of comptroller of the Mng's household and keeper of the wardrobe, and on October 10, 1381, 6 Edward IIL, he was placed on the bench of the Exchequer, as second baron, (N. Fosdera, ii, 574, 769, 785.) GASCOIGNE, William, is the first chief justice of whom we have any personal anecdotes, and the incidents related of him are not only creditable to himself as an individual, but aff'ord also the first ex ample of tha-t honesty, independence, and courage which should characterise the ju dicial bench, and of which m our own days we have so much reason to be proud; but of him we know, and we can expect to know, but little, until he became chief justice of the King's Bench. The family of Gascoig-ne, the derivation of which is sufficiently sho-wn m the name, is very ancient, no less than seven succes sive 'Williams being recorded in the pedi gree before the chief justice. The third of these is described as of Harewood, near Leeds, in Yorkshire, whose son acquired Gawthorp in the same parish by marrymg the heiress of that manor. There the j udge's father was settled, and there the judge was bom, his mother being Agnes, daughter and coheir of Mr. Nicholas Franke. In which of the legal seminaries he received his instruction it is impossible to determine, because the records of none of them extend to so ancient a date. Fuller says he was of the Inner Temple, but ad duces no authority; and in the MS. account of Gray's Inn, written in the seventeenth century, his name stands among the undated and supposed readers of that society. He was old enough in 48 Edward III, 1374, to be mentioned as an advocate in the "Year Books, and in 21 Richard IL, 1397, he was appointed oneof the king's Ser jeants. In 1398 he was among the twenty attorneys assigned for different courts or jurisdictions by Henry of Lancaster, Duke of Hereford (Rymer, viU. 49), on his banish ment from the kingdom in consequence of the quarrel with the Duke of Norfolk ; but on the death of Henry's father, John of Gaunt, four months afterwards, the infa tuated monarch seized the duke's lands, not- GASCOIGNB withstanding his declaration that Henry's succession to his mheritance should not be interrupted. Henry IV. had not been fourteen months upon the throne before he rewarded Gas coigne for Ms services, by constituting him chief justice of the King's Bench on No vember 15, 1400, All writers acknowledge his legal merit in the ordmary execution of his office, and it was not long before he had occasion to exhibit the higher charac teristics of his nature. In 1^406 the army raised by Richard Scrope, Archbishop of York, and Thomas Mowbray, earl mar shal, having been dispersed by the capture of the two leaders, they were taken to the royal presence at Bishop's Thorpe, the primate's palace, when the kmg com manded the chief justice to pronounce on them the sentence of death. Gascoigne resolutely refused to obey, saymg, ' Neither you, my lord, nor any of your subjecte, can, according to the law of the realm, sentence any prelate to death; and the earl has aright to be tried by his peers.' The Mng, how ever, was not to be stopped, and he found a -willing instrument m a kmght of York shire, named Sir WilUam Fulthorpe, in no way himself connected with the law. (Scrope and Grosvenor Roll, ii, 124,) Henry on reflection could not help ap proving his judge's boldness, and, so far from -withdrawmg his confidence from him, seems to have been m the famiUar habit of puttmg supposed cases for his opimon. The history of Gascoigne's committing Prince Henry to prison is told in various ways. The most authentic seems to be that the prmce, on the arraignment of one of his servants for felony before the chief justice, imperiously demanded his release, and having been refused, -with a rebuke for his interference, had angrily drawn his sword on the judge. His passion was in stantly checked by the digmfled demeanom- of Gascoigne, who calmly caUed on him to remember Mmself, remmded him of the position in which he would one day stand, and committed him to prison for his con tempt and disobedience. The prmce sub mitted at once and went away in custody ; and when the mcideut was related to the king, he exclaimed, ' How much am I bound to your inflnite goodness, 0 merci ful God, for having given me a judge who feareth not to administer justice, and a son who can thus nobly submit to it ! ' Almost all of Gascoigne's biographers have fixed his death to have taken place on December 17, 1412, 14 Hemy IV., and consequently have determined that Shalc- speare's introduction of him, as cMef jus tice to Henry V., is a poetic fiction invented for dramatic effect. Whatever enthusi asm we may indulge for the works of our immortal bard, it cannot extend to our GASCOIGNE ^accepting them as authority for historical facte, and unquestionably m a trial between him and the biographers we should feel bound m the absence of other evidence to give a verdict for the latter. But in this case there are materials which render it unnecessary to rely wholly on either, and which enable us to arrive with a clearer judgment at the truth. The result of the investigation proves that both ai-e -wrong — the biographers wholly, the poet partially. The error of the biographers in flxing the death of Gascoigne in December 1412 is mamfest in many ways. In the first place, he is the judge in a ¦case reported in February I4I3, (Y. B. 14 Henry IV, fo. 19.) Secondly, he was .-summoned to the firstparUament of Henry V, in Easter 1413, Tliirdly, ou the Issue Rolls of the same year the sum of 79/. 3.S, O^d, is stated to have been paid to him ¦on July 7 for his salary and additional annuity, (Devon's Issue RoU, 322,) And lastly, his will has been found in the eccle- .siastical court at York, the date being on December 16, 1419, and the probate being granted on the 23rd of the same month. Thus therefore the poet correctly intro duces Gascoigne as alive on the accession of Henry V. ; but we fear we must convict him of falsifymg history in his desire to ¦enhance the character of his hero, when he makes Henry with a noble generosity re- mvest the Mfiexible magistrate -with ' the balance and the sword ; ' nor can we acquit Lord Campbell of a similar charge, when he asserts that he can ' prove to demonstra tion that Sir WilUam Gascoigne * * * actually fiUed the office of chief justice of the Kmg's Bench under Henry V.' The only evidence that has the sUghtest tendency to support this -view is the sum mons to parliament, which was dated March 22, 1413, the day after the accession, in which he is called 'chief justice of our lord the kmg,' TMs single fact, however, gives Uttle assistance to the argument; because the title of chief justice would be properly appUed to him until he was actually superseded, and because the king, having obviously had no more time than to order a parliament to be summoned, the -write of summons would be naturally addressed^to those peers, judges, and others who were summoned to the preceding parliament, and consequently to the judi cial officers existing at the demise of the late kmg. But the slight presumption foimded upon the fact is mvaUdated by numerous contrary proofs. Thus M the parliament held by virtue of that summons, which commenced ou May 15, Gascoigne not only was not pre sent, but his usual place among the triers of petitions was filled by Sir WUliam GASCOIGNE 291 Hankford, who, though previously only a puisne judge of the Common Pleas, is named in precedence of Sir William Thirn- ing, the chief justice of that court. (Rot, Pari iv 4.) Again, although Dugdale defers Hank- ford's elevation to the chief justiceship for more than ten months from the accession, and although he was not mcluded in the new patente to the judges of the Common Pleas which were issued on May 2, a day or two before the openmg of Easter Term 1418, yet in several cases reported in the Year Books, not only of that term but of Trinity also, we find him, not indeed act mg in the Common Pleas, but presiding in the Kmg's Bench. Even if these two facts were not suffi cient to remove any doubt upon the ques tion, the two records to which reference has been already made contam such con clusive proof that Sir WilUam Gascoigne was not reappointed to Ms place as chief justice that it seems impossible that any one can mamtam the contrary. In one of them, the payment on the Issue Roll of July 1418, Gascoigne is called 'late chief justice of the Bench of Lord Hemy, father of tlie present king.' In the other, the inscription on his monument in Harewood Church m York shire in I4I9, he is described as 'nuper capit. justic. de Banco Hen. nuper regis AngUse quarii.' Can it be for a moment supposed that in either of these records he would have been docked of his title had he ever been chief justice ofthe reignmg Mng? Still, however, the difficulty remained arismg from Dugdale's date of Hankford's appointment as chief justice; but this has been removed by reference to the roll itself It turns out, on inspection, that the date, mstead of bemg January 29, 1414, as stated by Dugdale, is March 29, 1413, just eight days after King Henry's accession, and ten days previous to his coronation. The peciUiar period chosen for this act, and its precipitancy in contrast with the delay m issumg the new patente to the other judges, seem strongly to show- that it resulted from the kmg's peremptory mandate rather thau Gascoigne's personal choice, aud consequently to raise a sus picion that the indigmty he had laid upon the prmce was not ' washed m Lethe, and forgotten ' by the Mng, A royal wairant dated November 28, 1414, twenty months after his dismissal, grantmg him four bucks and four does yearly during his life, out of the forest of Pontefract (Tyler's Henry V. i, 379), was a favour too long retarded to warrant a more lenient construction of the conduct of the king, v2 292 GASELEE This great judge was buried in the parish church of Harewood, where the monument bears his effigy in judicial robes. He married first EUzabeth, daughter and heir of Alexander Mowbray, of Kirth- ington, Esq. ; and secondly, Joan, daugh ter of Sir "William Pickering, and relict of Sir Henry Greystock, baron of the Exche quer. By both he had issue. The eldest son by his first was named WiUiam, and as there were seven successive Williams before the judge, so also were there seven after him. The baronetcy of Gascoigne of Bambow was granted by Charles I. to a descendant of Nicholas, a younger brother of the judge, and became extinct m I8I0. ( Wot ton's Baronet, v. 384 ; Testam. Ebor. p. i. 410.) 6ASELEE, Stephen, was the son of an eminent surgeon at Portsmouth, where he was bom m 1762. He chose the legal profession and entered the society of Gray's Inn, became a pupil of Sir Vicary Gibbs, and was caUed to the bar in 1793. He joined the Westem Circuit, and was so well respected as a careful and weU-informed junior that when, after six-and-twenty years' practice, he was made a king's coun sel in 1819, his professional income was probably diminished. But though not gifted with those oratorical powers which were likely to gain him employment as a leader, his deserved reputation for legal knowledge soon recommended him to a judge's place. Accordingly he was selected on July 1, 1824, to supply a vacancy in the Common Pleas, and was knighted. In that court he sat for nearly fourteen years, with the character of a painstaking and upright judge, and in his private capacity as a worthy and benevolent man. He resigned his place at the end of Hilary Term 1837, and died on March 26, 1839, His widow survived him, and one of his sons is now a seijeant-at-law, GATES, Thomas, is described as of ChurchiU in the county of Oxford m his admission to the Inner Temple, on January 1, 1606-7. Having beencalled to the bar on January 29, 1614^15, he was elected reader to that society in autumn 1686. As his name is never mentioned in the Reports, there seems nothing but his politics to induce the Long ParUament (of which he was not a member) to recommend him to be called serjeant, and to be made a baron of the Exchequer, This howeVer they did on October 12, 1648, and he accepted a renewal of his commission on the death of the king. His death on August 19, 1660, at the age of sixty-three, was occasioned by an infection taken at Croydon while engaged in his judicial duties, and he was buried in tbe Temple Church. (Peck's Desid. Cur. b. xiv. 23.) . GAWDY GATESDEN, John de, is called by Dug dale (Orig, 21) a canon of St. Paul's ; but if so, civilians must have held those ap pointments, inasmuch as he had a wife and children. He was possessed of property in Norton and Bradford in Somersetshire, and held the office of sheriff of Surrey and Sussex in 20 Henry HI. and the tMee foUowingyears. (Madox, U. 177.) In 2S Henry IIL he had a liberate for 50/., to discharge the expenses of the queen, (PeW Records, iii, 17.) He is inserted in Dugdale's Ust of jus ticiers of the Common Pleas m 34 Henry IIL, 1260, on account of a fine havmg been acknowledged before him in Hilary Term of that year, and also as a justice itinerant intO' LmcoMshire, He is again mentioned as a justicier M an entry of 38 Henry HI. rela-. tive to certain ' heccagUs ' m Sussex held by himself and some other persons. (Abbi Placit 137.) He and the Bishop of Ely were sent as ambassadors to Spain on the Iring's affairs in 40 Henry IH. (Rymer, i. 343.) He died m April 1262, 46 Hemy IH., leaving large property both m Sussex and Somersetehire. By his wife Ha-wise he had a son named John, who died m Ms lifetime, lea-ving a widow ; and at the date of Ms own death, Margaret, his daughter, or granddaughter, was a mmor. She married John de Camoys.^ (Excerpt e Rot Fin. U. 316-384; Abh. Placit 187, 334.) GAUNSTEDE, SmoN, was m holy orders, and connected with the court as early as 9> Richard H., 1386, when his name appears attached to the confederation -with the Xing' of Castile, TMoughout the reign of Henry IV. he is mentioned as one of the clerks of the Chancery. (Rymer, vii. 615, 809.) On June 3, 1416, 3 Henry 'V'., he was appomted master of the Rolls, and on the chancellor's' going to France the Great Seal was left -with him from September 6 to October 12, 1416. He held it again under Henry VL, from September 28, 1422, tUl November 16, when he was recognised as an mdependent keeper with aU the usual powers, and re ceived the accustomed salary, (Rymer, x. 262.) He probably died soon after, since John Frank was appointed Ms successor on October 28, 1423. GA-WDY, Thomas, was the son of another Thomas Gawdy, of Harleston in Norfolk. Both were of the Inner Temple, and both serjeants-at-law. The father was reader there in Lent 1548 and 1563, and forrefusmg' to read in the latter year he was amerced, although he had been promoted to be a ser jeant in the previous October, (Dugdale's- Orig. 164 ; Machyn's Dianj, 26.) He re presented Nor-wich in Queen Mary's first parUament. He died in August 1566, and his virtues, together with those of Serjeant Richard Catlin, are recorded in a joint Latui GAWDY epitaph introduced into Plowden's Reporte. (180.) By one of Ms -vrives, Anne, the ^ughter of John Bassingboume, Esq., of Woodhall in HertfordsMre, he had two sons, Thomas and Bassmgboume, the latter of whom was the great-grandfather of two baronets — Gawdy of Crow's Hall in Suffolk, .•and Gawdy of West Herlmg in Norfolk ; but 'both titles became extinct at the beginning of the last century. Thomas Gawdy, the eldest son, who was (born at Harleston, became in 1558 member for Norwich, as his father had been before ¦Mm, and was among those who were sum moned by Queen Mary in October of the -as much as the other two. (.gave J He does not speciaUy appropriate these characters, but intimates that Drew was on the getting side. He was promoted to the bench as a jus tice of the Common Pleas on June 30, 1698, a position which he occupied for little more than two years, his death occurring on July 27, 1600. His monument in Tavistock Church represents him as a corpulent man, in full judicial costume, m a recumbent posture, and is considered a superior work of art. It was erected by his wife, AUce, the daughter of — SMrret, who after his death married Sir Francis GodolpMu. He left several children; his second son, Sir .Tohn Glan'viUe, who became a serjeant, and was speaker of the House of Commons in 304 GLOUCESTER April 1640, gamed a far higher eminence for his legal attainments than his father did, and his Reports on controverted elections are still in considerable estimation, (Risdon, 403,) GLOTICESTEE, Milo de (Eael ofHeee- eoed), sometimes called Milo Fitz-'Walter, was son of Walter, ' constabularius princeps militise domus regiis,' who built the castle of Gloucester on his o-wn domain. His mother was Emma, sister of HameUne de Balun, also a powerful noble, and a com panion of WilUam the Conqueror on his invasion. By Ms marriage with Sibyl, the eldest daughter of Bernard de Newmarche, he acquired the honor of Brecknock. In 31 Henry I, he was sheriff of Stafford shire and GloucestersMre ; and one of the entries is an allowance to him as sheriff of thirty shilUngs for mead and beer pro vided for the king. By the same roU it appears that he was justice of the forest for the former county, and that he and Pain Fitz-John were justices itinerant in both counties. On the death of Henry he concurred -with the other barons in placing Stephen on the throne, he being then high constable as successor to his father, and received, as the first fruite of his acquiescence, a charter of confirmation of all his lands. The king, in this grant, covenants with him ' siout baroni et justiciario meo,' evidently using the expression as if the two titles were synonymous. The royal favour, however, made no per • manent impression ; for soon after Milo for sook the king's party, and joined that of the Empress Matilda. To that unfortunate lady he proved himself a firm friend during the remainder of his Ufe, receiving her as his guest in her difficulties, supporting her and her establishment at Ms own expense during a period of two years, gmding her by his counsels, and aiding her by his arms. The oldest patent on record shows the ex tent of her gratitude. It is dated on July 25, II41, It confers upon him the title of Earl of Hereford, and gives him and his heirs the castle and moat of Hereford, and extensive privileges. In the following Sep tember he was one of those devoted warriors who covered Matilda's retreat from Win chester when closely pressed by the bishop. I He was reno-wned for his bravery and good conduct, and they were both strongly exemplified in his almcst romantic rescue of the sister of the Earl of Chester, when she, after the murder of her husband, Ri chard de Clare, was besieged by the Welsh, and being -without provisions, despaired of succour. He gained the castle on the side where it was considered inaccessible, and relieved her from her dreadful condition, 'Unharmed amidst all the perils he had encountered, he was at last accidentally GLYNNE slain by an arrow in a huntmg matoBj on Decem'ber 24, II46. He translated the canons of the abbey of Lanthony in Monmouthshire, who were oppressed by the Welsh, to a place caUed the Hide, near Gloucester, where he esta bUshed them in a new abbey called Lan thony Secnnda. He had five sons, all of whom died withr out issue, and three daughters, the descen dants ofthe eldest of whom acquired, besides the earldom of Hereford, those of Essex and Northampton. These titles all became ex tinct in 1872. (Dugdale's Monast. vi. 131- 136 ; Madox, i. 40, &c. ; Lord LytteUon ,t Lingard ; Magn, Rot. 31 Henry I.) GLOUCESTEE, Waltee de, one of the canons of Beverley, is caUed the son of Simon Lymereth, (Abb. Placit. 214,) He was an officer of the Exchequer, and in 22 Edward I, was entrusted -with the sheriffalty of Dorset and Somerset, which he held for five years. He then was appomted to visit the .seaporte to enquire mto the conceal ment of the Iring's customs on wool, &c. (Madov, i. 784, ii. 169.) In 28 Edward L he was a perambulator of the forests in Hante and Wilte, and about the same time was selected as one of the Mng's escheators,, acting m the north tiU the end of that reign, and in the south for the first four years of the foUo-wing. In 35 Edward I. he was a commissioner of array in Glamorgan, and paymaster of the le-vies there. (Ibid. i. 740.) During the early years of the reign of Edward ll. he was summoned to parUament among the judges, and was regularly con stituted one of the three justices of assize for Gloucestershire and four other counties in I3I0. Dugdale does not notice him as a baron of the Exchequer, although there is no doubt that he was so, bemg designated by that title in two write, directing him to confer 'with Nicholas de Segrave, and in the letters patent constituting Walter de- Norwich a baron in his place. The patent of his o-wn appointment has not been dis covered, but it must have been between June 16 and July 5, 13II, the former being- the date of his last summons to parUament, where he is evidently placed among the jus tices of assize, and the latter being that of the writ to Nicholas de Segrave. He held his rank for little mors than six weeks ; for his death is recorded in Walter- de Noi"wich's patent, which is dated on August 29. (ParL Writs, ii. 929.) He died in possession of considerable property in Surrey, and the counties of Lmcoln, "Wor cester, and Gloucester. By his wife Hawise- he had a son Walter, who died in 16 Ed ward II. (Cal. Inquis. p.m. i, 247, 306,) GLYNNE, JoHif, whose genealogy com mences in the year 843 with Cilmin Droed- tu, one of the fifteen tribes of North Wales,. was the eldest son of Sir WiUiam Glynne, GLYNNE knight, of Glyn-LUvon in CamarvonsMre, by Jane, daughter of John Griffith, Esq., of Carnarvon (Wotton's Baronet, iii, 289), and was bom m 1602 at the ancient seat of his ancestors. He was educated at Westmin ster School, and at Hart HaU, Oxford (now part of New College). At the same time he kept his terms at Lincoln's Inn, and having been called to the bar in 1628, he got quickly mto practice, for he appears in Croke's Reporte in Hilary Term 1633. In August 1638 he received a grant of the office of keeper of the writs and rolls m the Common Pleas in reversion (Rymer, xx, 300), a place of considerable profit. Having been previously appomted high steward of Westmmster, he was elected representative for that city in both the parliaments that met in 1640. In the last of these, the Long Parliament, he showed himself to be an active partisan of the discontented party. He took a promment part m the prosecution of the Earl of Strafford ; and one of the arguments he used to prove that the multi tude of the earl's minor offences amounted to Mgh treason, was ' Rame in dropps is not terrible, but a masse of it did overflow the whole world.' In all the proceedings his reasoning was inconseqviential and his con duct harsh and inhuman. He was one of the committee to prepare the votes con demnatory of the canons, and to draw up a charge against Archbishop Laud, and was the messenger from the Commons with a charge of high treason against the bishops who had signed a protestation against the Lords proceeding in their absence. ( White loeke, 63.) He supported the remonstrance on the state of the Mngdom, the carrying of which had so great an effect in widening the breach with the Mng ( Vemey's Notes, 44^125) ; and he published a speech, deli vered by him in January 1642, strenuously vindicating the priyUeges of the Commons on the occasion of the king's unadvised at tendance at the house, and demanding the delivery of the five members whom he had caused to be accused of high treason. (ParL Hist. ii. 1023.) He further showed Ms zeal in the cause by subscribmg 100/. in money or plate, together -with the mamtenance of a horse, for the defence of the parUament. {Notes and Queries, 1st S. xii. 358,) _ His active zeal will account for his bemg elected on May 80, 1643, recorder of London, In the next year he assisted at the Assembly of Divmes, and had the thanks of the house for his speech on the Jus Divinum. In aU the questions discussed he was a popular debater, but stoutly opposed the self-deny ing ordinance, ( Clarendon, v. 89.) No un- -vrilUng sharer in the forfeited spoils of the loyaUsts, the small were as welcome as the great, and he did not disdain a grant of the books of Mr, Vaughan of LmcoM's Inn {fVhitelocke, 177), at the time he was being GL"YNNE 305 gratified -with the clerksMp of the petty bag', worth 1000/, a year. The Presbyterian party, -with which he was connected, becoming jealous of the army, took measures in June 1647 for its being disbanded. Sir Thomas Fairfax coun teracted this attempt by bringmg a charge in the name of the army against eleven of the opposmg leaders, mcluding Glynne, and insisting on their bemg sequestered from their attendance on the house. Though the Commons at first resisted the inter ference, the accused members, upon the army's advance towards London, thought proper to withdraw. TMs was qmckly fol lowed by their impeachment, their expul sion from the house, and the attempt to place Mr. Steele as recorder instead of Glynne. After a year's byplay, resulting in the discharge of the accused, and their being restored to their seate, the farce con cluded, having answered its purpose of get- tmg rid for the time ofthe popular opponents of the army and their plans. (Ibid, 253- 310.) Glynne was re-admitted on June 7,' 1648, and was so entirely restored to confi dence as to be appointed in the foUo-wing September one ofthe commissioners to treat with the Mng in the Isle of Wight, and while engaged in that service to be named, on October 12, a serj eant-at-law. (Ihid. 334, 342.) In December, however, he was one of the victims of Pride's Purge, by the vote of the Rump repealing the previous revoca tion of the proceedings against the eleven impeached members, which, so far from being detrimental to him, turned out to his future advantage, by relievmg him from all implication in the murder of the Mng, Glynne's party having now lost aU power, he soon after showed an incUnation to side -with that of CromweU, who, wUling enough to encourage his advances, made him, on becoming protector, his serjeant.' In this character he appeared in the High Court of Justice, and went the Oxford Cfrcuit as a judge in 1654. In the same year he re ceived the appomtment of chamberlain of Chester, and was returned member for Car- narvonshfre in Cromwell's parliament of September, in which he seems to have been extraordinarily silent In April 1665 he presided at the trial of Colonel Penrud- dock for the rising m the west, when the judges were seized at SaUsbury (State Trials, V. 618, 604, 767; Athen, Oxon. i, xxUi,, iii, 604) ; and on July 15, when Chief Justice RoUe, who had refused to be concerned M that trial, had retired, was put into his place as chief justice of the 'Upper Bench. (Style's Reports, 452.) This position, there being then no House of Lords, did not disquaUfy him from sittmg for Flintshire in Cromwell's next parUament of September 1656. He supported Alder man's Pack's motion to offer CromweU the 306 GLYNNE title of long, and, being one of the com mittee to forward the appUcation, in a roundabout inconclusive speech he endea voured to remove the protector's scruples, by arguing that the kingly office is essential to our constitution, (Harris's Lives,iii. 472,) He cunmngly pubUshed his speech as a pamphlet on the Mng's retum, under the title of ' Monarchy asserted to be the best, most ancient, and legal form of Govem ment' In the new constitution which fol lowed he accepted a seat in Cromwell's House of Peers. ( Whiteloeke, 666.) The protector died on September 3, 1668, and Glynne was continued chief justice by Richard, on whose removal and the return of the Long Parliament, with a prophetic glance at the poUtical horizon, he resigned his chief justiceship. In the new parlia ment, called the Convention Parliament, that met on AprU 25, 1660, he was re tumed for the county, and his son for the to-wn, of Carnarvon, and played Ms cards so adroitly that, on the arrival of Charles II. in England, he was included in the first batch of Serjeants, bemg those who had been appomted irregularly by the parlia ment. On November 8, m the same year, all bygones forgotten, he was made, ac cordmg to Anthony Wood, ' by the cor rupt dealmg of the then lord chancellor ' (Clarendon), the king's serjeant (Sider fin, 3), and was knighted. He and May nard, who also attained the same raii, were both employed in the crown prosecu tions that followed, and divided the shame of appearing against Sir Harry Vane, their old coadjutor and friend, (Burton's Diary, iU, 175, 182.) Charles's coronation took place on April 23, 166I ; and the account given by Pepys of an accident on the occasion shows the feeling that existed m regard to the two legal renegadoes : ' I have not heard of any mischance to anybody through it all, but only to Serjeant Glynne, whose horse fell upon him yesterday and is Uke to MU him, which people do please themselves to see how just God is to punish the rogue at such a time as this, he being now one of the Mng's serjeante, and rode in the caval cade with Maynard, to whom people -wish the same fortune.' That the hostile im pression was not confined to the courtier is proved _ by Butler's immortalismg their names in the foUo-wing couplet : — Did not the learned Glynne and Maynard To make good subjects traitors strain hard ? He continued in the practice of his pro fession till Ms death, which occurred at his house in Portugal Row, Lincoln's Inn Fields, on November 16, 1666, He was buried in his o-wn vault under the altar in St, Mar garet's, Westminster, The reputation of his wealth was no doubt founded in truth; for, besides his GODFREY professional gains, the places which he en.* joyed must have brought him considerable profit. He was undoubtedly an able lawyer, and in his judicial character, as between man and man, was just and impartial Siderfin (159) states that his plainness and method iu argumg the most intricate case were such that it was made clear to the comprehension of every student. But here his praise must end, Asa poUtician, though the cunning with which he joined aU the ruling powers in tmm may be admired, who but must despise Ms various tergiver sations? Sir John was twice married. His first wife was Frances, daughter of Arthur Sqmb, Esq. ; his second was Anne, daugh ter and coheir of John Maiming, Esq., of Cralle in Sussex. By both he left cMldren. His eldest son, WiUiam (by Ms first wife), was, durmg his father s life, created a baronet on May 20, 1661, and his descen dants still enjoy the title. GODBOLT, John, was of Toddmgton m Suffolk, and after studymg at Barnard's Inn was admitted into Gray's Inn, where he was caUed to the bar, and was elected reader in autumn 1627, and soon appears in Croke's Reporte with considerable prac tice. He received the digmty of the coif at the great call in 1636 ; and it must have been from Ms professional reputation, for there is no account of his mterfeiing in the poUtical troubles of the time, that, when the parliament took upon them to appomt the judges, he was selected to fill a vacant seat in the Common Pleas. This occurred on April 80, 1647, and he was immediately added to the commission to hear causes in Chancery. (Whiteloeke, 245; Journals.) He did not long retain Ms place, but died at his house m High Holbom on August 3, 1684. (Register.) His coUection of Reporte was published soon after his death. The family appears to be now extmct, 60DEEEDE, William, was a resident at Middleton m Norfolk. His name does not occur in the Year Books tiU he was caUed to the degree of a serjeant-at-law m 3 Henry 'VI, In 1431 he received the ap pointment of Mng's serjeant, and on .Tuly 3, 1438, he was constituted a judge of the King's Bench, his attendance in which comt is noticed tiU Easter, 21 Hemy VL, 1443. His wife Catherine was a great Momoter of the rebmldmg of the church of Walpole St. Peter m MarsMand, in the -window of which her effigy is placed, (Blomefield!s Norfolk, i. 715.) GODFEEY (Bishop op Bath) is placed erroneously by Thynne and Philipot and then- followers in the list of the chancellors of Henry I. The sole authority they give is that of Matthew Parker, who m Ms life of Archbishop WilUam Corbel says that he consecrated ' Godfridum, regni canceUa- GOLDINGTON rium, Bathoniensem Episoopum.' The word ' regni,' however, in this passage, was no doubt, by a mistake of the tran scriber or the prmter, substituted for 'reginse,' as Godfrey certamly was chan cellor to Queen Adeliza; and the term 'canceUarius regm,' or 'AngUse,' was not introduced tUl long afterwards, that officer being mvariably caUed at this period ' can ceUarius regis.' This consecration oc curred also m II23, when Ranulph was chancellor. Godfrey was a Belgian priest who came over to England with the queen on her marriage in 112 1, as one of her chaplams. He was soon raised to the post of her chan cellor ; and, by her interest, shortly after wards obteined the bishopric of Bath, to which he was consecrated on August 26, 1123. He presided over his see nearly twelve years, and, dying on August 16, 1136, was buried at Bath. (Madox, i. 60 ; Godwin, 368 ; AngL Sac i, 560,) GOLDINGTON, William de, whose fa mily was established in Essex, where he held the manors of Raurethe, Badewe Parva, and Ringgers in Terlmg, is men tioned m the Year Book as an advocate in the early part of the reign of Edward IL, in the fourth year of which he was ap pomted one of the three justices of assize for Kent, Sussex, and Surrey, He con tinued to serve for several years in those and other counties, and was regularly sum- nioned to parUament in vfrtue of his office till the eleventh year. He died in 12 Edward IL, and left a son named John, who was an adherent of the Earl of Lan caster and the other barons m rebellion, (Pari. Writs, ii, p, ii. 984 ; CaL Inquis. p, m. i. 292.) GOLSSBOEO-aGH, Edwaed, of Golds- borough in Yorkshire, was of a very ancient and respectable family. He was probably an officer of the Exchequer, to the bench of which court he was raised, as third baron, on June 26, 1483, 1 Richard III, He was continued in his place by Henry VII,, who made him second baron on December 5, 1488. After sitting there for about six years more, he was suc ceeded by Thomas Bamewell on October I, 1494, His daughter EUzabeth married Sir John Gower, the ancestor of the Duke of Sutherland, (CoUins's Peerage, U. 444,) GOODEICH, Thomas (Bishop of Elt), This learned prelate was the second son of Edward Goodi'ich, of East Kirby in the county of Lmcoln, by his third wife, Jane, sole daughter of Mr. WilUamson, of Boston, The name was pronounced and often speUed 'Goodrich, not'withstanding that the epi gram given by Granger (i. 136) suggests a -different reading: — Et bonus, et dives, bene junctns et optimus ordo ; Prsecedit bonitas, pone sequuntur opes. GOODEICH 307 He was educated at Benett CoUege, Cambridge, from which he was elected a fellow of Jesus CoUege in I5I0, and was proctor of the university m 1515. His proficiency in the canon and civil laws led to his appointment as one of the syndics m 1629, to prepare the university's answer on the question of the kmg's marriage with Queen Catherine. Thus introduced to the royal notice, he received the rectory of St. Peter's Cheap in London, and was nomi nated one of the king's chaplams, with a canonry m St. Stephen's, Westminster. On March 17, 1534, he was elected Bishop of Ely. (Rymer, xiv, 486,) His zeal for the Reformation was soon manifested in his diocese by strmgent orders to his clergy to erase the pope's name from aU their books, and to demolish all images and reUcs in their churches. In 1637 he was one of the compilers of the work which was caUed the 'Bishops' Book ; ' and soon afterwards the Gospel of St. John was allotted to his share in the revision of the New Testament. In 1640 he seems to have been suspected of being concerned in the translation of Melanc- thon's Epistle, as his study was directed to be searched, (Acts Privy Council, vii, 98.) Under Edward VI. he assisted in the compilation of the Liturgy ; and m 1649 and 1650 he was one of the comnussioners assigned to enquire ' super hasretica pravi- tate.' (Rymer, xv. 181, 260.) On De cember 22, I55I, the Great Seal on the sudden retirement of Lord Chancellor Rich was ^ven mto the bishop's hands as keeper. This deposit, which seems in the flrst in stance to have been only temporary tUl Rich's recovery from his pretended illness, was by the almost immediate discovery of the real cause of that minister's retirement converted into a permanent one, with the fuU title of lord chancellor, on January 19, 1662. In the parUament which met on the next day the new Liturgy was made the law of the land. (Robertson's Heylin, 221, 252, 291.) Previously to the Mng's death he had settied the crown on Lady Jane Grey, by an instrument which the Duke of Northumberland had induced the bishop to authenticate with the Great Seal, He does not appear to have been consulted on the subject ; but -with the rest of the coun cU he subscribed the undertaMng to support the royal testament, and he acted on the councU duiing the nine days of that un fortunate lady's reign, signing as chanceUor several letters issued by them on her behalf, the last of which is dated on July 19. He was accordingly one of the prisoners named for trial on the accession of Queen Mary ; and it was perhaps on account of his hay ing jomed in the order sent by the councU on July 20, commandmg the Duke of North umberland to disarm, that her majesty struck x2 308 GOULD his name out of the list, (Chron. Qn. Jane, 91, 109; Lingard, vii, 122,) The Great Seal was of course taken from Mm, and Ms death within a year from his dismissal probably released him from those investigations which were so fatal to some of Ms brethren. He died at Ms palace at Somersham on May 10, 1564, and on Ms brass in Ely Cathedral he is represented in his episcopal robes as he wore them after the Reforma tion, with a Bible in one hand, and the Great Seal m the other. Of his muniflcent expenditure on the buildings of his see the long gallery at Ely Palace is an existing me morial (Angl. Sac. i. 676 ; Godwin, 272.) GOTTLD, Henet, was the son of Andi'ew Gould, of Winsham in Somersetehire, He was bom about 1644, and was caUed to the bar of the Middle Temple in 1667, and elected a bencher in 1689, Included m the great caU of serjeante m 1692, he was made one ofthe Mng's Serjeants m the fol lowmg year. In this character he con ducted the case for the biU of attamder against Sir John Fen-wick in 1696, On January 26, 1699, he was promoted to be a judge of the King's Bench, and on his first circuit had the unpleasant necessity of mflicting a ime of 100/. on Sir John Bolls at LmcoM, for giving him the lie, kickmg the sheriff, and other disorderly conduct, (State Tricds, xiii. 546 ; Luttrell, iv, 646,) On the death of King William his patent was renewed by Queen Anne, under whom he acted for the eight remaining years of Ms Ufe, dymg at his chambers in Serjeante' Inn, Chancery Lane, on March 26, I7I0. His residence was at Sharpham Park, be tween Street and Walton, in Somersetshire, the future birthplace of the celebrated no velist and magistrate Henry Fielding, who was the son of Sarah, the judge's daughter, by her marriage with Lieutenant-General Fielding, nephew of the Earl of Denbigh. He married Miss Davidge, of Worcester, and by her left a son, Davidge, the father of the next- named j udge. (Lord Raymond, 414,1809; Co//mso», ii. 268.) GOTTLD, Henet, the grandson of the last- named, and the son of Davidge Gould, Esq., of Sharpham Park, a barrister of the Mid dle Temple, by Ms wife, Honora, daughter of — Hockmore, of Buckland Baron m Devonshire, was horn about the year I7I0. The Middle Temple caUed him to the bar in June 17JJ4 ; and at the end of twenty years he arrived at the dignity of a bencher on being made Mng's counsel. His business was considerable, but he was distmguished more by the soundness of his law than by the power of his oratory. In Michaelmas 1761 he was raised to the bench as a 'baron of the Exchequer, where he sat till the end of the next year, when he was removed into the Common Pleas on January 24, 1763. GEANDEN With acknowledged ability he exercised his judicial duties till Ms death at the age of eighty-four on March 6, 1794, a period of thirty-three years from Msflrst appointment. In the riots of 1780, when the Mng, after Lord Mansfield's house had been burnt, offered to all the judges the protection of the military. Judge Gould is said to have decUned the proffered aid, and to have de clared that he would rather die than live under any other than the laws of England. He was buried at Stapleford Abbotte in Essex, of which parish his brother, Dr. William Gould, was rector. He married Elizabeth, daughter of Dr, Walker, arch deacon of Wells. Their only son dymg in the judge's life, his large fortune was' divided between Ms two daughters, one the wife of the Hon, Temple LuttreU, and the other of the Earl of Cavan. (CoUin son, U. 268.) GEAHAU, Robeet, was the son and heir of James Graham, Esq., of Dalston in Middlesex, and was 'bom at Hackney on October 14, 1744. He was educated at Trinity CoUege, Cambridge, and entering the Inner Temple m 1766, he was caUed to the bar m due course. After many years' practice, he was m February 1793 made attomey-general to the Prince of Wales, and Mng's counsel in the AprU followmg. In June 1800 he was raised to the bench of the Exchequer, on wMch he sat for nearly twenty-seven years. He was not considered a very efficient judge, and that hie previous reputation as a lawyer was not very high appears from Sir Edward La-w's remark when he was appomted, ' that he put Mr. Justice Rooke upon a pinnacle,' His principal distinc tion was his equanimity of temper. So great was his politeness and urbanity to every one that Jekyll said of him, ' No one but his sempstress could ruffle him.' His dignity must have been somewhat dis turbed by an unlucky accident which befeU him at Newcastle, while judge of assize there, and wMch was made the subject of a humorous song from the pen of Mr. John SMeld, to be found by the curious in Dr. Bruce's mteresting 'Handbook to New castle-upon-Tyne.' He resigned in February 1827, in his eighty-third year, but Uved several years afterwards, and died at his sister's, at Long Ditton in Sm-rey, when he was beyond mnety. GEANCTJET, William db, is noticed both by Dugdale and Madox (i. 356, ii. 320) as a baron of the Exchequer in 52' Henry IIL, 1268, but no trace of his con tinuance in office or of his personal history has been ascertained, except that a Walter de Granoourt, perhaps his son, was sheriff of Norfolk and SuffoUi in 6 Edward I. (Abb. Rot Orig. i. 28.) GEANDEN, Waein" de, was one of the- GRANT ifour justiciers appointed in 4 Henry IH., 1220, to deUver the gaols of Hereford (Rot, Claus, i. 487), but Ms name does not .afterwards occur. 6EANT, "William, Among the judges that distmgmshedthe reign of George IIL, Sir WilUam Grant occupies one of the most prominent places, and of his seven ¦countrymen who graced the judicial bench he stands next in reputation to Lord Mans field. He was bom at Elchies in Moray shire m 1766. His father, James Grant, was a humble member of that branch of the ancient clan of the Grante settled at Bal- domie, ha-ying been at first a small farmer and afterwards coUector of the customs m the Isle of Man. In consequence of the death of both his parente while he was in early youth, he was left to the care of his uncle, a wealthy merchant m London. After passmg tMough the grammar school at Elgin, he was sent to the college of Aberdeen, and then spent two years at Leyden in studying the civU law. He is ¦said to have resorted for a short time to an attorney's office as a useful mtroduction to practical knowledge. Entering LincoM's Inn on January 30, 1769, he was called to the bar on February 3, 1774, and deter mined to try his fortune m Canada, where he went m the next year. Soon after his arrival he rendered military service by commandmg a body of volunteers during the siege of Quebec by the Americans. The govemor appointed him attomey- general of the colony, where for several subsequent years he had the principal lead as an advocate. Not satisfied -with shmmg in so Umited a sphere, he then resigned Ms ¦office and retui-ned to England, Here, however, his colonial fame had not ex tended, and his efforte in the common law courte and on the Home Circuit were attended 'with so little success that he contemplated returning to his former exile. But his good fortune introduced him to two patrons, who were capable both of appreciating and rewarding his superior talents, Mr, Pitt, requiring some informa tion relative to Canada, was accidentaUy referred to him, and, havmg found his intelligence useful and abundant, and his views correct and statesmanlike, he at once saw his value and commenced that friend ship wMch secured his future promotion. As one of its first fruite he was returned to parliament at the general election in No vember 1790 for the borough of Shaftes bury. He soon distinguished himself in the debates, giving an effective support to the minister in the poUtical difficulties of that troublous time. In 1796 he was re tm-ned for the county of Banff, which he contmued to represent whUe he remained M parUament,His second pati'on was Lord Thurlow, GEANT 309 who, after listemng to Ms argument on a Scotch appeal m the House of Lords, ex pressed the highest opimon of his reasonin"- powers, and encouraged him to devote him self to the eqmty courte. There he con sequently took his stand, and in April 1798 receiving a patent of precedence, he m a very short time acqmred a leading business. In the same year he was ap pomted one of the judges of the Carmar then Circuit, and m 1795 solicitor-general to the queen. In 1798 he "became chief justice of Chester, and iu July 1799 he was appointed solicitor-general, and knighted. He held this office nearly two years, and on May 27, I80I, was made master of the Rolls, and at once justified the great ex pectations formed of Mm. During the seventeen years in which he sat in the Rolls Court he was looked upon as a perfect model of judicial excellence. No judge ever gave more satisfaction. His judgments were not only convincmg by their practical wisdom, but were remark able for the cleamess -with which they explained the prmciples of equity on which they were founded. No one who has practised under him can forget the patient attention with which he listened to all the statemente and arguments of counsel, or the discrimination he e-vinced in extracting from confused details all that was relevant, or the clearness and sim- pUcity of his reasons when he pronounced Ms decisions. To the regret of all, he retired from his court on December 23, 1817. The equity bar testified their respect and veneration for him by requesting Mm to sit for his picture, which, pamted by Sir Thomas Lawrence, now graces the hall m which he sat. For a few subsequent years he assisted in hearing appeals at the cock pit, but afterwards altogether retired from public life, and lived to attam his eighty- third year. He died at Dawlish in Devon sMre on May 26, 1882. When England was tM-eatened with in vasion. Sir WilUam, while master of the Rolls, for a second time assumed the mili tary habit, and, joining the volunteers who embodied themselves for the safety of the coimtry, he was called upon,.no doubt from the tradition of his prowess and experience at Quebec, to take the command of the LincoM's Inn corps, which he put into as good a state of efficiency as any m London. In 1809 he was elected lord rector of the university of Aberdeen, The impression which he made M parUa ment was wonderful. Few men have gamed a greater ascendency. Lord Brougham re lates that even Mr. Fox felt it difficult to answer him, and that once, being annoyed by some members talMng behind Mm -while he was listening to one of Sir WiUiam's 310 GRAS speeches, he turned round and asked them sharply, ' Do you think it so very pleasant a thing to have to answer a speech like that ? ' The effect of his addresses was thus described at a later period: — 'There was one extraordmary oration that night — Sir WUliam Grant's ; quite a masterpiece of Ms pecuUar and miraculous manner. Con ceive an hour and a half of syllogisms strong together in the closest tissues, so artftiUy clear that you think eveiy suc cessive inference unavoidable ; so rapid that you haye no leisure to reflect where you have been brought from, or to see where you are to be carried ; and so dry of oma- ment, or iUustration, or reflection, that your attention is stretched — stretched — racked. AU this is done without a single note.' (Memoir of Francis Horner, i. 285.) Though he opposed most of the beneficial alterations in the law suggested by Sir Samuel Romilly's intellectual and com prehensive mind, to Sir Samuel's ameUo- ration of the criminal code he gave a hearty support, GBAS, Nicholas le, is the last named in a writ by which justices itinerant into Northamptonshire were appointed, dated August 3, 1285, 13 Edward I. (airon. Petroburg. 102, 118.) He was appointed sheriff of Surrey and Sussex in 8 Edward L, and held the office for flve years. The castle of Odyham in HampshUe was also committed to his charge in 10 Edward I. (Ahh. Rot Orig. i. 36, 41.) He was possessed of the manors of Ren- ger in Terling and of Little Badewe in Essex. (Abh. Placit 190-306.) GEEEK, Thomas, who was bom and educated at Cambridge, held the office of baron of the Exchequer for one year and ten months, between Januaiy 20, 1676, and November 18, 1577, when he died ; but aU that is known of him is that he lived sixty- tMee years, and was buried in the church of St. Botolph, Aldersgate, He left a son and daughter. (Stow's London, 332-3.) GEEEN, Henet. Queen IsabeUa having granted to Henry Green, probably for some services as an advocate, the manor of Brigge- stoke in Northamptonshire, her son Ed ward HI. conflrmed it to him for Ufe. He was appointed- one of the king's serjeants- at-law in 19 Edward IIL, and was called to the bench of the Common Pleas on Fe bruary 6, 1364, 28 Edward III,, when he was Iniighted. In 1368, having been cited before the pope for pronouncing a judgment against the Bishop of Ely for harboiu'ing one of his men who had bm-nt a manor of Lady Wake's, and slain one of her servants, he was excom municated for his non-appearance. It is not related how he cleared himself from this sentence; but it did not prevent his being raised to the office of chief ju.stice of GEEENFIELD the King's Bench on May 24, 1361. H& retained his place four years and a half, and was removed on October 29, 1366. Joshua Barnes says (624, 667) that he- and Sir WilUam SMpwith were then 'ar rested and imprisoned for many enormities agamst law and justice, and were not re deemed without refundmg large sums wMch by mj ustice they had got from others, and were for ever after excluded from then- places and the Mng's favour.' It is some what curious, if this charge were made (of which no evidence, however, appears on the records), that m the warrant to Sir Henry Green, directmg him to give over the roUs, &c., to his successor, the Mng should call him ' dilectus et fldelis.' He is referred to as the ' wise justice' m one of the cases in Richard BeUewe's Reporte. (142.) That he was not much dammfled by any flue imposed upon Mm is apparent from the numerous manors and other lands in the counties of Northampton, Leicester, York, Hertford, Bedford, BucMngham, and Not tingham, together with a mansion in SUver Street, Cripplegate, London, which he pos sessed at the time of his death, wMch oc- cui-red in 1369. He married a daughter of Sir John de Drayton, and his son Thomas enjoyed the same property till his death in 1391-2. (Abb. Rot Orig. U. 196 ; Bridge's Northampt. ii. 247 ; Cal, Inquis, p,m, u, 206, Ui. 186.) GEEENFIELD, WiLLiAM DE (Arch bishop OF Yoek), was bom m ComwaU, and, from the practice that had been previ ously adopted by King Edward of raising the superior officers of the court to the chancel lorship, it is not unlikely thathe had passed his probation as a clerk of the Chancery or Exchequer. Like those officers, he was of the clerical profession, and had been re warded with the digmtiesof the Church, the deanery of Chichester havmg, in 1299, been superadded to his canonry of York, and, Uke them, he had been summoned to the parliament from 1293, on one of which oc casions he is caUed clerk of the council. (Le Neve, 60 ; Pari Writs, i. 28-113.) He was appomted chanceUor on Septem ber 30, 1802, and on December 4, 1804, he was elected Archbishop of York, Soon after, on the 29th, he declared to the council that it behoved him to take a journey to Rome on the busmess of this election, and requested the Mng to declare his will as to the custody of the Great Seal, WiUiam de Hamilton was immediately invested vrith the office of chancellor, and the archbishop elect proceeded to the Roman court, where, notwithstanding the king's letters, the pon tiff granted him consecration, only on the payment of 9500 marks. To relieve him from so extortionate an imposition, the clergy of his province raised the money among; them. GREGORY ' The ten years of his rule were principally iUustrated by Ms support of the Knights Templars m their faUen fortunes, and by Ms assisting at the general council held at Vienne m 1311, where one of the Mghest places was assigned to him. He died at his palace at Cawood on De cember 6, 1316, and was buried m the chapel of St. Nicholas in his own cathedral. He had the character of an eloquent man and an able statesman, and his library was exten sive enough to be worthy of a separate be quest to St. Alban's Abbey. ( Godwin, 686.) GEEGOEY, William, son of the Rev. Robert Gregory, vicar of Fawnthorpe and rector of Sutton St. Nicholas in Hereford shire, and Anne, daughter of John Harvey, of Bradestone in GloucestersMre, was bom on March 1, 1624, and educated at AU Souls' CoUege, Oxford, of which he was afterwards a feUow. Entering the society of Gray's Inn, he was called to the bar m 1650, made bencher m 1673, and elected autumn reader in 1676. He travelled the Oxford Circuit, and held several lucrative stewardships. He attamed sufficient eminence in the law to be elected recorder of Gloucester in 1672, to be created a serjeant in 1677, and to be re tumed as member for Weobly in 1678, the last year of Charles's second parliament, and to the new one summoned for March 1679. When the latter met, the king rejected Mr. Seymour, who had been chosen speaker in opposition to the nominee of the court, to the great indignation of the house, which would not give up the privilege of choice. On a compromise, however, both candidates were excluded, and Mr, Serjeant Gregory, having been called to the chair, was imme diately approved by the kmg. (Pearce's Inns of Court, 344; ParL Hist iv. 1112.) In that parUament, which only lasted two months, but had the credit of passing the Habeas Corpus Act, parties ran so high that, though a supply was granted, and the bill read a third time, the opposition took every means to delay sending it up to the Lords, tiU their grievances were enquired into, Roger North (Examen, 460 ; State Trials, vii, 524) relates that the Speaker Gregory one day, by a concerted plan, immediately upon a member movmg for the carrying up of the bill, rose from his chair without put ting the question, and, followed by the court party, before the opposition could have time to say a word, carried up the bill to the Lords, where the king, being on his throne, at once gave it his fiat. At this time, the king having newly arranged the ministry, reducmg the council to thirty members, and making the Earl of Shaftesbury the nominal president of it, four of tbe judges— WUde, Thurland, Bertie, and Bramston — were sum marily dismissed on April 29. In the place ofthe last Serjeant Gregory was appointed a baron ofthe Exchequer, and was kmghted. GEEVILL 311 Though his patent is dated May I, it is evi dent that he was not sworn in, nor his nomi nation announced, till some time after, for he stiU continued to sit as speaker tUl the prorogation of the parliament on the 26th of that month, wMch was followed by a dis solution in August. He retained his place till February 10, 1686, when he was dis charged in consequence of giving his opimon agamst the king's dispensing power. (Pari, Hist, V. 312 ; Bramston's Autobiog, 221.) In the foUowmg year he was removed by royal mandate from the recordersMp of Gloucester, To the Convention ParUament which met on January 22, 1689, Sir WiUiam was retumed for the city of Hereford, but soon vacated his seat on being selected by King WiUiam as one of the judges of the Kmg's Bench. In one of his circuite the mayor of Bristol thought proper to send Mm a message that he must not expect to have his charges borne by the city, to which he replied that they need not be frightened, for that he could bear his own expenses ; but, receiving great insolences from the people on his entrance, he found that a purposed affront was mtended. He there fore, on the sitting of the court, promptly fined the city 100/. and each sheriff 20/,, and would not remit the fme tiU they had submitted and apologised. He maintained throughout Ms judicial life the character for integrity he had gamed, and dying on May 28, 1696, at his manor of How Capel, Herefordshire, he was buried in the parish church there, which he had entirely re built. By his wife, Catherme, daughter and heiress of James Smith, Esq., of Til- lington, he had an only son, whose descen dants in the male line failed in 1789. (Manning's Speakers, 374; Kennett, iii. 628 ; LuttreU, ii. 277.) GEEINVILL, Adam de, paid in 35 Henry III. a fine of forty marks for a grant of the baili-wick of the forest of Sellwood in Wiltshire. (Cal. Rot. Pat. 21 ; Excerpt e Rot. Fin. ii. 106.) After this he was appointed justice of the Jews, and is men tioned in that character in 42 and 44 Henry III. (Madox, U. 319.) In the three following years, I26I-3, he appears as a justice itinerant m several commis sions. In 50 Henry IIL, 1266, Dugdale inserts him among the justices of the Common Pleas, on the authority of a liberate of that date, and till October 1272, a month before the kmg's death, there are continual entries of payments made for assizes to be taken before Mm, GEEVILL, William, son of Richard Grevill, Esq., of Lemington in Glou cestershire, attamed the Serjeant's coif in November 1604. He was made a judge of the Common Pleas on May 21, 1609, 1 Henry VHL, and so remained till I5I3, 312 GREY when he died, and was buried in Chelten ham Church, where there is a monument to his memory, (Dugdale's Orig. 47; Atkyns's Gloucesters, 173.) GEEY, John de, or GEAY (Bishop of Noewich), was one of the descendants of Anchitel de Gray, a Norman who came over with the Conqueror, and received from that prince various large possessions. His grandfather was Richard de Gray, a great benefactor to the abbey of Ensham in Oxfordshire, and his father was Anchitel. John was a native of Norfolk, and, fiUed some office in the Curia Regis. (Rot, de Oblatis, 12-78.) Being also brought up to the Church, he was, about 1200, preferred to the archdeaconry of Cleveland, which he exchanged for that of Gloucester. (Le Neve, 303, 308.) He was attached to prince John before he came to the crown, and his frequent attendance at the court after John's accession is sho-wn by several royal charters given under his hand from September 1199 to Jime 1200. (Dugdale's Monast ii. 168, 418, v. 112, vi. 956, 1090.) On this account Sir T. Hardy has inserted Ms name among the keepers of the Great Seal; but it may be doubted whether he is entitled to any other designation than that of a mere officer, who affixed the Seal for Archbishop Hubert, the chancellor at the time. His erudition and his wit, for both of which he was remarkable, soon made Mm a favourite with King John, who procured Ms election to the bishopric of Norwich on September 24, 1200. Under that title his name frequently appears from this time till the eighth year of the reign as one of the justiciers in the Curia Regis at West minster, and on the different itinera. (Hunter's Preface; Rot de Oblatis, 211, 351.) In 1206 he was, on the earnest recom mendation of the king, elected Archbishop of Canterbury, Although he was actually enthroned, the pope set aside the election, pretending that he was too much employed Dy the king in secular affairs to have suffi cient leisure to attend to the spiritual government of the Church. The appoint ment of Stephen de Langton followed; but the kiug, indignant at the pope's assump tion, and at his favourite's election being annulled, refused to acknowledge him. This led to the kingdom being placed under interdict, and soon after to the excommuni cation of the monarch. The bishop was soon removed from the actual scene of contention, by being sent as lord deputy to Ireland, where, shortly after, in 1210, he aided King John, on his visit there, in the introduction of English laws. On the invasion of England by Prince Louis of France in 1213, the bishop brought over from Ireland a powerful force to the king's assistance, but was soon after GEEY compelled to -witness his royal patron's resignation of the cro'wn to Pope Innocent, and to proceed to Rome to arrange the terms on which the clergy were to receive compensation for the losses they had sus tained through the Mng's proceedings. During his retum from this embassy he fell sick at Poictiers, and died there on November I, 1214. His remains were brought to England and honourably in terred in his own cathedral. In Februaiy of that year he had been elected Bishop of Durham, but the pope's confirmation did not arrive tiU after his death. (Surtees Durham, i. xxvii.) He was a man of agreeable manners and sprightly conversation, well-informed and inteUigent, ready in counsel and energetic in action. He was fond of antiquarian studies, and the author of some historical and other works, (Godwin, 429; Weever, 789; Blomefield s Norfolk, i. 274, 677; R. de Wendover, iii, 185, &c. ; Lingard, U, 17-25.) GEEY, Waltee de (Aechbishop or Yoek), was the nephew of the above- named John de Grey, being the second son of the bishop's elder brother John, by his 'wife Hawise, The first fact recorded of him is Ms purchase of the Chancery for the sum of five thousand marks, to be paid by instal ments of five hmidred pounds at the feast of St. Andrew and at Pentecost m each year. The charter by which tMs grant is confirmed is dated October 2, 1205, 7 John, and his uncle makes himself responsible on the roll for the payment of the fine. (Rot. de Fin. 378; Rot Chart 158; Rot Claus.i. 53.) Various ecclesiastical prefermente were now presented to him, and in May 1207 he was made archdeacon of Totnes, -with the prebend in the church of Exeter. In I2I0 or I2I8 he was elected Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, but it appears that it was only by the canons of Lichfield, the monks of Coventry choosing another person, and that both elections were made void. He was m October 1213 sent on a mission to Flanders, and previous to his departure he, of course, sent the Seal to the king, but still remained chanceUor, and is so styled four days after, (Rot. Claus. i. 158 ; Rot Pat lOB.) During his absence, however, which probably lasted longer than was expected, there is no doubt that the king appomted Peter de Rupibus his chancellor, who is so designated in two records dated November 21 and 24, 1213 (Rot de Fin. 507-9), and the Seal was delivered to Ralph de Neville on December 22 to be held under him. The bishop did not, however, long continue in office, for Walter de Grey on his retum resumed the title, and from January 12, 1214, till July 7, 1214 (although m the interval he had been GREY .again abroad), he is never mentioned with- •out that designation, (Rot. Pat, 108-111 ; Rot Claus. i. 160-8.) During this second absence he was elected Bishop of Worcester, and was consecrated on October 6, I2I4, when he probably re signed the office of chanceUor, the 29th of that month being the date of the first re cord in which his successor, Richard de Marisco, is so denominated. During the war with the barons, Walter de Grey adhered closely to the kmg ; but, though he was chancellor at the fame, he is not mentioned as having placed the Seal to the charter of May 16, 1213, 14 John, by which the Mng resigned the crown to the pope. In the contest for the archbishopric of York, his faithful adherence to the king procured his election m opposition to Simon de Langton, brother to the pri mate. The immaculate chastity of his Ufe was urged to the pope to procure his confirmation ; and the plea was allowed on a promise to supply the papal treasury -with a donative of no less than 10,000/,, and he accordingly received the pall on May 24, 1216, The straitened means to which he was reduced in order to meet the payment of a sum so enormous in those times ob teined for him a character for sordid avarice, an imputation which no doubt induced his contemporaries to believe the absurd story that is related of his having, during a famine, hoarded a quantity of corn, which became the resort of innumerable snakes, serpente, and other reptiles, and from which a fearful voice proceeded, com manding the ricks to be avoided, as they and all the possessions of the bishop be longed to the devil. That he was not truly charged with avarice, however, is proved by his gene rosity when he had cleared himself from Ms heavy debt Not only did he restore part of Ms cathedral, and make many munificent additions to the see, and to Ms church, but he presented the manor of Thorpe as a residence for his successors, and purchased also for them the palace at Westminster, which had been built by Hubert de Burgh. The former is still, under the name of Bishopsthorpe, in the occupation of the archbishops; and the latter, with the name of York Place, con tinued to be so tiU Cardinal Wolsey aUen- ated it to King Henry VIH., -when it received the new designation of Whitehall. His character for wisdom, prudence, and integrity was so high that in 26 Henry IH,, 1242, though at a very advanced age, he was left by Queen Eleanor, then regent, m the government of the kingdom when she went to join her husband in France. He presided over his see nearly forty years, and died at Fulham on May I, 1265. GEEY 313 His remains were removed to his cathedral, where a splendid monument was erected to Ms memory. (Godwin, 816, 469, 677 ; Hasted, i, 166 ; Le Neve ; Blomefield's Nonvich, i. 478.) GEEY, John de, was the nephew of the above Walter de Grey, being second son of his eldest brother, Henry, and of Isolda, the eldest of the five nieces and coheirs of Robert Bardolf. He was sheriff of Buck mghamshire and Bedfordshire in 23 Henry III., and had his seat at Eaton, near Fenny Stratford. In 30 Henry HI. he was made constable of the castle of Gannoc in North Wales, and was also justice of Chester. He offended the king in 35 Henry HI. by marrymg without his licence Johanna, the widow of Pauline Peyvre, who had been devoted io another person, and he was fined five hundred marks for his transgres sion, but shortly afterwards he is stated to have greatly ingratiated himself -with Henry by assummg the Cross, The Fine Roll of 1258 contains an evidence of the favour he thus obtamed, in the grant of a pardon of 800/, of the above fine and other debts which he owed to the crown. (Ex cerpt e Rot Fin. i. 458, U. 119, 167.) He was made steward of Gascony, custos of the castles of Northampton, Shrewsbury, Dover, and Hereford, and sheriff of the latter county. In 1260 he was among the justices itinerant sent into the counties of Somerset, Dorset, and Devon, When Henry submitted the determination of the differences between him and his barons to the decision of Louis, King of France, he was one of the barons who undertook that he should abide by it ; and during the war which foUowed he firmly adhered to his sovereign. After the battle of Evesham in 1265 he was made sheriff of the counties of Nottmgham and Derby, and died m the following year. Before his union with Johanna Peyvre, he had married Emma, daughter and heir of Geoffrey de GlanviUe, by whom he had a daughter and an only son, two of the de scendants of whom now sit in the House of Peers as Earl Wilton and Earl De Grey and Ripon. (Dugdale's Baron, i. 712, 716; Nicolas's Synopsis; &c.) GEEY, Henet (Eael of Kent), a Imeal descendant of the last-mentioned John de Grey, succeeded to the title of Earl of Kent on the death of his father Anthony in 1648, and had not long taken his seat among the peers before he was substituted for the Earl of Rutland in the commission from the parUament for the custody of their Great Seal. Clarendon (iv, 840, 408) calls Mm a man of far meaner parts than the Earl of Rutland, and says that the number of lords who attended the parliament was so smaU that their choice of the two who were to represent them was very limited. 314 GREY The commissioners held the Seal from November 10, 1643, tiU October 30, 1646, when it was given to the speakers of the two houses, (Journals!) In December 1647 the earl was one of the lords commissioners to take the four bills to the king at the Isle of Wight, and had to brmg them back with the king's refusal to assent to the destruction of the royal authority wMch they involved. He was renominated on March 15, 1648, chief commissioner of the Seal, m conjunction with another lord and two commoners, who continued m office till the death of the kmg, not one of them approving or taking any part in the tragic event. With that the power of the lords who were commis sioners virtuaUy terminated, but they re mained in office till the Commons, on February 6, 1649, voted the abolishment of the House of Peers, and two days after put the Seal Mto other hands. (White loeke, 283-378.) So ended the earl's political career. He died in 1651 ; and the title is now merged in that of Earl De Grey and Ripon. GEEY, William (Loed Geet de Wekke), was advanced to this peerage in 1624. From the commencement of the civil war he was an active partisan of the parUament, and one of the few peers that remained in the House of Lords while the rest joined the Mng, When Lord Fairfax suffered a defeat in the north, and the par liament were desirous to send to the Scots to assist them. Lord Grey on being named one of the deputation refused to go, and was committed to the Tower ; but, makmg his peace, he was soon after selected by the Lords as their speaker, in the absence of the lord keeper. In 1648 he was added to the commissioners of the Great Seal, and performed the duties of the office for nearly eleven months, the last few days being after the Mng's death, in the planning or execution of which fearful event he is not charged with concurring. With the abo lition of the House of Lords of course his office ceased, but he consented to be nomi nated ou the Council of State. ( Wliitehcke, 295-488 ; Clarendon, iv. 163^ 368, 416.) He survived the restoration of Charles II. more than fourteen years, and died in July 1674, His title became extinct in 1706. GEEYSTOKE, Henet DE, does not appear to have been a member ofthe baromalfamily of Greystoke iu Cumberland, He may therefore have been so called from Ms being born m that place. He was connected with the king's household or Exchequer in 27 Edward I., as well as several times after wards under Edward IL He acted as pay master of the forces in Nottingham and Derby, and was appointed by the latter Mng to assist the sheriff of Cumberland in arrest- GRIMBALD ing the Knights Templars. From 16 Ed-r ward HI. he held the office of custos of the lands and tenements which were reserved for the use of the king's chamber, and in this character various manors, &c., were E laced under his charge ; and in the par^ aments of 25 and 28 Edward HI. he was ordered to be present on the hearing of peti tions touching these lands, to give informal tion 'pur le roi et au le roi.' Dugdale introduces Mm in the twenty-seventh year as attomey-general ; but it is probably in reference to these matters oMy, as he does not appear to have been otherwise connected with the law. Though he is described as a ' clericus,' he could not have taken that grade m holy orders which prevented Mm from marrymg; for his widow Jane, the daughter of Sir WilUam Pickering, is said to have married CMef Justice Gascoigne. He had a grant of the French portion of the church of Mapeldurham, and of a mes suage and lands in Resceby m Yorkshire for his good services, and he was made a, baron of the Exchequer on October 6, 1356,. 30 Edward IIL, beyond wMch no trace of him remains. (Pari. Writs, i. 966, U. p, ii.. 648, n. ; N. Foedera, U. 1214; Abb. Rot Orig. U. 159-208 ; Rot ParL U. 236, 254.) GEIMBALD, Robeet, is inserted by Dug^ dale as a justicier m the reign of HemyH. (Orig. 100 ; Monast. vi. 425) ; but in the multipUcity of names of justiciers m thfr rolls of this reign, quoted by Madox and others, that of Robert Grimbald never occurs, although it does forty years after wards in that of Henry IH, The document to which his seal is attached is a charter granting certain lands m Dunnington to the priory of Osulveston in Leicestershire, and there are four others of the same descrip tion, m none of which is there any addition to his name at aU designating a judicial character. It appears, however, that he was united with Paganus from 2 to 8 Henry H., I156-II62, in the sheriffalty of Cambridge and Huntingdon ; and this, recollecting the judicial duties which appertained to that office, may have been the ground of naming him as a, justicier. He married Matilda, daughter and heir of Paganus de Hocton, who was probably the sheriff with whom he was associated. GEIMBALD, Peiee, is mti-oduced in Ma dox's List of the Barons of the Exchequer (U, 318), with a reference to a writ tested M 26 Hem-y IIL, 1241. There is a man date on the Close RoU (U. 207) of II Henry IIL, 1226, addressed to Magister PhiUp do Ardern and P. Grimbald, relative to certain business entrusted to them to transact in the bishopric of Durham, a duty which was likely to devolve on one connected ¦with the Exchequer. GEIMBALD, Robeet, was not impro bably a descendant of his before-mentioned GREMBTON namesake. He, as well as the other, was certainly resident in Northamptonshire, and m 9 Henry III, was appomted to conduct the qumzime of that county to Oxford. (Rot. Claris, ii. 74.) In the commission for justices itinerant in 1284, 18 Henry HI., he stood third of those nominated for Rutland, GEIMSTON, Haebottle, a descendant from Sylvester, the standard-bearer of the Conqueror, for whose services the parish of Grimston m Yorkshire, and various other manors in the East Riding, were the reward, was the son of Sir Harbottie Grimston, created a baronet in 1612, by EUzabeth, daughter of Ralph Coppinger, Esq,, of Stoke in Kent. He was bom at Bradfield Hall in Essex, and was at first intended for the law and entered at LincoM's Inn. But upon his brother's death he abandoned the study, till forming an attachment to the daughter of Sir George Croke, the judge refused to be stow her hand upon him unless he resumed his profession. He re-opened his law-books with all the ardour of a lover, and soon at tamed sufficient legal knowledge not only to satisfy Sir George, but also to obtain the post of recorder of Colchester, to which he was elected m 1638, being also retumed member for that town to the two parlia ments of 1640. Between the two parUaments Ms father died, and he succeeded to the title. In both of them he was one of the most vio lent opposers to the encroachments of the court, and a powerful advocate for the li berties of the people, being no doubt insti gated by the imprisonment suffered by his father for refusing to pay the loan-money. He was not very choice in his language, saymg in his speech against the advisers of sMp-money, that ' he was persuaded that they who gave their opinions for the legality of it did it against the dictamen of then- own conscience,' and calling Secretary Winde- bank ' the very pander and broker to the whore of Babylon. ' C ontributing two horses and twenty pounds in 1642 for the defence ofthe privileges of parUament, he was looked upon as one of the most active among the popular party; yet m 1643 he refused to subscribe the Solemn League and Covenant, and discontmued sitting m the house till it was laid aside. He then joined -with HoUes and the Presbyterian party against the Independents, and Cromwell m parti cular. He was one of the commissioners selected to treat -with the king in the Isle of Wight (Notes and Queries, 1st S. xii. 368 ; Whiteloeke, 384), when, though the negotiation was unsuccessful, his majesty was well pleased with his conduct, and on his return he urged upon the house the acceptance of the Mng's concessions. He then began to see the real object of the GEIMSTON 315 dominant faction, and, not consentingto their determination to get rid of the monarchy,, was with other members excluded the house. His influence 'with the army and the people was considered so great that he was put into confinement before the king's trial ; but was discharged by an order from Lord Fairfax on the very day of the execu tion, first entermg into an engagement not to act nor to do anythmg to the disservice of the parUament or the army. Cromwell's subsequent forcible dissolu tion of the parUament made it a matter of prudence that Grimston should retire to the Continent. At the same time he re signed the recordership of Colchester. Retummg to England in a few years, he was elected in Cromwell's new modelled parUament m 1666 as one of the sixteen members for Essex ; but, decUning to sign the engagement recognising CromweU's govemment, he was refused admittance to the house. He afterwards joined m the remonstrance of the secluded members, which protested against the assembly as not being the representative body of Eng land ; but no notice being taken of it, he quietly retired to the practice of his profes sion until more promising times. In De cember 1659 the Long Parliament was re stored to ite functions, and having dissolved itself m the following March, Sir Harbottle was appomted one of the council of state. Of the Convention Parliament, summoned on April 25, he was elected speaker, and distinguished himself by the pecuUar style of his oratory. In the addresses which he made to the kmg after his return the ful some style of his predecessors in the chair was revived, and even exceeded, -with the addition of absurd reiterations. He caUed the actors in the rebellion 'the [monsters who had been guilty of blood, precious blood, precious royal blood;' and in his speech, previous to the dissolution, he exclaimed, ' We must needs be a happy par Uament, a heaUng parliament, a reconciling and peaceful parUament, a parUament jjropiei* excellentiam, that may truly be called parlia- mentissimum parliamentum! ( Whiteloeke, 668 ; ParL Hist iv. 27, 113, 168,;) He had the honour of entertainmg the Mng on June 26, 1660, at his house m Lin coln's Inn Fields, and soon received a more substantial proof of the royal gratitude in the appointment of master of the Rolls, which was given him on November 3, though it was said that he gave Lord Clarendon 8000/. for the place. (Ch. ,Tust. Lee's Memor. in Law Mag. xxxvUi, 217,) He was then sixty-six years of age, and he held the office tUl his death, a period of twenty-three years. One of his decrees nearly cost him Ms life, NathaMel Bacon, of Gray's Inn, against whom it was pro nounced, offered a man 100/. to MU him ; 316 GEIMSTON and upon being cou'victed of the crime m 1664, was condemned to pay a fine of 1000 marks, to be imprisoned three months, and be of good behaviour for life, and to acknow ledge his offence at the bar of the Chancery. Bacon was discharged as insolvent in 1667, (I Siderfin, 230,) Sir Harbottle was also made chief steward of St, Albans, where he had purchased the manor of Gorhambury and other property, and recorder of Harwich, His judicial position did not prevent Ms sitting in par liament, in which he continued to be one of the representatives of the borough of Colchester till Ms death. He at last grew out of favour with the court, from his known disUke to the Roman CathoUc religion, which he made no attempt to conceal. When a bill was introduced in 1667 for changing the punishment of Romish priests and Jesmts from death to imprisonment for life, he indignantly asked, ' Is this the way to prevent Popery ? We may as soon make a good fan out of a pig's tail as a good bill out of this,' He asserted the right of the House of Commons to choose their own speaker when the king rejected Mr, Seymour in 1679 ; and at the close of his Ufe he was compelled to dismiss Bumet, the preacher at the Rolls, for a sermon on the 6th of November, which was mterpreted as levelled against the king's conduct, (ParL Hist iv 1096; Burnet, i. 696.) He died on January 2, 1686 (Luttrell, i. 384; 1 Vernon, 284), of natural decay, being then above eighty years of age, and was buried in St. Michael's Church, St. Albans. Sir Henry Chauncy, his contem porary, thus describes him : ' He had a nimble fancy, a quick apprehension, a rare memory, an eloquent tongue, and a sound judgment. He was a person of free access, sociable m company, sincere to his friends, hospitable in his house, charitable to the poor, and an exceUent master to his servants,' He published the Reporte of his father-m- law Sir George Croke, ha'ving first trans lated them into English, and is said to have greatly assisted Bumet in Ms ' History of the Reformation.' By his first wife, Mary, Sir G, Croke's daughter, he had six sons and two daugh ters ; by his second, Annie, daughter of Sir Nathaniel Bacon, niece to Lord Bacon, and -widow of Sir Thomas Meautys, he left no children. On the decease of his son Samuel in 1700 the title became extinct. The estate of Gorhambury, -with large landed property, he left to his great-nephew WUUam Lukyn, who assumed the name of Grimston, and m I7I9 was created a peer of Ireland by the title of Baron of Dim- boyne and Viscount Grimston, His gi-and- son was created Baron Verulam in England in 1790, a title which was converted into an earldom in 1816, (Croke Family, 606- GE"YMESBY 13; Chauncy's Heits, 46o; Collins' s Peerage, viii. 214.) GEOSE, Nash, was the son of Edward Grose, a resident of London, where he was bom about the year 1740, He was caUed to the bar at LincoM's Inn in November 1766, and took the degree of serjeant in 1774, soon commanding the leading busmess in the Common Pleas, which he reteined till he was raised to the bench. He was appointed a judge of the King's Bench on February 9, 1787, and received the honour of kmght- hood. After occupying the same seat for twenty-six years, his infirmities obUged him to resign it m Easter vacation 1813. His death took place in the foUowing year, on May 31, when Ms remams were in terred m the Isle of Wight, where he had a beautiful seat caUed The Priory. (Term Rep. 561 ; Gent. Mag. I8I4, 888, 629,) Both in his private and judicial cha racter he was MgMy respected; but con temporary critics, of course, differ as to his powers and efficiency. By some he was considered to have lost m credit what he gamed m rank, and this couplet was per petrated against Mm : Quails sit Grotius Judex uno accipe versu ; Exclamat, dubitat, balbutit, stridet et errat. Lord CampbeU (Ch. Just. iu. 155) says that Ms aspect was very fooUsh, and that he had the ' least reputation ' among Ms coUeagues ; but he adds that 'tMs supposed weak brother, though much ridiculed, when he differed from his brethrfen, was voted by the profession to be right.' Sir Nash married Miss Dennett, of the Isle of Wight. GEYMESBY, Edmiwd DB, was of the town of that name in Lmcolnshire, where he had considerable property. (Abb. Rot. Orig. ii. 156, 176.) He was probably the son of Simon de Grymesby, escheator to the king, and is mentioned as one of the procurators to appear for the abbot of Chomton m the parliamente of 17 and 18 Edward H. (ParL Writs, U. p. U, 938.) In the next year he was parson of the church of Preston. (Rot ParL i, 437,) In 7 Edward HL, 1388, he received the ap pointment of keeper of the rolls in the Irish Chancery (Cal. Rot Pat. 117), but two years afterwards he was sent to various parties m England to obtain loans for the liing to carry on the war -with Scotland, (N. Foedera, U, 912,) He was no doubt then a master or clerk in the English Chancery, m which office he contmued to act till the 25th, and perhaps the 27th, year of the reign, being a receiver of peti tions in all the parliaments assembled in that Mterval, (Rot Pari U. 126-236.) During this penod the Great Seal was twice placed under his seal, from December 16, 1340, to the end of the year, and from September 2 to October 8, I35I. GUILFOED GiriLFOED, Loed. See F. Noeth, GtTLDEFOED, Henet de, settled at Hempsted in Kent, in 26 Edward I, was appomted to perambulate the forests of the northem counties, and two years_ after wards to perform the same duties in the counties of Salop, Stafford, and Derby, In 32 Edward I. he appears at the head of the justices itinerant sent to visit the Isle of Jersey, and during the whole pf this time he was summoned among the justices to parUament, (Rot ParL i, 130, 180, 42l5 In November 1306 he was con stituted one of the judges of the Court of Common Pleas; but he was not re-appomted imder Edward H, ; Hervey de Staunton was placed there in his stead. He stiU contmued to be employed to take assizes, and as a justice itinerant. He died in the early part of 6 Edward IL, his last summons to parliament being dated on July 8, 1312, the first day of that regnal year. Several of his descendante were sheriffs of Kent, one of whom entertamed Queen Elizabeth at his manor-house. Ro bert, the last of the name, was made a baronet in 1686 by King James IL, but, leaving no issue, the title became extmct at his death, GUNDEVILLE, Hugh de, at the begin nmg of the reign of Henry IL, fiUed some responsible office m the Exchequer or in the Mng's household. In 1170, 16 Henry H,, he was despatched with William Fitz- John to arrest Becket, whose fate, how ever, was sealed before their arrival at Canterbury; and m 1172 he and Robert Fitz-Bernard were appointed lieutenants under Humphrey de Bohun in the govem ment of the city of Waterford. He held the sheriffalty of Hampshire from 16 Henry II. for ten years, that of Northamptonshire from 21 Henry II, for three years, and that of Devonshire m the 24th and 25th years of that reign. In 20 Henry H., II74, he was appointed, by writ of Richard de Luci, the chief jus ticiary, one of the five justices itmerant to flx the taUage of Hampshire ; and he was selected in II76 by the councU of North ampton as one of the eighteen justices itinerant who were sent round England. His pleas whUe so engaged extended over the fom- foUowing years. (Madox, i. 125- 188.) He died about the end of this reign, the Pipe RoU of 1 Richard I. (213) refer ring to property which had been Ms, _ GTJNDE-Y, Nathaniel, of a Dorsetshire family, was born at Lyme Regis, and entered the Middle Temple as a member m 1720, but, after being called to the bar m 1726 removed to Lmcoln's Inn, and was mad^ akmg's counsel in July 1742. Here- presented Dorchester m his native county from 1741 tiU his elevation to the bench. That he was considered stiff and pretentious GURDON 317 by his brethren may be presumed from the following character given of him in the ' Causidicade,' as a supposed candidate for the office of soUcitor-general vacant m 1742:—In the front of the crowd then appear'd Mr. G — nd— y, ' To this office,' quo' he, • my pretentions are sundry ; Imprimis my merit, e'en great as t' attract His m— J — y's notice, so nice and exact, As lately to call me inside of the bar, From among the rear-guard — poor souls, how they stare ! "Which is plain that he meant me some further preferment, More -worthy my learning, parts, and discernment. More claims I might urge, but this I insist on Is sufficient to merit the office in question,' Then the president thus, • You're too full of surmises ; The man -who is stiff, like an oaJi, seldom rises.' He waited eight years for his advance ment, when m May 1760 he was appointed a judge of the Common Pleas. He enjoyed the post less than four years, dymg on the circuit at Launceston on March 23, 1754. He was buried at Musbury m Devonshire. (Hutchins's Dorset, i, 249, 379 ; Gent Mag. xxiv. 191, Ixi. II69,) GTTNTHOEP, William, described as ' clericus,' probably held some office in the Treasury or Exchequer before he received the responsible appointment of treasurer of Calais, on March 20, 1368, 42 Edward IH. This place he held tiU October 26, 1873 (N. Fcedera, iii. 844, 992), and then was made a baron of the Exchequer. The latest mention of Mm in that character it is 9 Richard II. (Rot ParL iii, 204), but up to 18 Richard II, he is re corded as granting lands to the chantry of the chm-ch of St. Wolstan, in Grantham, Lincolnshire, and to the chapter of St. Mary, Southwell, in Nottinghamshire. (Cal. Inquii. p. m. iu. 162, 187.) GUEDON, Adam, son of Adam Gurdon, one of the baiUffs of Alton in HampsMre (Madox, ii. 304), married Custancia, the daughter and heir of John de Venuz, with whom he received extensive lands at Sel- bome in that county, together -with the bailiwick ofthe king's forests of Wulvermar and Axiholt. He seems to have been of a litioious disposition, no less than six entries occurring m the 'AbbreviatioPlacitorum' of causes decided agamst him. He joined the party of De Montford, and even after the battle of Evesham raised an array against his sovereign m HampsMre, Prince Edward advanced against the rebels, and coming up with them between Farnham and Alton, he inconsiderately leaped over the trench that surrounded their camp before his forces could foUow him, Adam met him, and, after a severe fight hand to hand, was at last mastered and obliged to yield himself 318 GUENEY prisoner to the prince, Edward generously gave Mm Ms life, and eventuaUy his liberty, and thus Secured the services of a brave and grateful enemy, (Rapin, iii. 170.) In 8 Edward I., I280_, Dugdale places him among the justices itinerant in Wilt shire ; but the pleas of that iter were con fined to the forest, and he was no dou'bt appointed in virtue of his bailiwick, as he is not mentioned upon any other circuit. He was frequently summoned to perform miUtary service, and in 23 Edward I, was nominated custos of the seashores of Hamp shire, and a commissioner of array in that county and iu Dorset and Wilte, In 33 Edward I., 1306, he -was elected a representative by the 'communitas' of Scot land, and constituted a justice there, and died in the same year. (Rot Pari, i, 267; ParL Writs, i. 161, &o, ; CaL Inquis. p. m. 12, 196, 212.) Besides his first wife Custancia, he mar ried two others— viz., Almeria, whom he divorced after havmg two sons; and Agnes, by whom he had a daughter, Johanna, to whom he left his property in Selborne, and who married Richard A.phard. That estate, stiU called Gurdon Manor, now belongs to Magdalen College, Oxford, GUENEY, John, The family of Baron Gurney may boast of a legal pedigree ex tending over more than a century and a half, inasmuch as his grandfather, Thomas Gurney, flourishing from 1706 to 1770, and his father, Joseph Gumey, were the re cognised shorthand writers, not only em ployed confidentially by the government and in parliamentary committees, but engaged by authority in reportmg the proceedings on all the important trials occurrmg during the period. His mother was a daughter of William Brodie, Esq., of Mansfield, andhe was bom in London on February 14, 1768, His education was commenced at St, Paul's School, and completed under the Rev. Mr, Smith at Bottesdale in Suffolk. Accompany- ing his father on his professional occupa tions in the courts of law, he natm-ally im bibed a predilection for that profession, and for practice m the art of forensic eloquence he frequented those debatmg societies in' which some of the greatest orators had made their first essays, adopting those political principles of freedom and reform which then made opposition popular. Hav ing entered the Inner Temple, he was called to the bar by that society in May 1793, He had not long to wait for employment. In the very first term, and the sittings after, he was retamed as junior counsel to defend Daniel Isaac Eaton for two libels ; and m the following February, in consequence of the absence of his senior, he led the defence of the same individual for another libel. On that occasion he delivered an animated, humorous, and effective speech, which at GUENEY once estabUshed him in his profession/ and placed him on a height from which he never descended. The first consequence was that he was engaged as assistant counsel to Messrs. Erskine and Gibbs in the memorable state trials of Hardy, Home Tooke, and Thelwall for Mgh treason, in all of which he proved Mmself a most efficient auxiUary. These occurred before he had been two years at the bar, and m aU of them verdicts of ac quittal were pronounced for his cliente. 'The same success attended his efforte as counsel for Crossfield and others, arraigned in 1796 on what was nicknamed the Pop gun Plot, and for John Binns when mdicted with O'Coigley, Arthur O'Connor, and others for Mgh treason m 1798, m both of which he most ably summed up the pri soners' defence, (State Trials, xxU.-xxvU.) At the London and Middlesex Sessions, where he then practised, he soon got a de cided lead, and graduaUy acquired such a footing m Wes-taninster Hall and on the Home Circuit as warranted him in apply- mg for a silk gown. But his supposed poli tics were agamst him, and it was not tiU he had been three-and-twenty years at the bar that he obtamed it, and then only in consequence of the extiaordmary abUity he displayed m prosecutmg Lord CocMane, Cochrane Johnstone, and the other parties impUcated m propagatmg a false story of Bonaparte's defeat and death, for the pur pose of speculatmg m the funds. Here, m opposition to a whole phalanx of the most a'ble counsel at the bar, he, almost unaided, gamed a complete triumph m the cou'viction of all the defendante. His promotion could no longer be delayed, and in I8I6 he took rank as Mng's counsel. For sixteen years more he contmued to labour as an advocate, during the whole of which period he shared the lead of the King's Bench -with Sir James Scarlett, Sir John Copley, and one or two eminent mem bers of the bar, and of the Home Circuit he soon became the acknowledged head. It fell to his lot to lead the prosecution of two of the Cato Street conspirators in 1820, who, with the remainder of those fried, were convicted on the clearest evidence. (Ibid. xxx, 711, I84I,) He at length met his reward. After forty years of continued success, tMoughout the whole of which he was conspicuous for Ms respectful yet independent demeanour to the com-t, and his kindly and courteous manner to all, and particularly for the ac knowledged virtues of his private Ufe, he was promoted to the bench on February 13, 1832, as one of the barons of the Exchequer, when he was knighted. For thirteen years SU John Gumey held this judicial position; and then, from Ms advanced age and the failure of his health, HADFIELD lie iresigned Ms seat m January 1846, only to die on the Ist of the foUo'wing March at his house in Lincoln's Inn Fields. With out taMng a high rank as a deep-read and black-letter lawyer, he supported as a judge the reputation he had gamed as an advo- •Cate for discrimmation, acuteness, and dis cretion, and his former experience gave him a recognised superiority on crimmal trials. He was brought up among Dissenters, but in his latter years he conformed to the Church of England. Whatever were his doctrinal opinions at different periods of Ms life, as a man he was imiversaUy respected, HALE 319 and Ms charities and practice during the whole of his lengthened existence were the best proofs of his having imbibed the spirit of the Master whom he ever professed to serve. By his wife, Maria, daughter of Dr. Hawes, he left several cMldren, one of whom, Rus seU Gumey, Esq., exhibits, as recorder of London, such high judicial powers and such deep legal knowledge that he has been fre quently called upon by the government to preside at the assizes in the place of judges temporarily incapacitated by Ulness. He is member for Southampton, and has been called to the privy council of his sovereign. H HADEIELD, Waltee de, was one of the justices itinerant who set the assize on the king's demesnes in Essex and Hertfordshire in 20 Henry IL, 1174. (Madox, i.l24.) The manor of "Writell in Essex was granted to him and John Fitz-WUliam in 4 Richard I,, 1192 (Ihid. ii, 167), between which date and ¦1201 he died, (Chancellor's RoU, 3 John.) HADLO'W, or HANDLO, Nicholas de, of the manor of Court-at-Street in Kent, was raised to the bench about November 1254, ¦and continued to act up to September 1266, In 42 Henry III, he was one of the three who were assigned ' ad tenendum Bancum Begis apud Westm,,' until the kmgarranged more fully for that court, (Dugdale's Orig. 43; Excerpt e Rot Fin. U, 211-446,) He died iu 1270, HAGET, GEOFPEETjin 10 RichardI,, 1198, was associated 'with two others as a justice itmerant over Yorkshire and the other north-. •em counties, to hear pleas of the crown. He was the eldest son of Bertram Haget, who possessed considerable property in York- .shire, and who granted a hermitage and land m the park of Helagh in that county, upon which Geoffrey afterwards buUt a ¦church, (Monast. vi, 437,) HAGHMAN, or HA'WMAN, Nicholas, was probably the son of Alan de Haghman, ¦and Amicia his 'wife, as in 6 Edward U., 1313, he was parson of the parish of Evers- ley in Hampshire, of the manor and ad vowson of wMch Alan and Amicia became possessed in 5 Edward I. j, , -r. He was constituted a baron of the Lx- ohequer on October 3, 1336, 10 Edward HL ; but Ms name was not included in the new patent on January 20, I34I, (App. Rot Orig. i. 195'; Abb. Placit 191.) HALE, Simon de, whose principal estate was situate in Yorkshfre, was sheriff of that county tUl 8 Hemy III. Li the next year he was at the head of the justices itinerant appointed to no less than ten counties, and in II Henry III, to three counties more. (Rot. Claus. i. 450, 630, ii, 45-213.) It is manifest, from his being placed at the head of the liste, that he was something more than an ordinary justice itinerant. In 10 Henry III, he was appointed sheriff of Wiltshire, and Ms people m Yorkshire were exempted from the rates of the county and hundred during his ab sence. He is last mentioned in 1240, when he again • appears as one of the justices itinerant before whom a fine was levied at York, HALE, Matthew, This eminent judge, whom aU look up to as one of the brightes't luminaries of the law, as weU for the soundness of his learning as for the ex cellence of his life, descended from an old and respectable family in Gloucestershire, His grandfather, Robert Hale, a wealthy clothier at Wootton-under-Edge, had five sons, the second of whom, also Robert, a barrister of LmcoM's Inn, had by his wife, Joan, daughter of Matthew Poyntz, Esq,, of Alderley, an only son, the futm-e judge, who was left an orphan five years after his birth. He was born at Alderley on No vember I, 1609, and on his father's death he was placed under the guardianship of Ms kinsman, Anthony Kingscot, Esq., who first sent him to a pmitamcal grammar school at Wootton-under-Edge, and then to Magdalen Hall, Oxford, intendmg- him for the clerical profession. He did not stay long enough to take a degree; but, like most young men, he was attracted by the pleasm-es mcident to his age. He was expert m athletic exercises, and it is related of him that one of Ms masters, who was Ms tenant, ha'ving told bim that he was better 320 HALE at his o-wn trade than himself. Hale, proud ofthe praise, promised him the house he lived in if he could hit him a blow^ on the head. The master' of course succeeded iu doing so, and gained possession of the house, while Hale received an early lesson how to estimate a flattermg tongue. He soon discarded the idea of becommg a divine, and determmed on a soldier's life, an mclination which he would pro bably have foUowed had not a family law suit taken him up to London to consult Serjeant Glanville. That leamed man soon observed his superior judgment and pecu liar fitness for the study of the law, and advising him to adopt it as his profession. Hale entered himself at Lincoln's Inn, and was called to the bar on May 17, 1686. During this mterval he forsook all his former vanities, which had never been tainted with any vice or immorality, and devoted himself wholly to the improve ment of his Ufe and the study of his pro fession. He Mmself states that for the first two years his application extended to sixteen hours a day, which, nearly bringmg him to his grave, he was obliged to reduce to eight hours, and acknowledged that he thought six hours, weU used, were suffi cient. (Seivard's Anecdotes, iv. 416.) At the same time he paid strict attention to his religious duties, never once missing attendance at church on Sunday for six- and-thirty years. As a diversion from his abstruser studies he made Mmself a pro ficient in mathematics and various branches of philosophy, and acquired considerable skUl in medical and anatomical knowledge, not neglectmg history, both ancient and modem, nor, particularly, the varied forms of theological doctrines. Besides introducing him into many de sirable friendships, his deep learning and kno-wn mdustry soon msured him good practice at the bar. He was entirely a loyalist, though he religiously and upon principle avoided taking any part in the dissensions of the times. In 1648 he was engaged for Archbishop Laud, and is said to have composed the speech in defence which was spoken by Mr. Heme. In 1647 he was one of the counsel appointed to defend the eleven members, and he also appeared for Lord Macguire at his trial m the King's Bench for high treason, (State Trials, iv. 677, 702 ; Whiteloeke, 258.) According to the statement of Burnet, he offered to plead for the kmg on his trial; and Serjeant Runnington (!Edit. of Hale's Common Law) suggests that he fumished his royal cUent with the line of defence which he actually adopted, m denying the jurisdiction of the court, which of course precluded the appearance of any counsel. In the subsequent trials of the Duke of Hamilton, the Earl of Holland, Lord Capel, HALE and others for high treason agamst the par Uament, he was employed in their defence, and his argumente were urged with soi^ much boldness and energy that the attor ney-general threatened him for appearing^ against the govemment. Hale indignantly retorted that he was ' pleadmg in defence of the laws, which they professed they would maiutam and preserve ; and that he was domg his duty to his cUent, and was not to be daunted with threatenings.' Notwithstandmg his monarchical prin ciples, he deemed it his duty to acquiesce in the existmg govemment, and not to. engage m any faction. He therefore sub scribed the engagement to be true and faithful to the Commonwealth, and was accordingly permitted to appear before the High Court of Justice in 1651 to take ex ceptions to the charge against the Presby terian Christopher Love — a privUege re fused to Mr, Archer and Mr, "WaUer, because they had not compUed with that formality. (State Trials, v. 211.) Though thus acting agamst them, the parUament showed thefr estimation of his legal know ledge by placing Hale m the next year at the head of the committee for the preven tion of the delays and expenses of law pro ceedings, (Whiteloeke, 520,) When Cromwell assumed absolute power Hale was one of the many who were dis gusted at his usurpation. The protector, however, who was no doubt sincere m his wish to strengthen his govemment by havmg men of known ability and honesty on the bench, and seeing what mfiuence Hale ex ercised by his learning and his courage, re solved to employ him as one of the judges. Hale naturally hesitated to accept the proffered office, but on the representetion that he would not be requUed to acknow ledge the usurper's authority, and at the urgent solicitation of Sir Orlando Bridge- man and other loyaliste, backed by the opinion of his clerical friends, he determmed to accept the appointment, upon the con viction that it was absolutely necessary that under all govemmente property should be secured, andjustice impartially administered. Accordmgly, on January 25, 1664, he was made a judge of the Common Pleas. He altogether refused to ti-y offenders' against the state, not recognising the pre sent authorities, and boldly and conscien tiously administered justice between man and man, regardless of the party to wHch either was attached. He convicted and hung one of Cromwell's soldiers for a foul murder of a Mng's man, and he dismissed a j ury because he discovered that it had been returned by CromweU's order and not by the sheriff. The protector on his return from the circuit told him ' he was not fit to be a judge,' to which he simply answered' 'that it was vei-y true,' However angry HALE and dissatisfied Cromwell might be, he could not afford to dismiss so popular a man, and was obUged, perhaps was glad, to pass over his refusal in 1665 to assist at the trial of Colonel Penruddock at Exeter, Hale therefore was continued on the bench, but upon the death of Cromwell m Sep tember 1668, not even the importumties of his friends and brother judges could induce him to accept a new commission from the Protector Richard, In the July (1664) after he became a judge, which did not then disqualify him for a seat in parliament, Hale was returned for his native county. The first business of this parliament was the consideration of the system of govemment to be adopted. Violent discussions foUowed, tiU Mr, Justice Hale proposed an expedient that seemed reasonable to the majority. It was to the effect ' that the single person in possession should exercise the supreme magistracy, with such powers, limitations, and quaUfica tions as the parliament should afterwards declare.' But the protector, fearing lest his power should thus be gradually taken from him, shut up the house, and would not re-admit the members till each had subscribed an unconditional recognition of his authority. Many refused to sign, and among them most probably was Hale, as his name does not subsequently appear either as a speaker or as a member of any of the committees. He was not elected to the only other parliament caUed by Crom weU, M 1666; but m that summoned by Pro tector Richard in January and dissolved m April 1659 he was chosen for the umversity of Oxford, but he seems to have been silent amid the dissensions of that short session. Upon the election of the Convention Parlia ment, in April 1660, Hale was agam re tumed for Gloucestershire. In that he was most active, being selected as a manager of the conference with the Lords which led to the retum of the king, and as one of the committee to examine the acte of govem ment lately passed, and to report how the legal proceedings that had taken place might, not'withstanding all U-regularities, be con firmed. (Burtcm, i. xxxii. iii, 142; Pari. Hist, iv, 24.) Burnet says (i. 88) that he attempted to bind Charles to certain con ditions, by moving for a committee to look into the conces.sions that had been offered by the late king durmg the war, and to suggest such propositions as should be sent over to the kmg. TMs motion, leading to a settlement which might have prevented much future mischief, was dexterously coimteracted by Monk. On the arrival of Charles, though Hale was not immediately replaced in his judicial position, he was at once confirmed m his degree of serjeant, and in that character was included in the commission for the trial of HALE 321 the regicides. At the termination of those doleful proceedings he was, m spite of Ms declared reluctance, constituted chief baron of the Exchequer on November 7 (I Siderfin, 3, 4), and so great was his desire to escape the honour of knighthood that he avoided the kmg's presence, until Lord Clarendon contrived an unexpected meeting with his majesty, who immediately conferred upon him the accustomed distinction. In every stage of his career Hale was accustomed to put into writing his reflec tions on the incidents of the time, and to lay down regulations for his conduct. Among many excellent rules for his guid ance as a judge was one 'to abhor aU private soUcitations.' Actmg on this, he rebuked a noble duke who appUed to him about a cause in which his grace was concerned, who, complaming of his rough reception, was -told by the king to be ' con tent that he was no worse used, for he beUeved he himself should have been used no better if he had solicited him in any of his own causes.' Another of his rules was ' not to be biassed with compassion to the poor or favour to the rich;' and so strict was he in its appUcation that he msisted on paying for a buck that was pre sented to him on the circmt before he tried a cause in wMch the donor was a party. After presiding in the Exchequer for nearly eleven years, he was promoted to the chief justiceship of the King's Bench on May 18, I67I. He remained m that dignified post for almost five years, when his bad health and increasing mfirmities induced him to resign it on February 21, 1676, in opposition to the wishes of the king and the solicitations of his friends and coUeagues, But he felt that he could not conscientiously retam a position the duties of which he was not able fully to perform, and the near approach of death made him desirous of leisure for its contemplation. Sir Heneage Fmch speaks of Mm as 'a chief justice of so mdefatigable an mdustry, so invincible a patience, so exemplary an mtegrity, and so magnanimous a contempt of worldly things, -without which no man can be truly great ; and to aU tMs a man that was so absolutely a master of the science of the law, and even of the most abstruse and hidden parts of it, that one may truly say of his Imowledge in the law what St. Austin said of St. Hierome's knowledge in divinity — "Quod Hierony- mus nescivit, mdlus mortaUum unquam scivit." ' These and other contemporaneous eulogies have been echoed 'by almost every writer during the two centuries that have elapsed since he flourished, and the more fully have been laid open to the world the prmciples that gmded him in Ms judicial career, and the daily practices and habits of his private Ufe, the more confirmed has 322 HALE been the admiration of his character, so that he is scarcely ever named except in terms of respect and veneration. Survmg his resignation scarcely ten months. Sir Matthew died on Christmas Day 1676. By his special direction his remains were interred in the churchyard of Alderley. A list of his numerous writings, few of which were published during Ms life, is given in most of the memoirs from which this sketch is compUed. Those which most -will be remembered are his ' History of the Pleas of the Crown; ' his ' Preface to BoUe's Abridgement,' contaming excellent advice for the guidance of young studente, in whom he ever took a special interest ; and his 'Analysis of the Law,' wMch formed the basis of Blackstone's 'Com mentaries.' His philosophical and reUgious works eminently show Ms varied learmng and his contemplative piety, and the MSS. which he bequeathed to LincoM's Inn li brary afford abundant testimony of his un wearied industryin coUectmg and transcrib ing the valuable records of the Mngdom. Of his two wives he had issue by the flrst only. She was Anne, daughter of Sir Henry Moore, of Fawley in Berkshire, and grandchild of Sir Francis Moore, the famous serjeant-at-law in the reign of James I. Two only of their ten children survived the judge. Late in life he mar ried, secondly, Anne, daughter of Joseph Bishop, of Fawley, described by Baxter as ' a woman of no estate, but suitable to his disposition, to be to him as a nurse,' She survived him for many years, and is spoken of m his will in the most affectionate terms. The male Une of his family has been long extinct. HALE, Beenaed, was born m 1677 at King's "Walden in Hertfordshire, an estate which had been in the possession of the family smce the time of Queen Elizabeth, He was the eighth son of William Hale, who represented the county in I66I and 1678, and of Mary, daughter of Jeremiah Elwes, Esq., of Roxby in Lincolnshire, Having entered the society of Gray's Inn, he took Ms degree of barrister in February 1704. He gained so considerable a repu tation as an able lawyer that on June 28, 1722, he was constituted chief baron of the Irish Exchequer, where he remained for nearly three years. From this position he was removed on June I, 1726, to the EngUsh Court of Exchequer as one of the puisne barons, when he was knighted. He sat there little more than four years, and died on November 7, 1729, at Abbots Langley, in the church of which his re mains are mterred. He married Anne, daughter of J. Thoresb)', Esq., of Northamptonshire, and left a large family. HALES HALES, Cheistophee, derived hia name from a place so caUed m Norfolk, where Roger de Hales possessed property in the reign of Henry II. Before the close of Edward III.'s reign the family had re moved into Kent and was settled atHalden, near Tenterden. The unfortunate Robert de Hales, prior of St. John of Jerusalem and treasurer of England under Richard IL, who was barbarously murdered by the rebels m I38I, was of this fanuly, and from his brother Sir Nicholas descended no less thau three emment lawyers who graced the judicial bench — Christopher and John m the reign of Henry "VIH., and James in that of Edward "VI, Christopher Haleswas the son of Thomas, the younger brother of the father of John, so that the two judges were flrst cousins. His mother was AUcia, daughter of Hum phrey Eveas. Receivmg his legal educa tion at Gray's Inn, he rose to be an ancient in I6I6, and reader m 1524. On August 14, 1525, he became soUoitor-general, and attomey-general on June 3, 1629. Durmg the seven years that he fUled this office he had to conduct the proceedmgs against several iUustrious persons who had mcurred the Mng's displeasure. He prosecuted Wolsey by an indictment to wMch the cardinal made no defence ; he appeared for the kmg agamst Sir Thomas More and Bishop Fisher on their last arraignment; and the tiials of Queen Anne Boleyn and those charged with being impUcated with her occurred duiing the last few months of his official tenure (State Trials, i. 370, 889) ; but history charges Mm with no harshness m performmg the deUcate duties thus devolvmg upon Mm. He succeeded Thomas CromweU as master of the Rolls on July 10, 1536_, and retamed the place for the flve remaining years of his life. He died in June 1541, and was buried at Hackington, or St. Stephen's, near Can terbury. His large possessions, many of which were granted to him by the kmg on the dissolution of the monasteries, were divided among the three daughters he had by his -wife EUzabeth, the daughter of John Caunton, an alderman of London, (Weever, 260; Hasted.) HALES, John, is described by Wotton (i. 219) to have been the first cousm of Christopher, but Hasted makes him the uncle of Christopher, representing him as the elder brother of Christophers father, instead of the son of that elder brother. If Hasted is right, John's father was Henry Hales, and his mother JuUan, daughter of Richard Capel, of Lenden, near Tenterden ; if Wotton is right, Henry was Ms grand father, and another John was his father. There is a curious entry with regard to them in the books of Gray's Inn, of which HALES they both were members, by wMch it appears that in July 1529 John Hales communicated to the society that Sir Thomas NeviU would accept Christopher Hales, then attomey-general, to be his bedfeUow in Ms chamber there. John Hales became a reader in that house in I5I4, and again in 1620. Residing at the manor of the Dungeon, or Dane John, near Canterbury, he was the acting steward -of the abbey of St. Augustme. As he does not appear as an advocate m the Reports, he probably held an office in the Exchequer, the barons of that court bemg at that time usually selected from among those who were conversant -with that department. He attamed the place of third baron on 'October 1, 1622, and was promoted to be second baron on May 14, 1628. He still held this position on August I, 1539, as John Smith then received a grant of the office in reversion on his death or retire ment. (Orig. 273, 292; Rymer, iii. 788.) He probably died shortly afterwards, John Smith taking his place in the next Michael mas Term. By Ms wife Isabel, daughter of Stephen Harris (Harvey, according to Hasted), he had four sons. His eldest, James, is the next-mentioned judge, and the descendante of two of the' others respectively were raised to baronetcies m 1611 and 1660; but both haye become extinct. ( Wotton, i, 219, in, 96, 162,) HALES, James. James Hales was the •eldest son of the above John Hales, by his -vrife Isabel Harris, or Harvey, Like his father, he studied the law at Gray's Inn, where he was three times reader — in 1532, in 1637, and in 1540, when he assumed the ¦decree of the coif. In 16'44 he was made one of the Mng's Serjeants, and soon after had a grant from. Henry VIH. of the manor of Clavertigh, with lands called Monken Lands in Eleham, Kent, (Hasted, -yiU. 106.) At the coronation of Edward 'VI. he was one of the forty who were made knights of the Bath. He was selected in 1649 as one of the commissioners ' super hsereticfi. pra- vitate' (Rymer, xv. 181, 250) ; and havmg on the lOth of May following been advanced to the bench by Edward VL as a justice of the Common Pleas, he sat there durmg the rest of the reign. He was one of the judges who pronounced the sentence of deprivation against Bishop Gardiner (iState Trials, i, 630) in February I55I, and had reason to flnd that that prelate when he attained power did not forget those before whom he was arraigned. Although firmly attached to the doctrmes of the Reformation, and conscious as he must have been of the danger of a revul sion, should a piincess who had even through persecution refused to renounce the ancient ritual succeed to the throne. HALES 323 Sir James Hales, when called upon by the Duke of Northumberland to jom the other judges in authenticatMg the mstrument by which the succession was to be changed and the crown was to be placed on a Pro testant head, boldly refused to affix his signature, declaring the attempt to be both unla-wful and unjust. The same flrmness he had thus shown in supporting the succession according to law, he exhibited immediately afterwards at the assizes in Kent m reference to the statutes relative to religion. Some indict ments having been brought before him against certain persons for nonconformity, he in his charge to the grand jury, regard less of the changes which might be ex pected under the present government, courageously pointed out what the law then actually was, and what it devolved upon them in the exercise of their duty to do. Although this was certainly not the way to 'stand weU in her grace's favour,' yet the queen appomted Mm one of the commission to try Sir Andrew Dud ley and others for high treason M August, and on October 4 granted him his new patent m the Common Pleas, thus appa rently overlooMng Ms neglect of her known wishes, and doing justice to the honesty of his principles. But this would not satisfy the bigoted chancellor Bishop Gardiner, before whom two days afterwards he came -with his feUows to take Ms oath of office. On that occasion the harsh prelate required him 'to make his purgation,' and a 'col loquy ' took place, in -which the judge justi fled his conduct, speaking plamly of his intentions to support the queen and the law, but at the same time to adhere to his religion, while the bishop taunted him with his ' lacMng no conscience,' and, after threatening but not movmg Mm, dismissed him -without his oath. Within a few days the bishop, in a true persecuting spirit, had him committed to prison, where his incarceration lasted several months, durmg which many attempts were made to Mduce him to embrace the Popish doctrme, not only by workmg on Ms fears of the -torments prepared for those who persisted m their heresy, but by the earnest persuasions of Foster, a Hampshire gentle man sent for the purpose, of Bishop Day, and of his brother judge Sir WilUam Port- man, He was at last overcome, but his recantation had such an effect upon his mmd that he attempted in the absence of his servant to kUl himself with his pen knife. The servant's return] saved his life, and being discharged from confinement, he was ' brought to the queen's presence, who gave him words of great comfort.' His release took place about April 1664, but his mmd was not at ease, and m the course of the next year, while staymg at his t2 324 HALS nephew's house at Thamngton, near Canter bury, he M a fit of despondency drowned himself in a river in the parish of St. Mildred. There is another account, that Sir James's death was occasioned by his crossing the river over a narrow bridge, from which he accidentally feU and was dro-wned, at the age of eighty-five. (^Holinshed, iv, 8 ; State Trials, i, 714 ,- Hasted ; Burnet.) Which ever of these stories is the true one, it is certain that a verdict oi felo de se was pronounced by the coroner s inquest ; for ¦there are two cases reported — The Bishop of CMchester v. Webb (2 Dyer, 107), and Lady Margaret Hales v. Petit (Plowden, 263) — ^the arguments and judgments in which proceeded on that finding by the jury. The hair-splitting subtleties urged in , these cases are supposed to have sug gested the argument which Shakspeare puts Mto the gravedigger's mouth in Hamlet. The name of Sir James's wife was Mar garet; but whether she was the daughter and heir of Thomas Hales of Henley-upon- Thames, or one of the daughters and coheirs of OUver Wood, called by Hasted a judge of the Common Pleas under Henry VIH. (there being no such judge), Hasted and Wotton differ ; but both authors agree that the judge left an only sou Humphrey, and that the Une became extinct in 1666, HALS, John, had a seat at Kenedon, in the parish of Sherford, in Devonshire. His name appears m the Year Books from II Henry TV., 1409, and he was appointed one of the Mng's Serjeants in I4I3, On May 5, 1428, 1 Henry "VT., he was made a judge of the Common Pleas, and on January 21, 1424, was removed to the King's Bench, But,notwithstandingthelatter appointment, he seems to have continued to act in the Common Pleas also till Hilary 1426, a fine ha-ying been levied before him in that term. (Orig. 46; Acts Privy Council, iy. 71, 172.) His name occurs in the Year Books till Hilary 1484, in which year he probably died, as a new judge of the King's Bench was appointed m the foUo-sving July, He married the daughter of — Mewy, of Whitchurch, and his second son ,lohn afterwards became Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry. HALTOFT, GiLBEET, is stated by Dugdale to be dead on November 80, 1458, 37 Henry VL, but he gives no information when he entered on the office of baron of the Ex chequer. The Exchequer Ust, however, dates his admission in Michaelmas 1447; and in the act of resumption of the crown grants, which passed in the parliament of November 1449, he is described as secondary baron, and 20 marks out of 40/. yearly, which had been granted to him by letters patent for Ufe out of the forms of London and Middlesex, were specially excepted. In 31 HAMILTON Henry VI. he received a further grant of 20/. yearly for life, which also was excepted from another act of resumption passed tnre& years after. The last mention which is found of his name is in the latter year, when the Commons prayed that he might be ap pointed one of the admmistrators of the pro perty of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, (Rot ParL v. 196, 317, 339.) In the four last years of Ms life Bishop Grey appomted him one of the judges of the Isle of Ely. (Cole's MSS. xxY. 47.) HAMBITEY, Henet de, was one of the sons of Geoffrey de Hambuiy, who resided at Hambury, or Hanbury, a parish in Wor cestershire. (Pari Writs, ii. p. ii, 364,) He was made one of the judges of the King's Bench in Ireland in 17 Edward H., and was raised to the office of chief justice of the Common Pleas there M the foUo'wmg year. (CaL Rot. Pat. 94, 96.) He was soon after wards removed from that country, being appointed a judge of the Kmg's Bench in England in "2 Edward HL, 1328. (Abb, Rot. Orig. U, 24.) The cause of his eleva tion to the bench may have been Ms con nection -with Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, for his adherence to whom he had received a pardon m 12 Edward II. He is mentioned as being alive M 26 Edward HI,, m the herald's visitation of Worcestershire, but he must have long retired from the bench, as the Liberate RoU does not name him among the judges m 12 Edward HI, His Uneal descendante are di-vided mto several opulent branches, two of which have been recently ennobled — one havmg been created Baron Bateman, of Shobden in the county of Hereford ; and the other. Baron Sudely, of Toddmgton m the county of Gloucester. HAMILTON, William de, had property in Cambridge, and his name is first re corded as a justice itinerant, but for pleas- of the forest only, in Hampshire and "Wilt shire m 8 Edward I,, 1280. In 10 Edwai'd I, he was custos of the bishopric of Win chester, and of the abbey of Hide, (Abb, Rot Oiig. i. 401.) He seems afterwards to have become a clerk m the Chancery, as it was probably in that capacity that the Great Seal was occasionally placed under his care. There is one letter addressed to him as the kmg's vice-chancellor, dated November 12, 1286 (7 Report Pub. Rec, App. xU. 242, 251) ; and another from the regent Edmund, Earl of CornwaU, -with directions relating to the Chanceiy, On Bishop Bumel's death, October 26, 1292,, the Great Seal was deUvered into the wardrobe under William de Hamilton's seal; and the record expressly states that he sealed the writs therewith for the few days that intervened before his accom panying the chancellor's remains to WeUs as one of his executors, (Rot, Pari, i. 117.)' HANKFORD Curing the absences also of the next chan ceUor, John de Langton, fi-om March 4 to 30, 1297, and from February 20 to June 16, 1299, he held the Seal and performed the necessary duties in the meantime. He received the usual ecclesiastical pre fermente which were conferred on this class of officers, being in 1292 made archdeacon of the West Riding of York, and in De cember 1298 appointed dean of York. He was also dean of the church of St. Burian M ComwaU. (Le Neve, 313, 322 ; Cole's Documents, 421.) On December 29, 1304, the king named him chanceUor ; but, bemg then absent, the Seal was ordered to be deposited m the wardrobe tiU his arrival, and it was deUvered to him on .Tanuary 16, 1305. He held it till his death, on April 20, 1307. (Madox, i, 74.) HANE70ED, William, was bom at a place of that name at Bulkworthy, in the parish of BucMand Brewer, in Devonshire, and was the second son of Richard Hank ford, of an ancient and wealthy family, to whose large estates he eventually suc ceeded. The first mention of him is as one of the king's serjeants-at-law in 14 Richard IL, 1390, In January 1898 he gave his opmion, by desire of the parlia ment, on the answers made by the judges to the questions propounded to them by Chief Justice TresiUan, which he declared to be good and loyal, and such as he him self would have given under the circum stances, (JRot, Pari, iii, 368,) It is to be hoped that this opinion was prompted rather by Ms fears of the danger that hung over him had he pronounced any other, than by the temptation of being raised to the seat on the bench of the Common Pleas then vacant. He was, however, appointed to fill it on the 6th of May foUowmg, Henry TV", renewed Ms patent on the very day he assumed the throne, feeling it a pomt of poUcy not to interfere so early in the judicial appoint ments ; and Hankford was made a knight of the Bath at the coronation. He continued in the Court of Common Pleas tMoughout that reign, and on the ¦accession of Henry V. he was removed from the Common Pleas to the head of the Court of King's Bench, his patent being dated March 29, I4I3, eight days after the death of Henry IV, He presided in the court during the whole of the reign, and was re-appointed at the commencement of that of Henry VI,, being the fom-th king under whom he had held a judicial seat. In a very few months, however, his career was closed, his death occurring on De cember 20, 1422, not four months after the accession. He was buried m the church of Monkleigh. He had a high reputation both in his moral and legal character. A very improbable account of his death HANNEMEEE 325 is given by Ms biographers. He is stated to have become weary of Ms life, and, with an intention of gettmg rid of it, to have given strict orders to his keeper to shoot any person found at mght m his park who would not stand when challenged, and then to have thro-wn Mmself m Ms keeper's way, and to have been shot dead m pur suance of his own commands. The cause of this suicidal conduct is represented to have been his ' direful apprehensions of dangerous approaching e-yils,' wMch could only have arisen from a diseased imagina^ tion, as there was nothmg at that time in the political horizon to portend the disasters of thirty years' distance. HoUnshed mtio- duces this event as happenmg m 1470, 10 Edward IV,, very nearly fifty years after the death of the chief justice. The story, however, was long beUeved in the neigh bourhood of his seat at Annery, in Monk leigh, and an old oak bearing Ms name was sho-wn in the pork, where it was said he had fallen. As CMef Justice Danby did actually disappear about that time, it is not improbable that the story appUes to him, Holinshed having mistaken the name. He left two sons, Richard and John, the first of whom had a daughter Anne, who married the Earl of Ormond; and their daughter Margaret, marrying Sir WiUiam Boleyn, was the grandmother of Anne Boleyn, the mother of Queen EUzabeth. HANNEMEEE, David, was the grand son of Sir John Mackfel, constable of Car narvon Castle in the reign of Edward I., who assumed the name of Hannemere from the town so caUed in FUntehire, which belonged to him, Philip, the youngest of his three sons, was ultimately his sole heir, and by his wife Agnes, daughter and heir of David ap Rice ap Evans ap Jones, had several children, of whom tMs David was the elder. His name appears as an advo cate in the Year Books from 46 Edward IIL, and on the accession of Richard II. he was appomted one of the king's serjeante, and ' narrator ' in all the courts. (Cal, Rot Pat, 197.) On February 26, 1883, he was constituted a judge of the Kmg's Bench, and from that time tUl the parlia ment of October 1386 he was among the triers of petitions. As Ms successor in the King's Bench was named in the following year, he probably died in the interval. By his wife Angharad, daughter of Lhy- velin Dhu ap Griffith ap Jorworth Voell, he had, besides a daughter Margaret, who married the reno-wned Owen Glendower, two sons, Griffith and Jenkm, from the latter of whom sprang a long succession of kmghtly descendante. Two of these were created baronete, one of them m 1620, now ex tinct by the death in 1746 of Sir Thomas Hanmer, who was speaker of the House of Commons in the reign of Queen Anne, and 326 HANNEN distinguished by his elegant and correct edition of the works of Shakspeare; and the other granted in I774,'by whose descendant the title is now enjoyed, ( Wotton, i, 411.) HANNEN, James, one of the present judges of the Queen's Bench, is the son of James Hannen, Esq., of London, and was bom m 1821. After receiving the earUer part of his education at St. Paul's School, he finished it at the university of Heidel berg. Adopting the legal profession, he was caUed to the bar at the Middle Tem ple on January 14, 1848, and joined the Home Circuit. During the twenty years that he practised in the courts he distin guished himself by the solidity of his advice, and the readiness and ability of his advocacy. Though he never accepted the silk gown, which has become a common aspiration, nor was ever in parUament, yet, notwithstanding he was well kno-wn as a liberal M politics, he was selected solely for Ms legal acquirements by a conservative govemment to fiU the vacancy m the Court of Queen's Bench occasioned by the death of Mr. Justice Shee. He was appointed on Fe bruary 26, 1868, and was soon after knighted. He married Mary Elizabeth, daughter of N. Winsland, Esq. HANNIBAL, Thomas, in 1504 entered the university of Cambridge, where he took the degree of Doctor of Laws in 1514, At the former date he received a prebend in the church of York, and at the latter became chancellor of the diocese of Wor cester. In 1522 both he and Dr. John Clerke were engaged at the Roman court M the double capacity of King Henry's orators and private agents for Cardinal Wolsey. Both of them were rewarded in succession with the mastership of the Rolls, Hannibal foUowmg Clerke in that office on October 9, 1623, and retaining it till June 26, 1627, when he voluntarily sur rendered it. In 1524 he presented to the Mng a rose of gold sent by the pope. (Rymer, xiv, 10; Athen. Oxon. u, 735, 771; Fasti, i. 89.) HAECOTTET, Simon (Loed Haecouet), was directly descended from Bernard, of the royal blood of Saxony, who with other lordships received that of Harcourt, near Falaise, from RoUo on his settiement in Normandy. His descendant, Robert de Harcourt, accompanied WilUam on his invasion of England, and his family had flourished during the succeeding period in knightly distinction, and had been resident during the twelfth century at Stanton, near Oxford, fi-om that time called Stanton- Harcourt. The chancellor was the son of Sir PhiUp Harcourt, by his first wife, Anne, daughter of Sir WilUam WaUer, the pai-- Uamentary general. The family estate, by one side or the other in the previous troubles, had been seriously diminished at the time of the Restoration, HARCOURT Simon Harcourt was bora m 1660, and while receiving his education at Pembroke- CoUege, Oxford, was admitted m 1676 as a member of the Inner Temple. He was- caUed to the bar in 1683, and in 1688 h& was elected recorder of Abingdon. (AtJien.- Oxon. iv. 214.) That borough returned him to parUament in 1690, and m aU thc' future parUaments of King WiUiam's reign;. That he was strongly imbued with tory prmciples he evmced on his first entrance into the house, by the objections he then raised in the discussions on the bUls for the settlement of the govemment, and afterwards in 1696 by powerful speeches. in opposition to the bill of attamder agamst Sir John Fenwick, as a proceeding both unconstitutional and unjust. He carried his party feeling so far that he deoUned M the first instance to subscribe the Associa tion of the Commons on the discovery of the assassination plot. The tide of party turned, however, to wards the latter end of King WiMam's reign. The consequence of tMs was first the removal, and then the impeachment, of Lord Somers, the duty of carrymg up the charge against whom to the House of Lords was entrusted to Harcourt, to whose manage ment or mismanagement (as it may be variously considered) may probably be attributed the non-appearance of the pro secutors at the trial. (State Trials, v. 682- 1314.) At this time he had acquired a complete ascendency, not only in the house, but in general estimation. His wit and eloquence, in addition to his legal abiUty, were so universally acknowledged that M after-years they were specially brought for ward in the preamble to his patent of peer age as a prmcipal reason for his advancement. With the accession of Queen Anne the tories were established m power, and Harcourt was at once admitted to partake it, being made soUcitor-general on June 1, 1702, and knighted. In the first parliament of that reign he was agam returned for Abingdon, but in the second and third he sat for Bossiney in Comwall. He supported the extraordmary claims of the Commons to decide on the righte of electors in the famous Aylesbury case, and has the credit of drawing the biU for the Union -with Scotland in such a manner as to prevent a discussion of the articles upon which the commissioners had ogi-eed. While soUcitor- general he acted as chuirman of the Buck inghamshire quarter sessions, and of his charges to the grand jury there are manu script notes in the British Museum. In April 1707 he succeeded to the post of attorney-general, but before a year elapsed he resigned it, in February 1708, on the change of ministry and the admission of the whigs into the cabinet. In the new parliament called in November of that HARCOUET year he was retumed agaM for Abmgdon, but on a petition against him by Ms whig opponent, the house, notwithstandMg the majority of legal votes at the close of the election were palpably in his favour, decided against Mm. He thus became the victim of an iniquitous system he had himself encouraged when in power m former parlia mente, by which the faction in the ascendant decided on aU petitions in favour of their own partisan. The Duke of Marlborough soon after removed him from the steward ship of the manor of Woodstock, which he had held for some time. (Bui-net, v. 10, 48, 287, 345; ParL Hist, vi, 264, 778; LuttreU, vi. 442.) Before the close of that parliament he was elected member for Cardigan, but during Ms recess from the house the absurd impeachment of Dr. Sacheverell was re solved on, aud Sir Simon was thus enabled to appear as his leading counsel at the bar of the House of Lords, and by a powerful argument to expose the folly of prosecuting his vam and silly client. This prosecution was the deathblow of the whigs. The tories were restored to power, and Sir Simon on September 19, 1710, resumed his office of attorney-general. He was returned to the new parliament for Abingdon, but before it met the Great Seal was delivered into his hands on October 19, with the title of lord keeper. He then took up his residence in Powis House, LincoM's Inn Fields. (State Trials, xv. 196 ; Luttrell, vi. 620, 630, 644.) Before he was solicitor-general his name only once occurs in the ' State Trials,' and after he obtained office there are only three cases in which he acted besides that of Dr. Sacheverell, (State Trials, xiii, 1084, xiv 661, 989, 1100, xv. 196.) The new lord keeper presided in the House of Lords for nearly a year without a title, but on September 3, I7I1, he was raised to the peerage as Baron Harcourt of Stanton-Harcourt. On April 7, 1713, the queen changed his title of lord keeper to lord chancellor, which he retained till her death on August I, I7I4, steering cautiously amidst the dissensions in the cabinet and through the agitating scenes by which the last months of her reign were ti-oubled. Although as chancellor he was forced to take the formal proceedings necessary for proclaiming the Hanoverian king, there was too much reason for believing that he had previously joined in the intrigue with Bolingbroke and Atterbury to restore the exiled family. The lords justices however replaced him in his position as lord chancellor ; and, not withstanding the suspicion attaching to him, he escaped the consequences with which his colleagues were visited, and re ceived no other punishment than an imme- HAEDEES 327 diate discharge from Ms office on the arrival of George I. The king made his flrst entry into London on September 20, and on the next day he sent to Lord Harcourt for the Seal, which was deUvered to Lord Cowper. Towards his old coadj utors he acted a friendly part, managing to defeat the impeachment of Oxford, and procurmg a qualified pardon for Bolingbroke. (Lord Raymond, I3I8 ; ParL Hist, vii, 486,) After some years, when the Hanoverian succession was recognised by the great ma jority of the people, he joined the whig party under Sir Robert Walpole, which procured him from his old aUies the mck- name of the Trimmer. His change of poli tics was accompanied, on July 24, 1721, by an advance in the peerage to the dignity of viscount, and an increase of his retiring pension from two to four thousand a year. To that administration he continued his support through the remamder of the reign, though he never held any other official posi tion than that of one of the lords justices durmg the Iring's occasional -yisite to his German dominions. He survived George I. not quite two months, when, bemg seized ¦with paralysis, he died at his house in Ca vendish Square on July 28, 1727, and was buried at Stanton-Harcourt, With undoubted abilities and a power of eloquence universally acknowledged.. Lord Harcourt's reputation as a judge is not very great, nor are his decisions held in high estimation at the present day. That he was Mnd and amiable in his disposition, polished in his manners, and of social habits may be inferred from the number of friends that circled around Mm, from his being a fre quenter of several literary and poUtical clubs, and from his intimate association with Pope, Swift, Philips, Gay, and the other -wite by which that age was distmguished. Lord Harcourt was married three times —first, to Rebecca, daughter of Mr. Thomas Clark ; secondly to Elizabeth, daughter of Richard Spencer, Esq., and -widow of Ri chard Anderson, Esq, ; and lastly, to EUza beth, daughter of Sir Thomas Vernon, of Twickenham Park, and widow of Sir John Walter, of Saresden in Oxfordshire, Bart, He had issue by his first wife oMy, and, his son Simon having died before Mm, he was succeeded by his grandson, to whose other titles an earldom was added in 1749. These honours became extmct va. 1830. HAEDEES, Robeet de, was in II86 one of the custodes of the see of Coventry, then vacant, and possessed of property at Had- leigh in Suffolk. (Madox, i, 116, 309,) He was one of the justices itmerant in the county of Lincoln in 1 and 8 Richard I., 1189-96. (Ibid, 704; Pipe Roll, 69,) He held the prebend of Lochton in the church of Lincoln, and died about 9 John. He derived his name from Hardres, a 328 HARDWICKE parish near Canterbury, and was no doubt a branch of the family who held the manor there under the Earls of Clare. They as sumed the name about 1180, and several of them held a high position during the fol lowing reigns. One of their descendants was sheriff of the county in the reign of Elizabeth, and another was created a baronet by Charles I. in 1642, The title, however, became extmct in the earlypart of the reign of George IIL (Hasted, iU, 732.) HAEDWICKE, Eael oe. See P. Yoee:e. HAEE, Nicholas, traces his descent in England to Jervis, Earl of Hare-court, or Harcourt, who accompanied William the Conqueror in his invasion of this island. He was the eldest son of John Hare, of Homersfield in Suffolk, and Elizabeth For tescue his -wife. Educated at Cambridge, he entered the Inner Temple, where he became reader in 1532. He received the honour of knighthood about the year 1589, and on April 28, 1540, he was elected speaker of the House of Commons, to which he was retui-ned as member for Norfolk. He presided also in the following session, his speech at the close of which affords a curious specimen of the inflated oratory of the period. (Pari. Hist. i. 546.) In September 1540 he was one in a com mission into Wales to examine what jewels, plate, and ornamente were embezzled from the shrine of St. David's. (Acts Privy Council, vii. 46, 85.) At this time he was chief justice of Chester, and he was soon after made master of Requests, which he held during the remainder of Henry's and the whole of Edward's reign. Fortunately for himself, he was not called upon to wit ness the will of the latter, and was not implicated in the measures taken to place Lady Jane Grey on the throne. On Sep tember 18, 1553, he was appointed master of the Rolls ; but it would appear that his judicial position did not prevent him from opposing the queen's marriage with Philip of Spain, since Sir Nicholas Throckmorton justifies his 'misliking' of that connection by the reasons for it which he had leamed from ' Master Hare ' and others in parlia ment If he had offended by this, he amply redeemed himself in the eyes of the court by Ms harsh endeavours to pro cure Throckmorton's conviction. (State Trials, i. 876-896.) His severity however at the trial overstepped its object, since it is not improbable that his refusal to ex amine a witness called by Throckmorton and to refer to a statute cited by him tended materially to the acquittal of the prisoner. Sir Nicholas died as master of the Rolls on October 81, 1667, and was buried in the Temple Church. By his -wife, Catherine, daughter of Sir John Bassingbourn, of Woodhall in Hertfordshire, he had three sons, all of whom dying without issue, the HAET estate went eventually to his younger bro ther John, one of whose sons was ancestor of Sir Ralph Hare, of Stow Bardolph, who was created a baronet in 1641, but the title became extinct in 1764. It was however revived in 1818, and the title is now en joyed. Another son was the father of Hugh, who was created Lord Coleraine in Ireland in 1625, but this title is also now extinct. (Olcifield and Dyson's Tot tenham, 80, 81 ; Wotton's Baronet, ii, 208,) HAEENG, Ralph, was a justicier as early as 10 John, and fines were levied before him as late as 8 Henry III, He is mentioned as seneschal or steward of Thomas de St. Valerico in 8 John, and that he was then advancing in the king's favour appears by the comnuttal to his custody of the two churches of Cesteskton and Mixebir, of wMch his son, Jordan, had been deprived on account of the interdict (Rot. Claus. i. 82, 114) ; and in less than two years he was employed in a judicial capacity. In 17 John he was appointed sheriff of the imited counties of BucMng ham and Bedford, and in the followmg year he was specially employed by the king, and the constables of the castles of Walimgford, Oxford, and Windsor were commanded to give him safe conduct on his mission. (^Rot Pat 146, 192,) From the first year of the next reign there are frequent entiles of his judicial employment, and of marks of royal bounty accorded to Mm, (Rot. Claus. i. 29-t-489.) He died about 1230, HAEPUE, Richaed, was the son, or grandson, it is uncertam which, of Henry, the third son of Sir John Harpur, of Rush- all in the county of Stafford, descended from a very ancient Warwickshire family, which had flourished fi-om the time of Henry I. He was a student at Barnard's Inn, whence he removed to the Inner Temple, where he was elected reader m 1564, In 1558 he was nominated seijeant, and m May 1667 he succeeded as a judge of the Common Pleas. He died on Januar}- 29, 1577, and was buried in the church at Swarkestone in Derbyshire, under a monu ment finely representing him in full legal costume, to which the sculptor has added unaccountably a collar of SS. By his wife, Jane, daughter of George Findern, of Fin- dern in the same county, he left several children, the eldest of whom, SU John, was father of Henry Hai'pur, of Caike in Dei'bj'shire, who was created a baronet in 1626. The seventh possessor of the title assumed the name of Crewe in addition to his own, and the present baronet bears both names. (Wotton's Baronet ii. 3; Fair- holt's Costumes, 278.) HAET, Anthony, a native of St. Kitt's in the West Indies, was bom about 1764. He was educated at Tunbridge School, and, HARVEY studymg for the legal profession, was called to the bar in 1781, and practised through out his life m the courte of equity. Sound as a lawyer, clear in his statemente, fluent if not forcible in his language, and indus trious and painstaking for his cliente, he obteined, both before and after he received a sUk gown, a very considerable share of business. He laboured before the equity judges with mdomitable perseverance for forty-six years, before his extensive legal knowledge gained him promotion ; but m May 1827 he was appointed vice-chancellor of England. His merite were then so much better appreciated that on the retirement of Lord Manners, in the following October, he was raised to the lord chancellorship of Ireland. One of Lord Norbury's in numerable jokes was made on this appomt ment : ' That the government had treated the Irish with their wonted injustice ; deprived them of what they needed, and given them what they aU-eady possessed — taken av;aj Mannei-s,ani given them ^Tear/.' His judgments were much admired, and his character was plain, unostentatious, and Mnd. He gave such universal satisfaction that his removal iu December 1830 was a subject of sincere regi-et to the members of Ms court, which was shown in a most affecting scene at his departure. He sur vived his retirement only one year, and died in December 1831, HAEVEY, Feancis, commencing his legal studies at Barnard's Inn, completed them at the Middle Temple, where he was called to the bar, and became reader in 1611. In December 1612 (at which time he resided at Northampton) he was chosen recorder of Leicester; and m I6I4 he attained the -degree of the coif On October 18, 1624, he was constituted a judge of the Common Pleas, On one of his circuits he fined a whole jmy 10/, apiece for giving perverse and wrongful acquittals in four different criminal cases ; and in another he showed some indignation on hearing an assize ser mon at Norwich, in which the preacher aUuded to the corruption of judges, saying in his charge to the grand jury, 'It seems by the sermon we are all corrupt ; but know that we can use conscience M our places as well as the best clergyman of all.' {Borough MSS. Leicester.) He remamed in that court tiU his death, which took place at Northampton in August 1632, (Croke, Car. 268.) HAE-WEDON, Robeet de, who held land in the forest- of Bernewood, was one of the four justices of traUbaston for Gloucester shire and ten other counties, dated on April 6, 1305, 33 Edward I. (N Fosdera, i. 970 ; Rot ParL ii. 216.) He acted as de puty to Hugh le Despenser, the justice of the foreste south of Trent in the next reign, in the fifth year of which the custody of HATTON 329 the manor of Rokele in Wiltshire, belong ing to the Templars, was committed to him at an annual rent of eleven pounds, ten shillings, and fourpence. (Ibid. i. 321 ; Ahh. Rot Orig. i. 184 ; Cal. Rot Pat 78,) HATHEELEY, LoED, See W, P. Wood. HATSEL, Henet, the son of Captain Henry Hatsel, of Saltram, near Plymouth (who took a strong part in the Great Rebel lion), was born m March 1641, and, bemg admitted a member of the Middle Temple, was called to the bar in 1667, and in 1689 was summoned to take the degree of the coif In another eight years he was con stituted a baron of the Exchequer on No vember 23, 1697, and knighted. He filled the seat during the remainder of William's reign, and was re-appointed on the accession of Queen Anne, on March 2, 1702. But on the 4th of the following June he suddenly received a message from Lord Keeper Wright, informing him that he might for bear sitting the next morning, the first day of term, her majesty designing his qiuetus. His conduct at the Surrey Assizes on the extraordinary trial of Spencer Cowper, charged with the murder of Sarah Stout, and acquitted, does not tell much in favour of his j udicial capacity. He lived twelve years after his discharge, and died in April 1714. He married Judith, daughter of Josiah Bateman, merchant of London, and -widow of Sir Richard Shirley, Bart, (Lord Ray mond, 250, 768 ; Luttrell, iv. 309, v, 181 ; State Trials, xUi, II06.) HATTON, Cheistophee. Something less than justice has been done to the character of Sir Christopher Hatton. He has been looked upon less as a grave counsellor than as an accomplished courtier, and the popular impression with regard to him is more con nected with his youthful graces than with his mature services. The prevalence of this feeling is in a considerable degree to be attributed to the jocose stanzas of our poet Gray in his fanciful account of the mansion at Stoke-Pogeis, which he erro neously supposes to have been occupied by Sir Christopher : — Full oft ivithin the spacious 'walls. When he had fifty winters o'er him, My grave lord-keeper led the brawls, The Seal and maces danc'd before him. His bushy beard and shoe-strings green. His high-crown'd hat and satin doublet, Mov'd the stout heart of England's queen, Tho' Pope and Spaniard could not trouble it. It is difficult to reverse the sentence of a poetical judge, especially when the decree is pronounced m quotable phraseology ; but truth in the end will triumph, and, what ever may have been the recommendations which introduced him at court, it will be acknowledged that he preserved his position there, and obtained his elevation, by quali ties more solid and accomplishments more 330 HATTON serviceable than an elegant address or a flattering tongue. Although the son of aprivate country gen tleman, his lineage, as is usual with the li neage of aU men who become great, was satis factorily traced to aNormannobleman, whose descendants were long settled in Cheshire until a younger son of one of them married the heiress of Holdenby in Northampton shire. William Hatton, the grandson of this gentleman, was, by his wife Alice, daughter of Robert Saunders, of Harringworth, father of three sons, the youngest of whom was Sir Christopher, who by the early death of his brothers succeeded to the paternal estate. Born in 1640, at Holdenby, he became a gentleman commoner at St. Mary's Hall, Oxford, but took no degree (Athen. Oxon. i. 682) ; and on May 29, 1560, he was ad mitted a member of the Inner Temple. It is uncertain whether Hatton took the degree of a barrister, because the Inner Temple registry of calls to the bar does not com mence tiU 1567, three or four years after he had entered into the service of the queen ; but, as he was clearly a member of the Temple in the following year, the pro bability is that he would not have remained in the house for eight years merely iu the character of a student. All that is known of his early residence in the inn is, that in the Christmas of his second year, 1561, the prominent office of ' master of the game ' was assigned to him in that celebrated masque at which Lord Robert Dudley, afterwards Earl of Leicester, was the chief personage. (Dugdale's Orig. 150.) The date of his introduction to court is established by Sir Harris Nicolas's disco very of a warrant, dated June 30, 1564, for ' one armour fit for the body of our well- beloved servant Christopher Hatton, one of our gentlemen-pensioners,' which, how ever, is only to be ' delivered to Mm on his paying the just value thereof.' (Cal. State Papers [1547-80], 242.) It may be presumed, therefore, that he had previously attracted the queen's notice. In 1568 he and four other gentlemen of the Inner Temple composed a tragedy called ' Tancred and Gisniund,' which was acted before the queen, each of them taking a part in the performance. Hatton con- tri'buted the fourth act. It is plain that by this time he had ingratiated himself with EUzabeth, as in that year he was appointed keeper of Eltham Park and the Park of Horn e, and had effected an exchange of his manor of Holdenby for the site of the abbey and demesne lands of Sulby with her majesty, who at the same granted him a lease of Ms paternal manor for forty years. During the next three years he received continued marks of royal favour, among -svhich were his nomination as one of the gentlemen of the privy chamber, and the reversion of HATTON the office of queen's remembrancer in thC' Exchequer. Hitherto he had taken no apparent part in politics ; but he was elected member for Higham Ferrers m the parliament of 1571, and for the county of Northampton in that of 1672. In the latter he was one of the committee appointed to confer with the Lords ' on the great matter touching the Queen of Scots ; ' but he does not appear to have spoken in the house till March 12, 1676, when he presented a message from the queen recommending the enlargement of Mr, Wentworth, who had been com mitted to the Tower for an off'ensive speech. At this time he is described as captain ofthe queen's guard, ha-ying succeeded Sir Francis KnoUys iu 1672. In 1673 he narrowly es caped assassination from the hands of Peter Byrohet, a fanatic who was hanged for the- murder of another person, whom he believed to be Hatton. Her maj esty gave him the affectionate nickname of ' Liddes,' and he addressed her in the warmest terms of love. Scandal indeed was busy as to the nature of his intercourse -with the queen, and the reports were not limited to the common herd of calumniators, but were boldly re peated to Elizabeth herself by Queen Mary, and were believed by Catherine de M^dicis and others. The letter -written by Dyer to Hatton, advising him what conduct to pur sue in consequence of a temporai-y loss of favour at the end of 1572, and Ms o-wn letters to the queen M the foUowing year, when he was sent to Spa for his health (preserved in Sir Harris Nicolas's valuable ' Life and Times of Sfr CMistopher Hatton'), all contain expressions which are very diffi cult to interpret under any other supposi tion than that an intimacy existed between him and the queen wMch would have been fatal to the character of any less elevated female. (^Ibid. 463, 461-6.) To what ex tent that intimacy was carried it would be as unseemly as useless to attempt to pene-i trate ; but seeing that the royal favour be gan when he was about five-and-twenty, and ended but with his life, extending over a period of twenty-six years, and that it was unbroken but by a few of those aman- tium irce which rather proved ite potency than caused any real interruption, it is im possible not to give him credit for a discre tion most uncommon in that age, and for so extraordinary a degree of prudence and modest demeanour as to subdue the efforts of rival claimants, and to secure the esteem and confidence of the wisest counsellors of the crown. During this period he frequently resided at the house in Eltham Park, apparently keeping up great hospitality. The church warden's accounts for 1676 contain an entry, ' Payd for brede and drynke when y° Queues Grasse dyned at Eltham, for HATTON ringing, xx*-;' her majesty's host bemg -no doubt Sir Christopher. (Archeeologia, xxxiv. 60.) Between 1574 and 1577 Hatton obtamed possession of the Bishop of Ely's house in Holborn, after an effort by the latter to fly from a contract made between them, which was speedily silenced by the interference of the queen in the follo-wmg well-known letter : — Proud Prelate ! I understand you are backward in complying with your agreement ; but I would have you know that I who made you what you are can unmake you ; and if you do not forthwith fulfil your engagement, by God I will immediately unfrock you, Elizabeth. In 1676 he obtained an act for the assur ance of his lands, and was gratified with a pension of 400/. a year for Ufe, with monopolies, and -with special advances for the payment of his debte. After having been connected with the court for thirteen years with no higher position than that of gentleman of the queen's privy chamber and captain of her guard, he was raised on November II, 1677, to the office of vice- chamberlain, and was sworn of the privy council, and as appears from the Diary of Dr. Dee the astrologer (p. 4), with whom he, like most of his contemporaries, con ferred, he was knighted on December 1. From this time his devotion to state affairs is apparent from the letters between Mm and the principal ministers, who ad vised with him on all important matters, both foreign and domestic, and evidently regarded his opinion with a deference which a mere favourite could not command. Still representing the county of Northampton, he appears to have been the queen's organ of communication with the parliament. In 1681 he conveyed her reprimand to the house for presummg to appoint a public fast without her authority ; in 1686 he pre sented the queen's answer to the address of thanks, and communicated her desire that they should adjourn for the Christmas hoUdays, On this occasion he made the unusual motion that the house should join in prayer for her majesty's preservation, and accordmgly every one knelt down while Mr. Vice-Chamberlain read a prayer ' de- ¦vised and set down by an honest, godly, and learned man.' (ParL Hist. i. 812, 827.) In the trials of Babington and the other conspirators relative to Mary, Queen of Scote, which took place in September 1686, Sir Christopher took a prominent part, and, if a judgment is formed fi-om modem prosecutions, not an impartial one. But, prejudiced as he could not but be by the confessions he had heard, there was more of indiscretion than unfairness m the re marks he interposed; and the Mndnessof his nature was manifested by his promise to pay the debts of one of the accused, of HATTON 331 whose gmlt there is no doubt, (State Trials, i. 1127-53,) The trial of Queen Mary immediately followed, Hatton bemg one of the com missioners, and her consent to plead, which she at first refused, was at length yielded, ' persuaded,' as she declared, ' by Hattou's reasons,' which he had deUvered with force and eloquence the day before. In the parliament which was called in the next month he took the lead in urging her ex ecution, expressing, as plamly appears from the whole proceeding, the universal wish of aU parties m both houses. The queen's answer to their jomt petition was delivered on November 12 ; and the warrant, after an affected hesitation, was signed on February 1, 1587, Secretary Davison, to whom it was given, having resolved not to act on his own responsibility, the privy council was summoned, and, in consequence of their decision, the warrant was forwarded to Fotheringay. Notwithstanding this, all the counsellors escaped public censure, except the unfortunate secretary, who was no more guilty than the rest, if guilt there was. But the queen wanted a pretence to excuse herself, and Davison was sacrificed to her hypocrisy by a severe sentence of fine and imprisonment. Had there been any sincerity M the queen's complamt, the whole council would have felt the weight of her indigna tion, but there is nothing to show that any other member of it suffered from her frowns. On the contrary, Sir Christopher Hatton, whom she must have known to have been anxious to release her from all fears about the Scottish queen, and to have been present when the warrant was forwarded, was, with in a month after the unjust proceedings against Davison, rewarded with the highest civil rank in the state, by bemg promoted to the office of lord chancellor on April 29. That Hatton's elevation to this high and important office occasioned some surprise cannot be doubted, for the public would naturally consider him a mere courtier, and would have forgotten that he had received a legal education. But he had now been known to the ruUng powers more than twenty years, during the last ten of which he had been one of the queen's most secret counsellors, advised with not only byher, but by her leading ministers on all occasions. They thus had a full opportunity of judpng of his talents and abilities, and their high appreciation of them is sufficiently evidenced by the correspondence which Sir Harris Nicolas has published. Although his early caU to a court life prevented him from pursmng the practice of the law, it is to be remembered that in his youth he spent some years in the study of it, and also that he had been long accustomed as a privy councUlor to sit m the Star Chamber. That these advantages were not wholly un- 332 HATTON productive of fruit is proved by the judicial character he acquired for care and industry in acquainting Mmself -with the rules of his court, and for wisdom and impartiality in the judgments he pronounced. He had the caution to require the attendance of four masters in Chancery when he sat in court, .'and two when he heard causes in his own house, (Egei-ton Papers, 125.) One of these was Sir Richard Smale, whose advice he is reputed to have followed in all matters of moment. Fuller says ' that some sullen Serjeants at the first refused to plead before Mm,' forgetting that his court was not their usual arena, but adding that, ' partly by his power, but more by his, prudence, he convinced them of their errors and his abilities.' His supposed incompetency to his judicial duties does not seem to have weighed so heavily upon him as to prevent Ms enUvening the bench with a joke. In a cause relative to the boundaries of some . land, the counsel forthe plaintiff havingsaid, ' We Ue on this side, my lord,' and the counsel for the defendant, 'We lie on that side, my lord,' the chancellor stood up and said, ' If you Ue on both sides, whom -will you have me to believe ? ' (Bacon's Apophthegms, 97.) During the remaining four years and a half of his life he continued to perform the duties of the chancellorship, in such a manner as to escape condemnation from his legal contemporaries and to retain the favour of his sovereign. In April 1688 he was ho noured with the order of the Garter, and on the death ofthe Earl of Leicester he sought for, and attained on September 20, no doubt by the queen's encouragement and infiuence, the honourable position of chanceUor of the university of Oxford, haying been elected two days before high steward of the sister university. It is thus apparent that she did not even resent the courage he had recently displayed in remonstrating with her against affixing the Great Seal to letters patent granting to the earl the unconstitutional post of Lieutenant of England and Ireland, He only presided over one parliament, which met on February 4, 1589, and was dissolved on March 29. (Pari Hist i. 853-8,) No further event of any importance in the chancellor's history is recorded before his death on November 20, 1591, Fuller ( Wortliies, i. 165) states that ' it 'broke his heart that the queen (which seldome gave boons, and never forgave due debte) rigor ously demanded present payment of some arrears which he did not hope to have re mitted, but did only desire to be forborn ; failing herein in his expectation, it went to Ms heart, and cast him into a mortal disease. The queen afterwards did endeavour what she could to recover him, bringing, as some say, cordial broths unto him with her own hands.' On several occasions there are ac counts of his suffering fi-om sickness, and HAUGH his last Ulness was probably a violent attack of his old disease, its termination being em bellished -with the story of the broken heart. But, whatever may have been the real cause of his illness, one fact is incontrovertibly proved, that to the last moment of his Ufe the queen's regard for him was undimmished. He was buried -with great pomp in St. Paul's Cathedral, where a splendid monu ment was erected to his memory by his nephew. Sir William Hatton. Surrounded as he was by statesmen of unrivaUed talent, an acknowledged favourite among many rivals, honoured and rewarded above his compeers, and holding prominent positions in the coimcil and the court durmg a long series of years, the absence of any weighty and the failure of every malicious charge against him, the respect and friend ship of the great and good men of his day, and the amicable relations in which he lived with Ms competitors for the queen's personal favour, all prove that he was a man of no ordinary capacity, and that he was as amiable in his disposition as he was discreet in his conduct, neither excitmg opposition by arrogance, nor usmg his known mfiuence to the injury of others. His principal rival m the queen's affections, the Earl of Lei cester, caUed him in his will Ms ' own dear friend,' and bequeathed to Mm, besides other valuable gifte, his George and Garter, ' not doubting that he shall shortly enjoy the wearing of it.' His love of literature has not been demed, and of his encouragement of the leamed many evidences remam. In the reUgious conteste of the time he always took the part of a moderator; and though suspected of bemg favom-able to the Catho lics, he endeavoured to intercept the rigour of the law agamst the Puritans, bemg of opinion that ' m the cause of reUgion neither searing nor cutting was to be used,' Sir Christopher dying unmarried, his_ es tates devolved on his nephew. Sir WiUiam Newport, the son of his sister. This gen tleman, who took his uncle's name, married t-wice, and his second -wife afterwards be came the wife of Sir Edward Coke. The chancellor's estates descended on Sn Chris topher Hatton, the grandson of a younger brother of the chancellor's father. His son was created Baron Hatton of Kerby in Northamptonshire in 1643, and the second baron was advanced to -the viscounty pf Hatton of Gretton in the same county in 1682 ; butboth titlesbecame extinct in 1762. The name of Hatton still survives m the peerage, having been assumed by the present Earl of Winchilseaand Nottingham's grand father, whose mother was only daughter, and eventuaUy heiress, ofthe first Viscount Hatton. (Nicolas's Life of Sir Christopher.) HATJGH, John, whose portrait in a win dow of the church of Long Melford in Suf folk is the only remaining indication of the HAUNSARD place in which he was born or resided, was a member of Lincoln's Inn, of which society he was reader in 1469, and again in 1473. He was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas m Hilaiy 1487, 2 Henry ATI., and he ceased to act, whether by death or other wise, after 'Trinity 1489. (Dugdale's Orig, 47-258.) He married Joan, daughter and coheir of Thomas, son of Chief Justice Sir Thomas BUlmg. HA'CNSAED, WrLLlAM DE, was one of the justices itinerant appointed for Surrey in 9 Henry HI., 1226 ; and in the two fol lowmg years he assessed the qmnzime and the taUage in that county. (Rot, Claus, u. 76, 146, 208.) HAUTEYN, Hamon, no doubt named from a manor caUed Hauteyn'sin the parish of Bemham-Broom m Norfolk, held some office m the Exchequer, and was entrusted with the sheriffalty of Lmcolnshire m 44 and 45 Hemy HI., durmg which he was either so negligent or corrupt as to incur an amercement of ten marks for delaymg the execution of a writ tiU it was too late to act upon it. (Abh. Placit. 162,) In I Edward I, he was one of the jus tices of the Jews, and acted as assessor in London and Middlesex of the fifteenth granted m 3 Edward I, (Pari, Writs, i. 4,) He also sat -with Ralph de Hengham and others as a justice itinerant for the county of Suffolk in 1286, 18 Edward I, (Abb. Placit. 277.) In the next year, how ever, being caUed to account by the trea surer and barons of the Exchequer, and convicted of various misdemeanours, he was suspended from Ms office of justice of the Jews m Trinity Term 1286, (Madox, i. 254, U. 321.) HAYA, Robeet de, was of the same name and flourished at the same time as the noble Scoteh family now represented by the Marquis of Tweeddale, In 7 John he commanded the king's galleys 'in in- suUs' (Rot Pat 63); and in 24 Henry IH,, 1240, he was one of the justices itine rant for York ; and bemg then sheriff of Bedfordshire and BucMnghamshire, he had permission as long as he was on that iter to pass his accounts at the Exchequer by means of a substitute, (Madox, ii. 177.) HAYES, Geoege, was the last-appointed and the last-deceased judge of the Queen's Bench, receiving Ms patent on August 25, 1868, as one of the three added to the seve ral courts iu futherance of the recent act re mitting the trial of election petitions to the judges, and within fifteen months dying almost in the exercise of his judicial duties. He was born on June 19, 1805, and was the son of Sheedy Hayes, Esq., of Judd Place, a West India proprietor. Educated flrst at Highgate, and then at St, Edmund's Roman CathoUc CoUege at Ware, he en tered the Middle Temple, where on Janu- HEATH 333 ary 29, 1830, he was called to the bar. He jomed the Midland Circuit, of which he eventually became the leader. In 1856 he took the degree of serjeant-at-law, to which was added in I860 a patent of precedence and about the same time he was appointed recorder of Leicester. Whether as jimior, or senior, or as recorder, he distinguished himself as a sound la-wyer ; and it was only his legal reputation, for he never entered into party poUtics nor ever sat in parlia^ ment, that pomted him out as an eligible recipient of the honour of the ermine. This selection was most acceptable to his brethren of the bar, for he was highly popular among them, being of the most amiable disposition, jomed to a jovial power of enUvenmg his companions. He was, m fact, a man of ' inflnite jeste,' and if there had been an album kept in Westminster HaU, to record the witticisms of the bar, many would have been the pages devoted to his vyitty pleasantries and whimsical pieces. His judicial career was lamentably short. While unrobing at Westmmster, after hearing a cause at Nisi Prius, he was seized with'a severe attack of paralysis, which ter minated m his death on November 25, 1869. He married Sophia Anne, daughter of Dr. John Hill, of Leicester, and has left a large family. HEATH, Nicholas (Aechbishop oe Yoek), was of a family seated at Apsley m the parish of Tamworth in Warwickshire, but was bom in London. After attending St. Anthony's School, in which Sir Thomas More had been a pupil, he was entered of Corpus Christi CoUege, Oxford; from whence he was transplanted to Christ's CoUege, Cambridge, where he took his degree of M.A. m 1621, being soon after elected a fellow of Clare HaU there. He is said to have been maintained while at coUege by Queen Anne Boleyn and her father and brother, and to have been m the flrst mstance a favourer of the new Protest ant doctrines. (Sti-ype's Mem. i, 279.) Though his assistance to Cranmer m Ms translation of the Bible seems to warrant this report, his opimons must have imder- gonegreat change. Takmg holy orders, he was instituted into the church of Hever in Kent m I53I, and, havmg proceeded doctor m divinity in the meantime, into those of Bishopsboum and Southmallmg in 1537, and of Shoreham m 1538, to which was added the rectory of CUff, In the foUowing year he became archdeacon of Stafford, and was made aUnoner to the Mng (Rymer, xiv, 648), who promoted him to the bishopric of Rochester on March 26, 1540, After remammg in this diocese for nearly four years, he was translated to Worcester, to wMch he was elected on December 22, 1543 ; and he sat there, quietly performing his episcopal functions, for the rest of 334 HEATH Henry's reign, and the flrst four years of that of Edward VL The act for the adop tion of the new Book of Common Prayer havmg been passed about that time, he, although he had voted against it, was ap pointed one of the commissioners for carry ing it into effect. Refusing to sign the form prescribed for the ordination of bishops, &c., he was committed to the Fleet in December 1550 (Chron. Grey Friars, 68), and, being proceeded against for contempt, was deprived of his bishopric in the ensumg October. His imprisonment m Bishop Ridley's house, to which he was removed in July 1552, was alleviated by the kindness and Uberal hospitality of that prelate, of whom Heath used always to speak as the most learned of the Protestant party. On the accession of Queen Mary the sentence against him was reversed, and he recovered possession of his see. One of the first uses which Mary made of him was to attempt the conversion of the Duke of Northumberland, in which he showed so much dexterity as to mduce the duke, either out of weakness or hope of life, to make a pubUo profession of Romanism on the soaft'old. (Robertson's Heylin, ii. 85.) The royal favour was further exhi'bited to wards Heath by maMng him President of Wales, and, on the deprivation of Arch bishop Holgate, by translating him to York, The congd d&lire is dated February 19, 1555 ; and the death of Bishop Gardiner in the same year leaving the office of chan cellor vacant, the Great Seal was deUvered to him with that title on January I, 1666. Although the fires of Smithfield, begun by Gardiner, continued to rage during the chancellorship of Archbishop Heath, there is no evidence, and indeed no charge, that he assisted m i:eedmg them. On the day of Queen Mary's death, No vember 17, 1568, the parUament being then sitting, he communicated the event to the Lords and Commons, and declarmg that the right and title of the Lady Eliza beth was free from all question and doubt, he directed her immediate proclamation. This prudent activity, which anticipated all pretenders and procured her a peaceful accession to the throne, could not but be gratefully felt by the new queen, who, though she did not again entrust him with the Great Seal, continued him in her privy council. He joined -vrith the other English pre lates in refusing to assist at the coronation of Queen Elizabeth ; but one of the num ber, Oglethorpe, Bishop of Carlisle, was at last prevailed upon to perform the cere mony on January 15, 1559, on her agreeing to take the accustomed oath. The parlia ment met on the 25th, and one of its earUest debates was with reference to an HEATH act for restoring the supremacy of the crown. To this biU Heath and eight other bishops were vigorous opponente, and the speech which he addressed to the house on the occasion has been pubUshed. It is firm and temperate and leamed, but ite arguments did not prevail. The biU passed into a law on March 22, and the archbishop and the opposmg bishops refusmg to take the oath, -they were deprived of their sees, and the queen's licence to elect a new arch bishop was issued on July 25, 1560. (Ry mer, XV. 699.) In the precedmg month Heath had been committed to the Tower, and in the folio-wing Febmary sentence of excommunication was pronounced agamst him. (Machyn's Diary, 238, 249.) The deprived archbishop was more for tunate than some of his coUeagues, for his imprisonment was of short duration, he bemg allowed after two or tMee months' confinement to retire to his o-wn property at Chobham in Surrey. For this compara tive clemency he no doubt was mdebted as much to the queen's gratitude for Ms early exertions m her behalf, as to her admira tion of his leammg and amiable character, and she showed her continued Mndness by an occasional -visit to him m his retirement. There he Uved for many years, pursmng uninterruptedly and -with patient devotion the studies which had first mterested him, and there he died m the year 1579, and was buried m the chancel of the parish church. Such is the history of his last years wMch aU his biographers have written; but a story is ventilated by Miss Strick land (Elizabeth, 165) as to a Nicholas Hethe's imprisonment m 1565, wMch she appUes to the archbishop. The tale, how ever, is of iteelf highly improbable, the identification of the two whoUy fails, wMle a letter from the archbishop to Lord Bur leigh, dated at Chobham, September 22, 1673, wherembe expresses his gratitude 'for havmg lived many years m great qmetaess of mind,' confirms the origmal account. (CaL State Papers [1647-80], 467.) Durmg his presidency oyer the province of York, Queen Mary gave to him and his successors as a residence m the mefropoUs, mstead of York House, which had been appropriated by Hem-y VHI., Suffolk House, near St. George's Chm-ch in South wark. This he was permitted to seU, and to purchase m ite stead Norwich House, near Charing Cross, which, changing its name to York House, long contmued m the possession of the archbishops, but was commonly let Ijy them to the keepers of the Great Seal. After Lord Chancellor Bacon's disgrace, the Duke of Buckmgham obtained it, giving other lands m exchange, and the site is now occupied by the streets which bear his name and title. Writers of all parties describe Arch- HEATH Isishop Heath as a man distinguished by iis private virtues, of great abilities and integrity, of gentle temper and prudent .conduct, firm in his principles and mode rate amidst ¦ the bigots of both parties. (Godwin, 470, 687, 710; Athen. O.von.ii. ¦817 ; Lingard; Hayward; Bumet.) HEATH, Robeet, son of Robert Heath, ¦of Brasted in Kent, and Jane, his wife, daughter of Nicholas Poner, was born 'uppon the 20th day of May in the year 1675,' says the chief justice in a short memoir of Ms Ufe written a few months "before his death. He was educated at the free grammar school of Tunbridge, and at St John's College, Cambridge, where he remained for tMee years. He was then admitted of Clifford's Inn, whence he re moved to the Inner Temple, where he was called to the bar in 1603. In 1607 he was selected to be reader of Clifford's Inn, and became a bencher in I6I7, fiUing the post of reader there in 1619, and that of trea surer M 1625, (Dugdale's Orig. 167, 171,) He had the fortune to be a favourite of the favourite Buckingham, for whose use he received by patent the profits of the King's Bench and Common Pleas offices, and thus ingratiated himself with the frequenters of the court. On November 10, 1618, he was elected recorder of London in opposition to James Whiteloeke. On his nommation as soUcitor-general on January 22, 1621, he resigned the recordership, 'but was elected by the citizens to represent them M the -parliament of that year. In it he was a frequent debater, trymg to accommodate matters for the king, who knighted him, and retained him in his office during the rest of Ms reign. Soon after Charles's accession, Heath on October 31, 1625, was promoted to the attorney-generalship. In the foUowing May he had to bring articles of impeach ment against the Earl of Bristol (ParL Hist. ii. 80), in the nature of a cross-bill to the charges which the earl had made against the Duke of BucMngham, who at the same time was also impeached by the House of Commons. All these proceedmgs were stopped by the sudden and mtempe- rate dissolution of the parliament. In the next year he had the mvidious task of opposing the release of the knighte who, havmg refused to contribute to the loan, had been committed to prison, and M this ¦ difficult duty he displayed much learning, ingenuity, and eloquence. In 1628, when the judges' refusal to bail or discharge them was taken up by parUament, Sfr Robert Heath had again almost smgle- handed to mamtain the argument against antagomsts so powerful as Sir Edward Coke, Littelton, Selden, and Noy, and he did it -with such abiUty and courage that, though defeated, he lost uo credit by his HEATH 335 exertions. (State Trials, iii. 30, 138.) The violent termination of this parUament in March 1629, and the imprisonment of the members who forcibly detained the speaker m the chair at its close, led to other pro ceedmgs in wMch Sir Robert Heath took a very prominent part. By the Mng's command, he obtained private opinions of the judges upon certam abstract questions, and upon the answers he obtained filed in formations against the offending members, and, on their refusmg to plead, judgment of fine and imprisonment was pronoimced against them. When the conduct of the judges in this matter came to be canvassed by the Long ParUament, Sir Robert Heath seems almost to have escaped censure, as merely performing the duty wMch de volved upon him as the servant and advo cate of the cro-wn. In the exercise of his fimctions as attorney-general he was so zealous and active a partisan of the court that the kmg constituted him chief justice of the Common Pleas on October 26, I68I, (Rymer, xix, 346.) On September 14, 1634, he was dis charged from Ms place without any cause being assigned. His removal may perhaps owe its origin to his opposition to Laud, and his disincUnation to the extreme -views which that prelate adopted in ecclesiastical matters. It was generally beUeved, how ever, that the question of ship-money, the ¦writs to collect which were issued four days after the appomtment of Sir John Finch as Heath's successor, had some con nection -with the change. (Rttshworth, ii. 258.) Anthony Wood, in his account of Noy, casually says that Sir Robert Heath was 'removed fr-om the cMef justiceship of the King's Bench for bribery ; ' but m his account of Heath Mmself he alludes in no way to his dismissal, and makes such mis takes in the courte to which he was ap pointed as to deprive his record of any value. (Athen. Oxon. ii. 684; Fasti, U. 46.) WMtelocke, who was not his friend, would not have omitted all notice of Ms removal could he have aUeged such an imputation as the cause. Upon the foun dation of Wood's loose statement merely, for no other can be cited, Lord Campbell ( Ch. Just. i. 416) makes this assertion : 'The truth seems to be that he [Heath] continued to enjoy the favour and confi dence of the government, but that a charge had been brought agamst him of taking bribes, wMch was so strongly supported by evidence that it could not be overlooked, although no parliament was sitting, or ever Ukely to sit ; and that the most discreet proceeding, even for himself, was to remove him qmetiy from his office.' Historians ¦will be anxious for information of his lord ship's authority for this statement; for they wiU be un-wiUMg to suppose it to be 336 HEATH gratmtous scandal, although it seems to be contradicted by the very act of the govern ment that displaced him. In the next term after he was ousted from the bench he resumed his practice at the bar as jimior Serjeant (Croke, Car. 376), a privUege that the king would scarcely have granted, or that the fallen judge would have had the effrontery to ask, if his disgrace had been so notorious 'that it could not be over looked.' That he was actually replaced on the bench, when the ' parliament was sitting ' — a parliament, too, that was ready enough to find any blot in the Mng's ap pointmente, — sufficiently shows the incon sistency of the charge. The chief justice himseU says, in his memoir before cited, -written when he was in sorrow, and just before his o-svn death : ' At the end of three years I was on a sudden discharged of that place of chief justice, noe cause being then nor at any time since shewed for my re moval' In the next year (1635) the kmg reqmred his presence at the coimcil board to hear a certain cause (Cal. State Papers [1684-6], 87) ; and in the following year he was again taken into the actual service of the crown, his patent as king's serjeant being dated Octo'ber 12, 1686, He con tmued at the bar for four years more, when he was replaced on the judicial seat on January 23, I64I, as a judge of the King's Bench ; and was further favoured, on May 13, -with the office of master of the Court of Wards and Liveries. (Rymer, xx. 448, 517.) When the king retired to York, Sir Robert joined him there, and on June 10, 1642, addressed a letter to the House of Lords, informing them that he had ' left the parUament to go to the kmg at York as by oath and duty bound ; ' whereupon they resolved to the contrary, and that his staying at the parliament, being sent for from them, was not against his oath, (Parry's Parliaments.) On February 7, 1648, he was created Doctor of Civil Law by the university of Oxford, and a few months later the king, being then in that city, appointed him chief justice of the King's Bench, and in a letter dated July 4, 1643, authorised him in the summer assizes ' to forbear those places whither you con- ceave you may not goe with convenient safety.' (Notes and Queries, Ist S. xii. 259,) Several complaints were made to the parliament against CMef Justice Heath and other judges who acted with Mm on the circuit. On these charges, and for adhering to the king, then in arms against the parUament, the Commons impeached them on July 24, 1644; but as the chief justice never put Mmself in their power, he escaped trial. This, however, did not pre vent them from venting their enmity. On November 26, 1646, they passed an ordi nance disabUng Mm and four others from HEATH being judges, ' as though they were dead; ' and by another vote of October 24, 1648, they ordered that he should be excepted from pardon, ( Whiteloeke ; Pari, Hist, m. 286.) His estete was sequestered, but was- recovered by his son Edward at the Re storation. According to his own relation, the parliament gave him liberty 'either to exile himseU' Mto a foreign countiy, or to run the hazard of further danger.' Of course he never took his seat as chief jus tice m Westminster HaU; and the pro thonotaries of the King's Bench, Henley and Whitwick, took advantage of the dis tractions of the times to appropriate to^ themselves the fees received for his use. They were brought to account by the chief justice's son in 1663, when, notwith standing they pleaded the Statute of Limitations, they were forced by a decree- m Chancery to refund the whole amount. ( W, Nelson's Reports, 76.) Sir Robert fled into France m 1646, and survived his royal master just seven months,, dying at Calais on August 30, 1649. His body was brought to England and en tombed with that of his -wife, under a stately monument, m Brasted Church. Among Ms papers, now m the possession of his noble descendant, has been found a jeu d'esprit on the twenty-four links of the collar of SS., each Unk representing some judicial attribute commencing with the letter S. It is whoUy m Ms hand'writmg, and was probably composed as an amuse ment of his exUe. It not only shows great mgenmty, but exhibite m the stiongest Ught 'with what solemn responsibiUty the writer regarded the quaUfications, the vir tues, and the duties of a judge. (Notes and Queries, Ist S. x. 367.) His short memoir also, written undoubtedly dming his exile, gives pleasmg evidence of an amiable and pious mind. He married, whUe yet a student, Margaret, daughter of John Miller, and by her he left several cMldren. HEATH, Richaed, was caUed to the bar of the Inner Temple in November 1669, and was elected a bencher in October 1677. He was summoned to take the coif in 1683, and promoted to the bench of the Exchequer on April 21, 1686. Of Ms subserviency to the court there is mamfest proof in his con curring with his coUeagues m favour of the king's dispensmg power, and m his conduct with regard to the seven bishops. Arch bishop Sancroft thus relates it to King James, when called before him on Novem ber 6, 1688, after the mvasion of the Prmce of Orange : ' I wiU particularly acquaint your majesty with what one of your judges, Baron H. by name, said commg from the bench, where he had declared our petition to be a factious libel. A gentleman of quality asking him how he could have the conscience to say so, when the bishops had HEATH been legally discharged of it, he answered, " You need not trouble yourself with what I said on the bench : I have mstructions for what I said, and I had lost my place if I had not said it." ' He did lose his place shortly after, bemg superseded by James himself in the beginnmg of December. No wonder therefore that he was included among those who were excepted from the bill of mdemnity at the revolution. He died in July 1702. His wife was Kathe rine, daughter of Henry Weston, of Ock- ham and Sende, Esq., sheriff of Surrey and Sussex. (2 Shower, 469 ; State Trials, xii. 503; ParL Hist, v. 334; Luttrell, i, 482, V 198,) HEATH, John, was the son of Thomas Heath, an alderman of Exeter, and the nephew of Benjamin Heath, to-wn-clerk and a lawyer of eminence in that city, who was the father of Dr, Benjamin Heath, the head-master of Eton. He Mmself for a time fllled the office of town-clerk of his native city. A member of the Inner Temple, he was called to the bar in June 1762, and in 1776 he was graced with the digmty of the coif. On July 19, 1780, he was appomted a judge of the Common Pleas, and in that court he continued to sit for nearly thirty-six years. He died at the age of eighty on Janu ary 16, 18I6, and was buried at Hayes in Middlesex, That he was somewhat eccentric may be surmised from his refusal to accept the honour of knighthood, at that time and now almost invariably conferred on the occupiers of the judicial bench, declaring that he would die ' plain John Heath ' — a resolution to which he flrmly adhered. But his excellence in performing the func tions of a judge is allowed by all who were witnesses of his career. Lord Eldon, who was part of the time chief justice of that court, took occasion to remark with admi ration and surprise on the extent of his professional knowledge. Many also are the testimonies to his private worth, and to the universaUty and accuracy of his general knowledge. He was considered a severe judge, and, thoughcapital punishments were then carried to an outrageous extent, the failure of the ticket-of-leave system which too frequently foUows the penalties since substituted forcibly conflrms the judge's opinion that ' the criminal is soon thrown upon you again, hardened m guUt.' Yet in Ms private intercourse he was kind, charitable, and good-natured. He died unmarried, (Notes and Queries, 3rd S, ii. 11, &c.) HEGHAU, Rogee de, was of a Kentish family, and probably the son of Robert de Hegham, whose widow, Matilda, paid for an assize M that county in 56 Henry IH., 1272, (Excerpt e Rot Fin. ii, 571.) In HEIGHAM 337 21 Edward I. he acted on the part of the kmg on a quo warranto at York. (Arch, Inst, York, 164.) In 26 and 26 Edward L he assessed the tallage of London, and m the latter year he was appointed to peram bulate the forests of flve counties. At the end of the same year he is mentioned on the records as a baron of the Exchequer (Madox, i. 467, U. 235 ; ParL Writs, i. 397), although Dugdale does not mtroduce Mm into his list till two years afterwards. In 34 Edward L, having been grossly insulted by one WUUam de Briwes, agamst whom he had pronounced a judgment, the deUn- qiient was ordered to make an apology in full court, and to be committed to the Tower, there to remain at the 'will of the king, (Abh, Placit. 256.) In the last year of that reign he acted as a justice of assize in Durham, and was one of the justices of trailbaston for the home counties. (Rot. ParL i, 198, 218, 267,) On the accession of Edward H, he was re-appointed to his seat in the Exchequer, and died about the middle of the second year, ih January or February 1309. HEIGHAM, Clement, whose family was so called from a -village of that name in Suffolk, was the son of Clement Heigham, of Lavenham, and Matilda, daughter of La-wi-ence Cooke. Adniitted into LincoM's Inn in I5I7, he became reader in 1538, and again in 1547. At an early period of his career the monastery of St. Edmunds Bury appointed him chief bailiff of the Uberty of St. Edmund, but there is no appearance of his practising in the courts at "Westminster, his name bemg nowhere mentioned in the Reports. This may have arisen in some measure from his being a Roman Catholic, a sufficient impediment to any professional advancement m the reign of Edward VI. He was soon engaged in Mary's service as a pri-yy councillor, and sat in parliament successively for Rye, Ipswich, "West Looe, and Lancaster. After the queen's marriage with King Philip he was selected as the speaker of the parUament that met on November 11, 1554, in which the attainder of Cardinal Pole was reversed, and the supremacy of the pope restored. The re vival of the acts against heresy mduced nearly forty members, whose names are preserved by Sir Edward Coke, to leave the house in disgust at the obsequiousness of the majority to the rulmg powers. (Pari. Hist. i. 617-625.) The parliament was dis solved on January 16, and eleven days afterwards Heigham received the honour of knighthood from the hands of King Philip. (Machyn's Diary, 342.) On March 2, 1558, he was promoted to the office of lord chief baron of the Ex chequer ; but, though on the accession of Queen Elizabeth he received a new patent, he was removed on January 22, 1659. 338 HELYNN Sir Clement then retired to his seat, Barrow Hall in Suffolk, where he spent the remainder of his life, beloved for his piety and benevolence, and for the readiness he always evmced in accommodating the differences of his neighbours, sho-wMg himself in all respect a loyal subject, and maMng himself so little obnoxious by his religious opinions that the lord keeper, Sir Nicholas Bacon, was a visitor in his house. He died there on March 9, 1670, and was buried in Thurning Church m Norfolk, He married twice. His first -wife was Anne, daughter of John de Moonines, of Seamer Hall in Suffolk; and his second was Anne, daughter of Sir George Waldegrave of Smalbridge, and -widow of Henry Bures of Acton m the same county. By each he had children, and his representatives have preserved the honour of the family from that time to this, (Burgon's Gresham, ii. 108 ; Fuller's Worthies, U, 360.) HELYNN, Waltee de, is described in the Patent Roll of 52 Henry IH. as 'jus ticiarius noster,' and there are continual entries of payments for assizes to be held before him to the end of the reign. (Ex ceipt e Rot. Fin. U, 460-574.) He is called ' one of the Mng's justices appointed to hold the pleas of the lord the kmg' in I Ed ward I. ; and m the fourth year he was paid twenty pounds for his expenses in -yisiting ' eleven places to expedite the king's busi ness.' (Devon's Issue Roll, 81, 96.) It would appear that he was removed to the Common Pleas in 6 Edward I., as from that year tiU Trinity, 9 Edward I., 1281, fines were levied before him. (Dugdale's Orig. 44.) There is no later mention of him after 1284, when a special commission was directed to him and Giles de Berkeley. (Swinfield's Roll, 182.) He was seated at Much-Marcle, near Ledbury, in Hereford shire. HEMINGTON, Richaed de, was pro fessionally engaged in the courts, and in 35 Henry IIL, 1261, appeared before the king at Windsor on the part of John de Bailiol, who afterwards, in 52 Henry III., proceeded against him for delivering up his castle of Fothermgay to Baldwin Wake, the king's enemy and his, without his as sent. (Abb. Placit. 165.) He performed the duties of a justice itmerant in 46 and 47 Henry III,, 1262-8, and the Fine RoU proves that he was a re gular justicier till near the end of the reign, the last entry of payments for writs of assize to be held before him being in Oc tober 1370. (Ibid. 178 ; Excerpt, e Rot Fin. U, 410-624.) HENDEN, Edwaed, was descended from a branch of the old Kentish family of the Hendens, originally residing on an estate bearing its name m the parish of Wood- church in Kent, but afterwards removed to HENGHAM Benenden in its neighbourhood, where they were clothiers in great repute. Entering at Gray's Inn in 1686, he be came reader there in I6I4, and m the same year sat in parliament for Rye. Having been in I6I6 called to the degree of the coif, for the next two-and-twenty years he had an extensive practice, and on January 22, 1639, he was constituted a baron of the Ex chequer (Rymer, xx. 306) and knighted, 'When the parliament entered the field against the Mng they passed an ordinance assessmg all who had not voluntarily con tributed to the army, in such sum as the committee meeting at Haberdashers' HaU should deem reasonable, not exceeding a twentieth part of their estate. In Decem ber 1643 the Commons applied to the Lords to rate Baron Henden, as an assistant to their lordships, who accordmgly as sessed him at 2000/. for the twentieth part of his estate, to be employed for the defence of Poole and Lyme, The baron not obey ing this order, the house, on the 23rd of the same month, directed proceedings against him ; but, as he was iU at the time, it seems that they were not then taken, and that he died in the following February. (Lords' Journals, vi. 324, 436.) He was buried m the chancel of Biddenham Church. HENGHAM, William de, was a resident in Norfolk, and was probably a brother of Andrew, the father of Ralph de Hengham. He was one of four who, m 9 Henry IH., 1124, were appointed to take an assize of novel disseisin in Norfolk ; and m II26 he was sent -with three others to try certain prisoners in the custody of the Bishop of Ely, who were charged -with murder. (Rot Chus. n. 78, 169.) HENGHAM, Ralph de, was the son of Sir Andrew de Hengham, of a knightly family seated at St. Andrew's Manor at Hengham in Norfolk. He was brought up to the then commonly united professions of the Church and the law, in the former of which he held a canonry in St. Paul's and the chancellorship of Exeter, to which he was collated in 1276, but resigned it -withm three years and a half. (Le Neve, 89.) As a la-wyer, the payment for assizes to be held before Mm commences in January 1270, 54 Henry IIL, which was probably the date of his appointment as a justice of the King's Bench. These entries of assizes before him are very numerous, and the rapidity with which he established his reputation in the court is evinced by his standing at the head of the circuite during the next two years till the end of the reign. (E.vcerpt e Rot Fin. U. 604-684.) That, on the accession of Edward I, he was immediately removed to the Common Pleas appears from a fine having been levied before hini in November 1272 ; and that his elevation as chief justice of the HENGHAM Thing's Bench must have been between November 1273 and September 1274 (though Dugdale does not name him m that ¦character till 1278) is proved by an entry of pleas ' coram domino rege et R. de Hengham et sociis suis, justiciis de Banco domini regis, in Octabis S, Michaelis, anno regno &c. secundo, mcipiente tercio, apud Westm.' (Ahb, Placit. 263.) In 18 Edward 1. he was removed from Ms office and fined, but what was the pre cise charge against him is nowhere recorded, and the amount of the fine is variously stated. It has been generally fixed at 7000 marks ; but the complamte against Mm in the next parUament were palpably too sUght to warrant such a punishment, and probably were merely made by those mean spirits who are too ready to press a falling man. One was, that the chief justice had confirmed a false judgment pronounced by Solomon de Rochester, the justice itinerant ; and another, that a man had been arbitrarily imprisoned by him. (Rot ParL i. 48, 52.) There is much more probability that the fine did not ex- clear the gaol there, and to hear a certain appeal, (Rot. Claus. i. 83.) By his wife Roese he had a son, also. named Simon, who sided with the rebel lious barons, and was excommunicated by the pope. His lands were restored after his death in 4 Henry IH., 1219, to his brother PhiUp (E.vcerpt e Rot. Fin. i. 44), whose successors were summoned to par liament in the reigns of the three Edwards ; but the eighth baron dying in 1388 -withr out issue, the male branch became extinct, and the barony is in abeyance among the representatives of Lucia, the sister of the last lord, who married Gilbert Earl of Angus. KYNASTON, William, was a member of a family long established at Ruyton-of- the-eleven-towns in Shropshire. He pur chased m 1721 the office of master in Chancery from Mr. WilUam Rogers, to whom, according to the vicious practice of the period, he paid 6000/. for the place, besides 1500 guineas to Lord Chancellor Macclesfield for his admission. 'When the investigation took place m 172.5-6 mtO' the malpractices of the court, among the deficiencies in the accounte of several of the masters, that of Mr. Kynaston was found to be above 26,000/. He suffered imprisonment in the Fleet for his debt, and was exposed in two acts of parUament, St. 12 Geo, I. c. 32 and 83. Afterwards maMng good his deficiency from his private estate, he was not excluded from Ms office, in which he stiU contmued tiU his death. The ' Gentleman's Magazme ' (x. 93) an nounces his appointment as cursitor baron of the Exchequer, in the room of George CUve, deceased, m February 1740 ; but as there is no patent nor other proof of Ms holding that office, and as Edward Barker had the grant of it in Januai-y 1744, it is probable that he only performed the duties temporarily during the vacancy. In 1733 he was elected recorder of Shrewsbury, and represented that borough in the par Uaments of 1735, 1741, and 1747. He died in 1759, and was bmied in the family vault atRuyton. (State Trials, xvi. 858, 907 j ParL Hist xiv. 76.) L LACY, Rogee de, was descended from the before-mentioned Eustace Fitz-John, whose son Richard Fitz-Eustace, constable of Chester, married the daughter of Al breda, widow of Henry de Lacy, by her second husband Robert de Lizures, and had by her a son, John, who assumed the name and arms of Lacy, on becoming pos sessed of the property of the ancient family of De Lacy. Roger was the son of this John, by AUce de Vere, the sister of Wil liam de MandeviUe^ and on his father's death in 1179, inherited the constableship of Chester. He accompanied Kmg Richard to the Holy Land, and was present at the sieges^ LACY of Acre and Damietta. In King John's confldence also he held a high place, and was sent by him with other eminent men to conduct the Kmg of Scotland to Lm coln, to do homage and fealty to the En glish sovereign. A lively account is given by Roger de Wendover (173, 180, 2.36) of Ms bravery in defending for nearly a year the castle of Roche-Andeli in Normandy, when besieged by Philip, King of France, and of his ultimate capture in 1204, when famine compelled a surrender. King John advanced for Mm his ransom of one thou sand marks, and afterwards exonerated him from its repayment (Rot. Claus. i, 4), conferring upon him, on his return to Eng land, the sheriffalty of the counties of York and Cumberland, with the custody of their casties. (Rot Pat 48 ; Fullei:) His constant attendance on the king is shown by various records; and from two entries on the Rotulus de Prrestito, of losses of forty shilUngs and twenty-five shillings, ' de ludo suo ad tabulas,' may be judged the familiarity which existed between him and the monarch, who, it may be observed, devoted part of Sunday to this amusement. (Rot Chart, passim ; Rot Misce, 139-164 ; Rot de Prcestito, 229, 238.) Among other valorous acts of his life, it is related of him that, hearing, during Chester fair, that Ranulph, Earl of Chester, was besieged by the Welsh in the castle of Rothellan, he proceeded -with a body of loose and unarmed people coUected there, and delivered the earl from his danger. For this timely assistance the earl gi-anted Mm ' magisterium omnium leccatorum et meretricum totius Cestreshire,' which he afterwards transferred to his steward, Hugh de Button, and his heirs. That he acted as a justicier appears from fines which were levied before him in the tenth year of this reign. (Hunter's Preface.) He married Maud de Clere, sister to the treasurer of York Cathedral, and, dying m January 1212, was buried in the abbey of Stanlaw in Cheshire. He was suc ceeded by his son, the next-mentioned John. (Dugdale's Baron, i. 100.) LACY, John de (Eael of Lincoln), was the son of the above Roger de Lacy, by Maud de Clere, Though the king con tinued to him the favour which he had ex tended to Ms father, it is evident that some suspicion of his loyalty existed, inasmuch as, when his castle "of Dunington was com mitted to his charge in July 1214, 16 John, he was called upon to provide four of his vassals, as well as Ms brother Roger, as hostages for his faithful services, (Rot Claus. i. 151, 167, 169.) He nevertheless joined the insurgent barons, and was one of the twenty-five who were appointed to enforce the observance of Magna Charta, LAKEN 391 Obtaimng, however, the pardon of the king in January 1216, he not only had his lands restored, but several otherfavours were soon after conferred upon him ; and in August he had letters of protection sine termino. (Rot Pat 162, 176, 179, 180.) Two sub sequent records, however, afford proof of a second revolt — one in September 1216, by which the king committed Ms land of Navesby in Northamptonshire to Emald de Ambleville; and another in August 1217, 1 Henry IIL, by which, on returning to his allegiance, his property was again replaced in his possession. He then made a pUgrimage to the Holy Land, but had re turned to England before 5 Henry IIL, in which year he and his -wife Margaret had a grant of the chase of Wynbumeholt, (Rot. Claus. i. 289, 318, 389, 462.) She was the daughter of Robert de Quincy, by Hawise, daughter of Hugh Cyyelioc,Earl of Chester, and one of the coheirs of her brother, Ranulph Earl of Chester, who had been also created Earl of Lincoln. On Ranulph's death without issue the earldom of Lincoln was granted to this John de Lacy. Although, at first, the new earl jomed the party of Richard Mareschal, Earl of Pembroke, in his resistance to the king's authority, he was soon induced to retum to his duty. He continued loyal for the re mainder of his life, and was entrusted with the sheriffalty of Cheshire in 21 and 24 Henry HI,, and with other honours and privileges. He twice filled the office of justice itine rant—in 10 and 18 Henry III,, I226-I233. (Ibid U. 161.) He died on July 22, 1240, and was buried in the abbey of Stanlaw. By his wife Mar garet, who survived him, and was after wards married to Walter Mareschal, Earl of Pembroke, he had a son, Edmund, whose son Henry, the third earl of this name, died in 1312 -without issue male. (Exceipt. e Rot Fin. i. 265, 338, 390 ; Wendover, iU. 297, 855, iv. 44, 256, 270.) LAKEN, William, was of an opulent family seated at WUley in ShropsMre. He was the son of Sir Richard Laken, knight, by Elizabeth, the daughter of Sir Hamond de Peshall, of the county of Stafford, knight, and -widow of Henry Grendon. He is men tioned in the Year Book in Michaelmas, 31 Henry VL, 1452 ; and in the February following he was summoned to take upon him the degree of the coif. On June 4, 1465, 6 Edward IV., he was constituted the fifth judge of the Court of Kmg's Bench, and sat there tiU the restoration of Henry VI. in 1470, when he was re-appointed ; as he was also by Edward IV. on his retum in the following year. He died on October 6, 1475, and was buried at Bray in Berkshire, where his monumental brass stiU remains. He mar- 392 LAMVALLEI ried twice: his firstwife was named Matilda; his second was Sybella, one ofthe daughters of John Syterwalt, of Cleaver. They left issue, which was afterwards -widely spread ; and he is now represented by Sir Edmund Lacon, baronet, of Norfolk, the third of that title. (Hasted, U. 397; Ashmole's Berks, iii. 4.) LAM'VALLEI, William de, was a baron holdmg lands in Essex ; and his attendance on the court is shown 'by Ms being one of ¦ the witnesses to the king's charter in 10 Henry II, He was selected as a justice itinerant and associated with Thomas Basset, a man experienced in the laws, in 21 Henry IL, 1175 ; and their pleas con tinue to be recorded for the five following years, though they probably are only the arrears ofthe pleas of the first year, (Madox, i. 125-139.) Nothmg further is related of him during the rest of Henry's reign ; but in that of , Richard he lost the royal favour and his lands, recovering both, however, by a timely fine of one hundred marks. Under John, although he never acted as a justicier, he is so described in the letters sent by Baldwin de Betun as security for the fine on the charter of liberties granted to the burgesses of Heddun, (Rot de Oblatis, 89.) In the same year he was, for a fine of two hundred marks, entrusted with the custody of Col chester Castle and of the forest up to Chelmsford Bridge, as he formerly held them in Richard's reign. But he again forfeited the royal favour, for in 3 John he paid seventy marks for the king's ' bene volentiam ; ' and in 6 John, Geoffrey Fitz- Peter had the custody of his lands in Essex. (Rot de Finibus, 2791) Dying in 12 John, he left by his wife, Hawyse, a son WilUam, whose daughter married John, son and heir of Hubert de Burgh, Earl of Kent. (Dugdale's Baron, i. 6.33; Nicolas.) LANCASTEE, William de, was the grandson to Roger Fitz-Reinfrid, a j usticier. His father, Gilbert, had married Helewise, the only daughter of William de Lancaster, Baron of Kendal, who not only himself confederated with the barons in their wars with King John, but involved Ms son, William, who assumed the name of Lan caster from his mother, in the same troubles. He was one of the knights who were taken in Rochester Castle in 17 John, and it was only by a fine of twelve thousand marks that his fether could obtain his release, and a remission of the royal anger ; nor was it tiU 1 Henry IIL that he was discharged from prison, (Rot Claus. i. 241, 385 ; Rot lie Fmihus, 670.) He afterwards conducted Mmself as a loyal subject, and in 10 Henry III. was named as one of the justices itine rant for the county of Cumberland. He held the sherifliilty of Lancashire LANE from 18 to 30 Henry IIL, and the honor of Lancaster was committed to his trust. He died in December 1246, and was buried in Furness Abbey. He left no issue by his wife, Agnes de Brus. (Dugdale's Baron, i. 421.) LANE, Richaed, the lord keeper of the Great Seal of Charles I., was son of Richard Lane, of Com'tenhall, near Northampton, by Elizabeth, daughter of Clement Vincent, of Harpole in the same county, where he was born in 1584. (Baker's Northamptonsh. i. 181.) He was called to the bar at the Middle Temple, and his early practice wag in the Exchequer, the cases in which he reported from 1605 to 1 612. He was reader to his inn in 1630, and treasurer in 1637, and had previously in 1615 been appomted counsel or deputy recorder of Northampton, and in 1634 attorney-general to the Prince of Wales. (Clarendon's Life, i. 67.) "When the House of Commons impeached the Earl of Strafford, Mr. Lane was assigned to con duct the earl's defence, which he did so ably that the Commons, seeing the great probability of the earl's acquittal by the Lords, desisted from the trial, and effected their malicious pui-pose by a disgraceful bill of attainder, which by popular clamour was eventually passed. (State Trials, ui. 1472.) OfficiaUy connected with the court, he of course joined the Mng at Oxford, where, having been previously kmghted, he was appointed lord chief baron on Ja nuary 25, 1644. The first duty that Sir Richard had to perform was to act as one of the commis sioners on the part of the Mng in treating for an accommodation at Uxbridge, when he joined the other la-wj-ers in resisting the demand of the parliament to have the militia entirely vested m them. There ap pearing no probability of satisfactorily set tling this question, or that upon religion, which was -violently debated, the treaty was broken off and the war proceeded. On Lord Lyttelton's death, the Great Seal was placed in the hands of Sir Richard as lord keeper, on August 30, 1645. The Iring, whose difficulties mcreased dailj^, was at last obliged to escape from Oxford, and that city was surrendered to the opposing army under General Fairfax on June 24, 1646, under articles in which the lord keeper was the principal party on the king's behalf. By one of them it was pro-rided that the Great Seal and all the other official seals should be left for the victors. ( Wliite locke, 210.) Thus deprived ofthe insignia of his office, nothing remained to him but its name, which he reteined during the re mainder of the king's life. The only evi dence that his patent, was renewed by Charles II. is in the epitaph on his wife's tomb at Kingsthorp. Like the king, he became an exile from his native land, and LANEEANC died in 1660 in France, as appears by the commission, dated April 22, 1661, to his relict the Lady Margaret, to administer to his personalty. LANEEANC (Aechbishop op Cantee- buey) was born at Pavia about the year 1005, and belonged to an Ulustrious family which is said to have descended from the Emperors Cams and Numerian. After ac quiring some celebrity m his native city, where he was for several years professor of laws, his anxiety to travel took him to Normandy, where he first opened a school at Avranches, and eventually, about 1042, retired to the poor and lonely abbey of Bee, then one of the most insignificant of the Norman monasteries. Herluin, the abbot, discovering his talents, induced him to re sume his office of teacher ; and the fame of Ms lectures became so -widely extended that students flocked to them from all parts, Pope Alexander II, being one of his pupils. He thus diffused a teste for knowledge among the clergy, and to him, in a great degree is to be attributed the revival of Latin literature and the liberal arts in France. His exposure of the ignorance of Arfastus has been already mentioned, and the enmity it occasioned. Ite effect, how ever, was soon removed by the good humour of Duke William, and he became first a monk, and then prior, of the monastery. Among the students who came to receive his instructions there were some who had been pupils of Berengarius, archdeacon of Angers, who was master of a school at Tours. This desertion exciting the envy of Berengarius, who had propounded some doctrines relative to the Eucharist in oppo sition to those maintained by the Roman Church, he in revenge endeavoured to im plicate Lanfranc in the same opinions. Lanfranc, however, had little difficulty, not merely in satisfying the pontiff of his orthodoxy, but in establishing such a re putation at Rome as -to be called upon to refute the obnoxious heresy in the councU then assembled. _ Duke William, who highly appre ciated his talente, took the advantage of his visit to Rome by employing him to obtain a repeal of the sentence of excommunication to which he had been subjected by Manger, Archbishop of Rouen, on account of his marriage with Matilda, ¦aUeged to be related to him within the forbidden degrees of consanguinity. Lan franc was successful in obtaining the papal dispensation, accompanied by a condition that "WilUam and his wife should each found an abbey at Caen. This injunction they immediately obeyed, dedicating one of them to St, Stephen, and the other to the Holy Trinity. Of the former, Lanfranc was appointed the first abbot in 1063, and i LANFRANC 393 pursued Ms lectures there with increased celebrity. William entrusted to him the education of his chUdren, and offered him the arch bishopric of Rouen, which he was allowed to refuse : but after the Conquest, on the removal of Stigand from the archbishopric of Canterbury, the kmg, feeling the im portance of supplying his place with a man of weight and prudence, faithful to his intereste, and equal to the burden, selected Lanfranc as his successor, and overcame the scruples with which the modest abbot resisted his elevation. He was not only willingly accepted by the monks, and ap proved by the barons and people, but gladly confirmed by the pope. He was accord ingly consecrated in August 1070, and on -visiting Rome in the following year to receive the pall was welcomed with parti cular respect by Ms former pupil Alexander IL, who rose to give him audience, kissed him instead of presenting his slipper for that obeisance, and, not satisfied with giving him the usual pall, invested him -with that which he had himself used in celebrating mass. In this visit he defended the rights of the church of Canterbury against the claims of Thomas, Archbishop of York, and eventually succeeded in estabUshmg them before the Iring, to whose decision the pontiff referred the question. On his retum from Rome he laboured successfully in reforming- the irregularities and rudeness of the clergy. His severity in deprivmg manj' occasioned considerable complainte ; but the introduction of foreign scholars m their places contributed effec tually to the enlightenment of the nation. His efforts in support of his church were unremitting, nor were they repressed by the power of his opponents. Finding that the king's brother, Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, and Earl of Kent, while Stigand was in dis grace, had taken possession of ma,ny of the manors belonging to the archbishopric, Lan franc instituted a suit against him, which was tried before Geoffrey, Bishop of Cou- tance, at a shiremote on Penenden Heath, when, after three days' hearing, the resto ration of twenty-five manors was adjudged to him. Enjoying the favour of the Conqueror and of his successor, he employed his power in the advancement of justice and the protection of the EngUsh, His pri vate charities were widely diffused, and his munificence as a prelate is proved by his rebuilding the cathedral of Canterbury, recently destroyed by fire, together with all the buildings for the monks, whose num bers he increased from twenty to one hun dred and forty. He founded also the two hospitals of St, Nicholas at Harbledown, and of St. John at Canterbury, for lepers and the infirm ; he repaired many churches 394 LANGDALE and monasteries in Ms diocese which had suffered in the wars ; and he contributed largely to the restoration of Rochester Cathedral Dugdale (20) infers that Lanfranc, in conjunction -with Geoffrey, Bishop of Cou- tance, and Robert, Earl of Moreton, held the office of chief justiciary during some part of the Conqueror's reign, from the existence of several precepts he had seen, directed to them by the kmg, which he ca.n only thus interpret. That this mference is correctly drawn we have the evidence of some letters of Lanfranc addressed to the king while iu Normandy. His influence with William was undoubted, and the arrest of Odo is ascribed to Ms over coming the Conqueror's reluctance to touch an ecclesiastical person, by sug gesting that he might take him, not as Bishop of Bayeux, but as Earl of Kent. After a useful and active occupation of the primacy for nineteen years, he died on May 24, 1089, at the age of eighty-four, and was buried in his cathedral. Although devoted to literature during the whole of his life, few proofs of his learning remain. His principal work was his treatise against Berengarius. The others were cmefly upon ecclesiastical matters, including a commentary on the Epistles of St, Paul. (Biog. Brit. Lite- raria, ii. I ; Godwin, 59 ; Madox, i. 8, 32 ; WiU. Malmesb. 447-495 ; R. de Wendover, ii, 8-36 ; kc.) LANGDALE, Loed, /SteeH.BlCKEESTETH. LANGHAM, Simon de (Aechbishop of Canteebuey), became a monk of West minster in 1355, and till his death, forty years afterwards, he was a devoted friend to the house. Appointed prior in April, and abbot in May, 1849, he applied his early savings to the discharge of the en- gagemente of the monastery ; he suppressed its abuses, regulated its discipline, and gained the esteem of the brotherhood by his Mnd and equitable sway. He was raised to the office of treasurer of the kingdom on November 21, 1360, 84 Edward HI., and elected two years after wards to two bishoprics, London and Ely, to the latter of which he was appointed, by his own selection, on January 10, 1362, He continued treasurer till February 1363, when he succeeded William de Edmgton, Bishop of Winchester, as chan ceUor, On July 22, 1866, he was trans lated to Canterbury 'by papal provision, and about the same time resigned the Great Seal, During his primacy he greatly exerted himself in the correction of the"^ abuse of the privUege of pluralities ; but he incurred some censure by the removal of John Wickliffe from the headship of Canter bury Hall in Oxford, which was iu conse quence of the appointment having been LANGLEY contrary to the statutes of Simon Islip,. its founder. And if this Wickliffe be the same man as the reformer, of which some doubt has been lately raised, there- is evidence in his writings to show that his attacks on the popish exactions were not occasioned by this quarrel, as he had commenced them some years earlier. On September 27, 1368, Pope Urban V. promoted Langham to the dignity of a cardinal presbyter, by the title of St. Sixtus. The kmg taking umbrage at his- acceptance of it, he resigned the arch bishopric on November 27, and retired to Avignon. Pope Gregory XI, advanced Mm to the title of Cardmal Bishop of Preneste, ha-ying first employed him in several negotiations in 1372 to mediate- peace between the Kings of England and France and the Earl of Flanders, during which he revisited his native country. In these treaties he is styled the Cardinal of Canterbury, and the king calls him his ' dear and faithful friend.' (N. Fcedera, iii. 932-970.) It is certain that he re tained so much of the royal favour as to^ be permitted to hold various prefermente at this time m England. Besides a pre bend in the church of York, he was trea surer and archdeacon of Wells, and dean of Lincoln, his filUng the latter place while a cardinal bemg the subject of a complaint to the parUament of Apiil 1876. (Rot. ParL ii. 839.) It is stated that at this time he had appUed for and procured permission to- retum to England, and that he projected the rebuildmg of Westminster Abbey. But all his plans were frustrated by a paralytic stroke, which occasioned his- death on .Inly 22, 1376. He was first buried in the church of the Carthusian. monastery which he had founded in Avig non, and was three years afterwards re moved to St. Benet's Chapel in Westmin ster Abbey, where his tomb still remains. He was a man of great capacity, wise,, affable, temperate, and humble ; and of his^ munificence we haye evidence in his bene factions to Westminster, so that it is pro bable that the ' railing hexameters ' on his^ translation from Ely to Canterbm-y — Lffitentur coeli, quia Simon transit ab Ely ; Cujus in adventum fient in Kent millia centum, were rather the maUcious effusion of ani individual enemy than the expression of popular feeling.' (Godivin, 115, 261;. Weever, 479; Le Neve, 6, 39, 44, 69; Angl. Sac. i. -46.) LANGLEY, or LONGLEY, THOMAS- (Bishop oe Dueham), was descended from an honourable family in Yorkshire. He studied at Cambridge, and in his youth was a retainer of the house of Lancaster. Educated as a priest, he was prefeired in LANGLEY 1400 to a canonry, and in 1401 to the deanery of York. His connection with the reigning family soon introduced him to the court, where he began his political career as keeper of the Mng's privy seal in 1408 (Devon's Issue RoU, 298), retaining it tiU March 1405, 6 Henry VL, when he received the Great Seal, A vacancy in the archbishopric of York occurring soon after by the execution of Richard Scrope, Langley was elected his successor on August 8 (Rymei; viii, 407) ; but the pope resisting-, and the death of Bishop Skirlawe opportunely happemng soon afterwards, he took the wiser course of avoiding a contest with the papal power by accepting the bishopric of Durham, to which he was elected on May 17, 1406, He retained the Great Seal till January 30, 1407. During the remainder of the reign of Henry IV. he was frequently employed in state affairs. In 1409 he had letters of protection on going into Tuscany on the kmg's busmess, and in 141 1 he acted as • a commissioner at Hauden-Stank, on the borders of Scotland. In the latter year, on June II, he received a cardinal's hat from Pope John XXIII,, an elevation which was not displeasing to his sovereign, whose continued confidence in him was shown by making him one of the executors of his will, (Devon's Issue RoU, 385,) Henry V, soon after his accession sent him as one of the ambassadors to the King of France (Ihid. 336, 340), with whom a truce for one year was concluded. He was a second time raised to the office of chan cellor on July 23, 1417, and retained it to the end ofthe reign, when, finding himself in the possession of the Great Seal with a new sovereign only a few months old, he had the precaution to obtain a formal entry of his delivering it up to the king's uncle, Humphrey Duke of Gloucester, and other lords, and to have the same recorded on the RoUs of Pariiament. With the full assent of that parliament the bishop was re-appointed on November 16, 1422 (Rot. Pari. 170-1), but continued in office only about twenty months, being succeeded, on July 6, 1424, by Beaufort, Bishop of Wmchester. He was nominated one of the king's council in the parliament at Leicester m February 1426 ; but in the foUo-wing June he prayed to be excused therefrom on ac count of his age and infirmities, so that he might attend to his episcopal duties, (^Acts Privy Council, iii, 197,) Thus reUeved from poUtical attendance, he occupied the rest of Ms life in numerous magnificent and charitable works in his diocese, among which was his restoration of the Galilee m his cathedral built by Bishop Pusar, and the foundation of two schools for grammar LANGTON 395 and music. He did on November 80, 1437, having presided over his see for more than thirty-one years, (Godivin, 751; Le Neve, 314, 346; AngL Sac i, 775; Suriees's Durham, i. iv.) LANGTON, John de (Bishop of Chi- chestee), of whose parentage nothing is known, was a clerk in the Chancery, and is the flrst person to whom the title of master or keeper of the Rolls can be distinctly traced. In a patent of 14 Edward L, 1286, quoted by Sir T. Hardy, he is called 'Custos Rotulorum CanceUarise Domini Regis,' a duty which then, probably, devolved on the senior clerk of the Chancery, as even in the present reign that officer was still considered as the head of the masters of that court. Like his brethren in that de partment, he was an ecclesiastic, and held, among other preferments, canonries in the churches of Chichester, Lincoln, and York, and the treasurership of Wells. He was appointed chancellor on Decem ber 17, 1292, and contmued the prudent and sagacious course pursued by Bishop Burnel, his predecessor. He witnessed, during his ministry, the triumph of his sovereign's arms in Scotland, and the resig nation of that kingdom by Baliol. An event much more important in its conse quences also occurred while he held the Seal — viz., the enactment of the statute caUed 'Articuli super Cartas,' 28 Edward I., 1300, by which the Great Charter was fully conflrmed, and regulations made to prevent any future encroachments on its provisions. On the death of WiUiam de Luda, Bishop of Ely, in 1298, a contest arose be tween the monks of that abbey, one party electing their prior, and the other John de Langton, to till the "vacancy. The king gave his assent to the latter choice, but the pope, to whom the two candidates hastened to submit their pretensions, superseded both, and placed another in the seat. (Godwin, 259.) To conciliate all parties, however, the cunmng pontiff raised the prior to the bishopric of Norwich, and gave the arch deaconry of Canterbury, then a very valuable preferment, to John.de Langton. This appointment took place in 1299. (Le Neve, 12.) He resigned the chanceUorship on August 12, 1302, and in May 1306 he was raised to the bishopric of Chichester, Soon after the accession of Edward H. he was agam, about August 1307, appointed chancellor, and on January 21, 1308, he delivered up the Great Seal to the Mng, who was then proceedmg to Boulogne to celebrate his nuptials -with the French prmcess, Isabel, and received another to be used during the kmg's absence. He con tmued chanceUor tUl May II, I3I0, when he retired fi:om the office. 396 LANGTON He presided over his diocese during the remainder of the troubled reign of Edward IL, and for the first ten years of that of his ¦successor, dying on June 17, or July 19, 1337. He was resolute in the performance of his ¦ecclesiastical functions. Having excom municated Earl Warren for adultery, that nobleman came -with his retainers to lay violent hands on Mm ; but the bishop, aided by his servants, succeeded in resisting their .attempt, and threw the earl and all his party into prison. He was very bountiful to his see, and in the university of Oxford he founded a chest, still called by his name, ¦out of which any poor graduate might, on .proper security, "borrow a small sum for his immediate necessities. (Godivin, 606 ; Chapter Books, Chichester.) LANGTON, "Waltee DE (Bishop of Lich- JiELD AND Coventry), is mtroduced by Sir T. Hardy among the keepers of the Great Seal, because on the death of Bishop Burnel, the chanceUor, on October 25, 1292, 20 Ed ward I., it ¦was delivered to Mm as custos ¦of the king's wardrobe, unAer the seal of WiUiam de Hamilton. If either of these is to be called keeper, however, the latter is the more entitled to the designation. They had no more thau the temporary care of the Seal, while in its usual place of deposit, till the appointment of a new chancellor, the ¦above John de Langton, which took place on December 12. Walter de Langton was born at West Langton in the county of Leicester, and was nephew of Wiljisim de Langton, dean of York. He was himself dean of the free chapel at Bruges, a canon of Lichfield, and one of the pope's chaplains. He held the •office of keeper of the wardrobe until he was raised to the treasurership of England, on September 28, 1295 ; and iu the following February he was elected Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, still retaining the office of treasurer, (Mado.v, ii. 42.) Although possessing the king's confidence and favour, his integrity and boldness in correcting the insolence of Peter de Gave ston and Prince Edward's other servante, ¦and restraining their expenses, occasioned him much trouble and persecution. In 1301 hewas charged with such heinous crimes by one Sir John Love tot, as adultery, simony, ¦and homicide, that the king was obUged to dismiss him till he had purged himself. For this he was compelled to take a journey to Rome, where, after great cost,' he succeeded, and wasnot only reinstated in June 1303, but received the strongest proof of his sove reign's conviction of his innocence by being .made principal executor of the king's will. On Edward s death, however, his persecu- ¦tion recommenced. He was turned out of his office, cast into prison, and a long list of <;harges "brought against him for malversa tion, which were directed to be heard before L.-i"W William de Bereford, one of the judges. After a long imprisonment at London, Wal Ungford, and York, no proof could be brought against him, and he was absolved by the court in October 1308. In I31I he was again imprisoned on a charge of homicide, but again succeeded in confounding his ac cusers. His adherence to the Mng against the barons was followed by his restoration to his office in March 1812, 5 Edward H., from which he finally retired in September 1814, and spent the remainder of Ms days in the quiet exercise of his episcopal duties. He died on November 16, 1321, and was buried in the chapel of St. Mary, which he had added to his cathedral at Lichfield, His benefactions to his see were numerous and munificent. (Angl. Sac. i. ^441 ; God ivin, 318.) LASINGBY, William, derived, probably, fi-om a manor of that name m Lmcolnshire, is first mentioned in the RoUs of ParUament of 8 Henry IV,, where there are copies of commissions to him and two others to treat ou the part of the Earl of Northumberland with Robert, King of Scotland, and the am bassadors of France. For his connection with the earl's treasonable proceedmgs he was attainted, and all his lands forfeited. In the last year of Henry's reign, however, he obtained his pardon, and was restored to his possessions with the assent of the par Uament. (Rot Pari iu. 605, 655.) Ou the accession of Heni-y V. he was ap pointed chief baron of the Exchequer ; but the onl)' judicial transaction m which we find him engaged is on the commission to try Richard, Earl of Cambridge, Sir Thomas Grej', and Sir Hem-y Lescrop, of Marshani, who were condemned for conspiracy against the king's Ufe. (Ibid. iv. 65.) A new chief baron was appomted on No vember 4, 1419 ; but whether the vacancy was made by Lasingby's death or resigna tion does not appear. LATHELL, NICHOLAS, who in I Edward I"V ., 1461, is described of the Exchequer, had a grant of 20/. a year out of the profits of Bedfordshire and BucMnghamshire. In 1473 he was clerk of the Pipe, and fourteen years afterwards, in Michaelmas 1487, 3 Henry VIL, he was promoted, no doubt on account of his experience as an officer, to the bench of the Exchequer, as fourth baron, Ou December 5, 1488, he was advanced to the office of third baron, and retained his seat till the seventeenth year of that reign, (Rot ParL v. 472, 529, vi, 97,) LATTNFAEE, John de, is introduced by Madox (ii, 319) in his List of Barons of the Exchequer in 42 Henry IIL, 1268. LA'W, Edwaed (Loed Ellenboeough), was of a family distinguished by clerical honours. His father was the learned Ed mund Law, Bishop of Carlisle ; his elder LAW brother John became Bishop of Clonfert in 1782, of Killala in 1787, and of Elphin in 1796 ; and another brother, George Ed'ward, was consecrated Bishop of Chester in 1812, and was translated to the diocese of Bath and Wells m 1824. His mother was Mary, the daughter of John Christian, Esq, of Unerigge in Cumberland ; and, of the thir teen children she produced, he was the sixth child and fourth son. Edward Law was born at Great Salkeld in Cumberland on November 16, 1750, In 1762 he was placed on the foimdation of the Charterhouse, where he remamed six years, and rose to the head of the school. Proceeding in 1768 to Cambridge, he en tered Peterhouse College, of which his father had been master since the year 1754, Among his friends there was Archdeacon Coxe, by whom his picture at that time has been so faithfully drawn that it may be recognised in all his future career. His disposition is described as warm and generous, his thoughts as great and striking, his language as strong and nervous, and somewhat inclined to ex press his opinions with a Uttle too much abruptness; active and enterprising, and preferring in his studies ' the glowing and animated conceptions of a Tacitus to the softer and more delicate graces of a TuUy.' In 1771 he took his degi'ee of B.A,, coming out of the school as third wrangler, and gaining the gold medal for classical learn ing. In the next two years he obtained the members' prize for the second best disserta tion in Latin prose, and honourably com pleted his university career by being elected fellow of his college. He had been admitted at Lincoln's Inn in 1769, and when he left the university he attended at the chambers of Mr, (after wards Baron) Wood, studying the mys teries of special pleading for two years, at the end of which he devoted himself for five years more to the practice of that science, the mastery of which is so essential to all who hope for future success and honour. He then was called to the bar in Hilary Term 1780, and joined the Northern Circuit, where he was not long before his merits were tested. His name, so familiar in the north, added to his already gained repute in London, insured him an imme diate accession of business. In 1787 he had eamed sufficient professional credit to be honoured with a silk gown, and in the same year held a crown brief on the trials of Lord George Gordon and others for libels, (22 State Triah,183.) But the best proof of the estimation vrith which his forensic efforts were regarded was that before he had been eight years at the bar he was entrusted with the conduct of the defence of Warren Hastings, Ms juniors being Mr. Dallas and Mr, Pluraer, both subsequently raised to the bench. In this LA'W 39r arduous and deeply responsible undertak ing, opposed to all the eloquence, invete racy, and power of the greatest orators of the day, he manfully and successfully- struggled during the seven years of that- famous trial, from February 1788 to April 1795, when his exertions were rewarded by the acquittal of his persecuted client Durmg the continuance of that trial he was, in 1792, made attomey-general of Lancaster; and on February 14, 1801, he was selected by Mr, Addington as attorney- general, and knighted. In little more than a year he was, by the death of Lord Ken yon, called to the high position of lord chief justice of the King's Bench, His promotion took place on April 12, 1802, accompanied by his being called to the- House of Peers with the title of Baron El- lenborough, a small village in Cumberland. At the time when he was appointed at torney-general for Lancaster the political world was agitated by the excesses of the French Revolution, and he became neces sarily engaged in all the trials that resulted from the seditious attempts of its admirers in this country. In conducting the extra ordinary prosecution at Lancaster of Thomas Walker and others for a con spiracy, he at once consented to an ac quittal, on findmg that the evidence in- support of it was m the highest degree' suspicious, and prosecuted the perjured witness. He succeeded at York in con victing Henry Redhead Yorke of conspi racy, and he assisted in London on the trials of Thomas Hardy and John Home- Tooke for high treason, in which his duties were confined to the examination of the witnesses. During the few months in' which he held the office of attorney-general to the Mng, besides prosecuting to convic tion ,Ioseph Wall on a charge of murder' committed twenty years before, while go- venor of the island of Goree, he originated no prosecution for political offences. On commencing his official career a seat in parliament was provided for him, and> during the short time that he held it he* supported the ministerial measures with a nerve and vigour which at once fixed tho- attention of the house. These character istics distinguished his oratory in the House of Lords, His arguments were^ enforced with extraordinary power, and seemed to be urged without preparation ; but, his temper being too easily ruffled, he' was apt to use expressions the violence of which rather astonished than convinced that august assembly, and their coarseness. and mtemperance frequently called do-wn- upon him deserved castigation. On the death of Mr. Pitt m 1806, Lord EUenborough, accordmg to established custom, held the seal of chanceUor of the Exchequer tiU the new ministry was. 398 LA'W appointed. By that ministry, composed of the whigs and a few of Lord Sidmouth's friends, he was offered and refused the Great Seal, but by unadvisedly accepting a seat in the cabinet, subjected himself, as Lord Mansfield had done before him, to the suspicions which must attach to one who at the same time holds a political and a judicial position. However honourably and independently the individual may act, there is so palpable an indecorum_ in the connection between the two that it isto be hoped no further example wiU revive the controversy. His adherence to _ the whigs lasted only tUl the ministry expired. Thenceforward 'he disconnected himself from party, though all his tendencies were strongly towards the support of government and the resistance of innovations. He op posed most of the excellent endeavours of Sir Samuel Romilly to amend the criminal law, but was himself the author of an act, which goes by his name, making more stringent the punishment for malicious m- j uries. So inimical was he to all changes that he resisted the attempt of the same enlightened la-svyer to subject real estates to the payment of the debts of the pro prietor. Though the bigotry of his opinions as a legislator incurred grave censure, in his character as a judge he won the admiration of all. At least equal to his predecessor in legal learning, in personal deportment and in judicial eloquence he formed a complete contrast to him. His dignified bearing be spoke the chief justice, and his forcible language gave weight to his judgments, while the dread of his indignation against every attempt to impose upon the court tended greatly to improve the practice. His powers of sarcasm were very great, sometimes inconsiderately exercised ; but prevarication by a witness, frivolous objec tions by a counsel, or any appearance of indecorum in the conduct of a case, never escaped the severity of his rebukes. In all questions between man and man he was infiexibly just, and in the trial of cases where the laws of morality were outraged by either party he exposed the delinquent with indignant austerity. During his presidency the press teemed with libels both political and personal, and the chief justice partook most unjustly of the unpopularity which attended the nu merous prosecutions for them, particularly in the time when Sir Vicary Gibbs was attomey-general. Unmindful that ajudge has nothing to do with originating charges, the people forgot that he is not answerable for the cases brought before him for trial, and they were apt to tax his lordship with being tlie promoter of the obnoxious pro ceedings, as well as to blame him for the boldness with which he exposed the licen- LA"WEENCE tiousness ofthe press, and the severity with which the convicted were punished. His judgments, indeed, in all criminal cases were considered severe, and that pro nounced against Lord Cochrane, found guilty of a charge of conspiracy (his com pUcity in which was never positively proved and is now more than doubted), was par- I ticularly condemned. The most degi-ading part of it was immediately remitted, and , the sentence led to the abolition of the punishment of the pillory, except for per jury. Even Lord Cochrane's o-wn counsel acknowledged the judge's strict impar tiality on the trial, and fairly attributed the sentence to his abomination of all fraud, and to his determination to prove that in the eyes of the law there can be no dis tinction of persons. Fewjudges have equalled him m leaming, sagacity, and unsuspected integrity, and none have surpassed him. His rule was resolutely firm and infiexibly just, unswayed by the hope of popular applause or the fear of popular frenzy. Yet, though the admi ration and respect which must necessarily attend those quaUties could not be with held from Mm, he failed in securing the affection nf those over whom he presided. His severity of demeanour, his mtolerant manner, and his frequent petulance, natu rally produced more fear than love. In the exercise of his wit, of which he had a large share, there was too much sarcasm and ridi cule ; and in the numerous examples of it, which have been over and over again re peated, there is scarcely one of them wMch, however it may amuse the hearers hy ite humour, does not inffict a wound upon ite victim. At length overcome by his mcessant la bours, he felt the necessity of retiring. His resignation was received by the govemment with real regret, and the prince regent, in an elegant and eloquent letter, expressed his sorrow. This event occm-red on November 6, 1818, and m Uttle more than a month he ceased to live. He died on December 11, and was buried in the Charterhouse, where an exceUent stetue of him has been placed. He married Ann, the daughter of George Phillips Towry, Esq., formerly m the royal navy, and by that miion he was the father of five sons and five daughters, Edward, the eldest, for his services to the state, was in 1844 promoted to an earldom ; and Charles Ewan, the second son, held the important office of recorder of London, and was M.P. for the university of Cambridge at the time of his early death, (Lives by Townsend, Lord CampbeU, &c.) LA'WEENCE, Soulden, whose famUy is traced by the heralds as far back as a knight who was honoured with their present shield of arms by Richard Coeur de Lion, for Ms bravery at the siege of Acre, was great- LEACH ^andson to a physician to five crowned heads, grandson to a captain in the royal navy, and son of Dr. Thomas Lawrence, of Essex Street in the Strand, president of the CoUege of Physicians. He was "born in 1761, and was educated at St, Paul's School, and St John's College, Cam bridge, where he took his degree of B.A. in 1771, coming out seventh wrangler, and of M.A. in 1774, when he was elected fellow ¦of his college. CaUed to the bar by the Inner Temple in June 1784, he was honoured with a Serjeant's coif in 1787. Seven years after wards he was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas, in March 1794, but in the ¦course of a month exchanged his seat with Mr. Justice Buller, for one in the Court of King's Bench, receiving the honour of knighthood. The Reports of the time will show how well he j ustified the selection, and the sound ness of his law was not questioned when he ¦differed in opinion, as sometimes he did, with Lord Kenyon. That chief was suc ceeded in 1801 by Lord EUenborough, who had been Sir Soulden's college friend ; but .after a few years a difference arose between them, which induced the latter to take the opportunity that the resignation of Mr. .Justice Rooke in 1808 gave him, of retum ing to his original position in the Common Pleas. There he sat for the four following years, when he resigned in Hilary vacation I8I2. Survi-ying his retirement only two years and a half, he died on July 8, I8I4, and was bmied in St. Giles's-in-the-Fields, where there is a monument to his memory. He was a great favourite with the bar, who respected him for his learnmg, and loved him for his courtesy, a habit to which there was no exception, unless it was a little roughness towards those who were connected with the newspaper press. "He was so conscientious a judge that by a codicil to his will he directed the costs to lie paid to a litigant who had been de feated in an action in which he considered that he had wrongly directed the jury, {Hoare's Wilts; Freshfield, 84; Gent Mag. Ixxxiv. p. U, 92, Ixxxv, p, U. 12-17 ; Notes ¦and Queries, 3i-d S. in. 18, 395.) LEACH, John, was bom on August 28, 1760, at Bedford, where his father, Richard Leach, carried on the trade of a copper smith. He was educated at the grammar school of that to-wn, and, being intended for an architect, was placed in the office of Sir Robert Taylor, then eminent in that pro fession. One specimen of his constructive talents remains at the present day in a house called Hewlett's, at Bekesboume, near Canterbury, which he planned for the proprietor of the estate; and there is no- thmo- in this exauiple to indicate that he was unwise in leavmg that calUng for a more ambitious career. How the change LEACH 399 occurred is variously related, but the result was that, by the recommendation of some of his friends who were struck -with his energy and acuteness, he commenced the study of the law when he was about twenty-five years old, entering the Middle Temple in January 1786, and placing him self under the tuition of Mr. (afterwards Lord Chief Baron) Alexander, an equity counsel in considerable practice. He was called to the bar m February 1790, and, as the custom in those days was for even Chancery barristers, selected the Home Circuit and Surrey sessions. During the next ten years he attended them, and in both he secured an extensive business by his neat and forcible speeches and his lucid statement of facts. He also was engaged as counsel at the Seaford election and on the subsequent petition, being his first connection with that borough, for which he was elected recorder in 1795, and over which, by his residence there and his pur chases of property, he ultimately acquired such an influence as to be enabled to return both of ite members. From 1800, when he left the sessions and the circuit, his business in the equity courts increased to such an extent that in Hilary Term 1807 he was called within the bar -with a patent of precedence, and proved himself an able opponent to the counsel who then took the lead in those courts. His style was peculiarly precise and terse, and his lan guage remarkably correct and perspicuous, so that his arguments were very effective. In the previous year he entered parliament for Seaford, for which he continued to sit till 1816, when he left the ranks of the whigs, which he had at flrst joined, and adopted the politics of the regent, who had set him the example of change. With that royal personage he had gradually ob tained favour from the time he defended the Duke of York in 1809 agamst the attecks of Colonel Wardle, in one of the few speeches which he uttered in the house. Another of his speeches was m support of the Regency Bill in 1811, thus confirming the favourable impression he had made on the regent, by whom he was appointed chancellor of the duchy of Corn waU in February 1816. To this m the next year was added the chief justiceship of Chester. The next proof of royal favour which he received was the appointment of vice- cha-ncellor of England, the biU estabUshing which office he had four years before stre nuously opposed. He succeeded to that seat on January 9, 1818, and was knighted ; and in May 1827 he was nominated master of the Rolls, and was swoi-n a privy coun sellor. In this office he remained' till his death, on September 16, 1834, when he was buried at Edmburgh. 400 LEACH Though remarkable for the gentleness of his manner and the suavity of his address, Sir John Leach was the most unpopular judge of his time, and, though his legal experience was great, his judgments gave but scant satisfaction. His irritable temper frequently involved him as a barrister in unseemly altercations with those opposed to him, and as a judge in violent colUsions with the leading members of the bar. His manner of treating those who diifered from him, or against whom he had imbibed a prejudice, became so obnoxious that a deputation of the most distinguished coun sel practising in his court waited upon him with a formal remonstrance upon his intem perate and dictatorial deportment towards the profession. The known intimacy be tween him and the prince regent, and the strong suspicion that he assisted in_ getting up the case against Queen Caroline, did not tend to diminish the dislike with which he was generally regarded. Sir Samuel Romilty, writing in his Diary in 1816, wMle he speaks highly of his talents and his powers of argumentation, says that he is worse qualified for a judicial situation than almost any one he has kno-wn in the profession, as ' he is extremely defi cient as a lawyer,' only knowing what he has acquired by daily practice, and being extremely wanting in judgment. And he prophesies that if he should be ever raised to a great situation, this deficiency, and ' his extraordinary confidence in himself, wUl involve him in some serious difficulty.' This prophecy was verified in the result. Both as vice-chancellor and master of the Rolls, though he despatched the causes before him with immense celerity, he relied so little upon authorities, and listened so indifferently to any arguments that con flicted with Ms own opinion, sometimes not even condescending to give any reasons for his judgments, that his decisions were frequently appealed against, and not un- frequently overturned. In comparing his summary judgments -with Lord Eldon's proverbial delays, the chancellor's court was designated the court of Oyer sans terminer, and Sir John's that of Terminer sans oyer. In private Ufe his amenity and courteous- ness were as remarkable as his sharpness and want of temper on the bench. One of his failings tended to make him somewhat ridiculous. Not content with distinction as a lawyer, he had the absurd ambition of being considered a man of fashion. He prided liimself on his aristocratic intimacies, and, seldom associating 'with his professional brethren, frequented the crowded parties of the great, even after the fatigue of sitting in his court to a late hour m the night. This perpetual round of fatigue and gaiety probably occasioned, or aggravated, the LECHMEEE diseases under which he suffered towards- the end of his life — diseases requiring pain ful operations, which he underwent with the greatest fortitude, and which he never allowed to interfere with the discharge of his duties. He was in his seventy-fifth year when he died, and was never married.. (Legal Observer, Oct. 1834 ; Laio and Law- yei-s, ii. 88 ; Law Mag. xii. 427.) LE BLANC, Simon. TMs smiable judge was the second son of Thomas Le Blanc, of Charterhouse Square, London, Esq., and was born about the year 1748, Admitted a pensioner of Trmity HaU, Cambridge, in January 1766, he became a scholar in November following, proceeded LL.B, in 1778, and was elected a fellow of his house in January 1779. He studied the law at the Inner Temple, and was caUed to the bar in February 1773, joining the Norfolk Circuit. He accepted the degree of the "coif in Hilary Term 1787, obtaining m the Common Pleas a considerable lead, and in- 1791 he was chosen as counsel for his alma mater. He was promoted on ,Tune 6, 1799, to the post of justice of the King's Bench, and knighted. In that court he sat for nearly seventeen years, with the character of an- excellent lawyer and a conscientious and impartial judge. The absence of incidente worthy of being related in so long a period — if we may except an atiocious Ubel on him in a newspaper called 'The Independent Whig,' in 1808, for which the editor was- speedily punished by a long imprisonment (State TriaU, xxx. II8I-I322)— is a proof that the whole of it was employed in the regular discharge of duty, iminfluenced by poUtical bias or personal prejudice. There is not a more graceful testimony that this was the case -with Sir Simon Le Blanc than the sentence 'Bio nemo neque integrior erat in civitate, neque sanctior,' -with which his death on April 15, 1816, is recorded by the respected reporters of his court — Messrs. Maule and Selwyn (vol. v. p. i.). LECHMEEE, NICHOLAS, of a Worcester shire family, second to none in antiquity and reputation, was the third but eldest surviving son of Edmund Lechmere of Hanley Castle, by Margaret, the sister of the accomplished and ill-fated Sir Thomas Overbury. He was bom in September 1613, the year in which his uncle was- poisoned in the Tower, and was bred up in Gloucester School, whence he was re moved to Wadham College, Oxford. After taMng his degree of B.A. he became a stu dent of the law at the Middle Temple, where he was called to the bar in 1641, and elected a bencher in 1665. Before that date he had taken a prominent part on the side of the parliament against Charles' I. His name is appended, with several others, to a summons to the govemor of LECHMEEE Worcester in June 1646 ; and he was one of the committee who came to that city on its surrender in the following month. (Nash's Worcester, ii. 'App. c.-cvi.) In 1648 he was elected member for Bewdley, and sat during the remainder of the Long Parliament. When Charles IL, accom panied by the Scotch army, possessed him self of 'Worcester in 1651, Hanley Castle was twice used by the Scottish horse as their quarters, while its master joined CromweU's forces and shared in his triumph at the battle. In CromweU's second and third parliament of 1654 Lechmere was one of the members for Worcestershire. In the latter he promoted the Petition and Advice, pressed that it should be pubUshed, called it a Magna Charta, and afterwards likened it to the Petition of Right. Before Crom well's death he was appointed attorney of the duchy of Lancaster, and walked in that character at the protector's funeral. In this office hewas continued under Richard, in whose parliament he was one of his staunchest supporters. On ite dissolution he took his place as part of the Rump, both before and after its second expulsion. Two days previously to ite dissolving itself in preparation for the king's return, a bill was passed for reviving the duchy of Lancaster, and Nicholas Lechmere was voted its at tomey, (ParL Hist. U, 624, iii. 1583; Burton's Diary, U. 136, 526, iu. 586.) In the meantime Lechmere had made his peace with the Mng, who before he left Breda granted him a fuU pardon ; but he could not expect to be elected for the Con vention Parliament ; and during the rest of his life he never resumed his senatorial dignity. In his legal capacity he bore a good reputation ; and it is evident that he enjoyed an ample share of professional emoiumente, from his being enabled not only to repurchase those portions of the patrimonial estates which had been alien ated by the former necessities of the family, but to add other lands and manors to it. At the revolution his exemplary character, and, perhaps, his early opposition to the Stuart dynasty, recommended him to the new govemment. Though he had attained the age of seventy-six, he was raised to the bench of the Exchequer on May 4, 1689, and was thereupon knighted. He sat there for eleven years ; but in the last year he was so infirm that he sent his opinion on the bankers' case in writing, and vvas obUged to be excused from going the cir cuit. He received his quietus at the end of June 1700 ; and on April 80, 1701, he died at Ms mansion at Hanley. (Pepys, i. 887 ; LuttreU!) He married Penelope, daughter of Sir Edwin Sandys, of Northbome in Kent, and left several chUdren, Among their de scendants one was raised to the peerage as LEE 401 Baron Lechmere of Evesham in 1721 which died with him in 1727 ; and another received the honour of a baronetcy in I8I8 whose representative now enjoys the title.' LEDENHAM, ExrsTACE de, was one of the justices itinerant into Lincolnshire in 8 Richard I., II96-7 (Madox, i. 704), of which county he had been sheriff two years before. His principal property was at Lange Ledenham. LEE, William, was the second son of Sir Thomas Lee, baronet, of Hartwell, Buck inghamshire, and of his -wife Alice, daughter of Thomas Hopkins, a merchant of London. ( Wotton's Baronet, iii, 149.) He was bom in 1688, and was educated at the univer sity of Cxford, where he took his bachelor's , degree. He was entered in July 1703 at the Middle Temple, whence he removed in February 1717 to the Inner Temple, from which he proceeded as barrister. His classical attainments may be inferred from his being appointed Latin secretary to the king in 1718 (6 Report Pub. Records, App. ii. 119) ; and his forensic talents from his success at the bar and his bemg made ope of the king's counsel, an office in those times of far greater distinction than it holds at the present day, when the multiplicity of courts requires an almost infinite num ber of silken leaders. In the first parlia ment of George IL, January 1728, he was elected mem"ber for Chipping Wycombe, and between ite third and fourth sessions he was raised to the bench, being constituted a judge of the King's Bench in June 1730. During the seven years that he sat in that court as a puisne judge he refused the cus tomary honour of knighthood, but on his elevation to the head of it on June 8, 1737, he was induced to accept the honorary dis tinction. He presided as lord chief justice of the King's Bench for seventeen years; and, though succeeding so eminent a j udge as Lord Hardwicke, his impartial administra tion of j ustice and his perfect mastery of the science of law secured to him the respect and admiration of his contemporaries. It fell to his lot to try the persons impUcated in the rebellion of 1745, and he performed the obnoxious duty with dignity and firm ness. In March 1754, shortly before his death, the office of chanceUor of the Ex chequer having become vacant by the sudden death of Mr. Pelham, the seals were placed in his hands as chief justice of Eng land till the office should be fllled up. This was done in compliance with a custom which had been acted on from time im memorial, and originated m the fact that the chief justiciary in former ages was the president of the Exchequer. He died on April 8, 1754, and was buried at Hartwell. (State Trials, xvU, 401, xviii, 329; Burroto's S. C. 105, 364.) Lord CampbeU (Ch. Juit ii. 218), though D D 402 LEEKE with an ineffectual attempt to place his character in a ridiculous light, is ooUged to speak highly of his legal and intellectual powers, and to acknowledge the purity of his intentions, the suavity of his manners, and the justice of his decisions. Sir James Burrow, who had sat under Mm during the whole period of his career, in his ' Settle ment Cases ' (p. 328) thus expresses him self : — ' He was a gentleman of most unblemished and irreproachable character, both in public and in private life ; amiable and gentle in his disposition ; affable and courteous in Ms deportment; cheerful in his temper, though grave in his aspect; generous and polite in his manner of living ; sincere and deservedly happy in his friendships and family connections ; and to the highest de gree upright and impartial in his distribu tion of justice. He had been a judge of the Court of King's Bench for nearly twenty- four years, and for nearly seventeen had presided in it. In this state the integrity of his heart and the caution of his de termination were so eminent that they never will, perhaps never can, be excelled.' His brother. Sir George, was at the same time the president of the highest court of civil law, as dean of the Arches and judge of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury; a coincidence of which there is another recent example in Lord Eldon and his brother Sir WilUam Scott, Lord Stowell. Sir William Lee married, first, Anne, daughter of John Goodwin, of Burley in Suffolk ; and secondly, Margaret, daughter of Roger Drake, Esq., and widow of James Melmoth, Esq. The baronetcy, after beiug enjoyed for a hundred and sixty-seven years, failed iu 1827. LEEKE, Thomas, was the eldest son of Ralph Leeke, of Wilsland in Shropshire, where the family had been established since 1334, He was educated at Shrews bury School, and at St, John's College, Cambridge, where he took his demees of, B.A. and M.A. in 1622 and 1626. Beyond Ms being admitted as a student at Gray's Inn in 1616 no other fact is known of him in the law till he was appointed cursitor baron on November 25, 1642. As he was certainly not a serjeant, and is not named 'by any law reporter as a barrister, he probably held some office in the Ex chequer before his promotion. His loyalty prompted him to join the king in the troubles, and, in consequence of the incon venience occasioned by his leaving his post, Mr. Richard Tomlins was put in his place by the parUament on September 29, 1646, inorder that he might on the next day re ceive the new sheriffs of London, and pre serve the forms which, the entry says, had never been omitted for the space of three or four hundred years. At the Restoration Mr, Baron Leeke re- LEGGE appeared and resumed his official position, wliich he enjoyed for the short remainder, of his Ufe. He died in 1662. (Lords' Journals, vii. 606.) LEEKE, William, though inserted in Dugdale's 'Chronica Series' as a baron of the Exchequer in 1679, and though in the reports of the Mngdom there is a grant to him of the office on May 8 in that year, is found on investigation to have refused -the honour thus bestowed upon him. Many instances are to be found of modesty de clining an offer of advancement, but this is a unique example of an office actually con ferred being immediately abdicated. He was the eldest son of William Leeke, of Wimeswould iu the county of Leicester, Esq. Born about 1630, he was admitted into the society of Gray's Inn, and caUedto the bar in 1661, becoming an ancient in 1676. His monument speaks of Ms know ledge of the science of the law, and his great pains to prevent litigation among his clients, which may account for his being nowhere mentioned by the reporters. On February 12, 1679, he was summoned to teke the degree of seij eant-at-law in the following Easter Term, with the view, probably, to his further elevation. Ac cordingly on May 8 he received a patent as a baron of the coif. An entry m the Gray's Inn books shows that he had given up that title (if he ever took it) before May 28, for on that day liberty was given to him, under the description of Mr, Serjeant Leeke, to assign his chamber in the mn to any other gentleman of the society — an entry which did not necessarUy show that he meant to retire from practice, as he had of course a chamber appropriated to him m Serjeante' Inn. He died at the age of 57, on October 9, 1687; and in the encomiastic inscription on his monument in Wimeswould Church occurs this passage : — In alte enim PurjDm-atorum Judicum subsellia a Carolo II. evectus, munere se tam pi-icclaro statim abdicavit ; moderationis plane slngularis rarum exemplum. He married Catherine, daughter of WiUiam Bainbrigge, Esq., of LocMngton in Leicestershire, (Nichols's Leicestershire, iU. 506.) LEGGE, Heneage, was the second son of William, flrst Earl of Dartmouth, by Lady Anne Finch, third daughter of Heneage, flrst Eail of Aylesford, and great-grandson, through his mother, of the celebrated lord chancellor of Charles IL, the Earl of Not tingham. Born in 1704, he was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in 1728. He was chosen high steward of the city of Lichfield in 1784, and in 1739 became one of the king's counsel. In 1743 he was ap pointed counsel to the Admiralty and auditor LEICESTER ¦of Greenwich Hospital, and in the same year was engaged to defend WilUam Chetwynd, indicted for the murder of his schoolfellow Thomas Rickette by stabbing him with a knife for takmg away a piece of cake. The juryfoundaspecialverdict; butthe question whether it was murder or manslaughter was never decided, the king granting a free ^lardon, and the vindictive efforts of the de ceased's friends to sue out an appeal not "bemg successful. In June 1747 he was raised to the bench .as a baron of the Exchequer, and sat there for twelve years, respected as well for his "learnmg as for his impartiality and modera tion. The latter qualities were manifested :in his able summing up on the trial in 1762 •of Mary Blandy for the mm-der of her father. He died on Aug-ast 30, 1759, leavmg issue by Ms wife Catherine, daughter of Mr, .Jonathan Fogg, a merchant of London, (CoUins's Peerage, i, 121 ; State Trials, xviii. :290, 1170.) LEICESTEE, Eael or. See R. de Bbatt- .MONT. LEICESTEE, Peiee de, in 1290, 17 Ed ward L, was one of the j ustices of the Jews ; but iu 1291, the duties of his office having terminated with the expulsion of the Jews from England, he was appointed a regular baron of the Exchequer, in which office he continued to act till his death, in the thirty- first year of the reign, (Madox, i. 287-54, u. 62-323.) He left a son named Thomas, and had property in BucMnghamshire, War wickshire, and Northamptonshire. (Abb. Placit 348 ; Cal. Inquis. p. m. i. 163, 187, ,223 ; Abb. Rot Orig. i. 163.) LEICESTEE, RoGEE DE, was the son of Sir Nicholas de Leicester, who possessed large estates in Cheshire, by Margaret, the -daughter of Geoffrey Button, and -widow of Robert de Denbigh. He became a justice of the Common Pleas in 1276, 4 Edward I., from Trmity in which year till Michaelmas 1289 fines were levied before him. (Dug dale's Orig. 44.) Being then removed from Ms office -with several of his brethren for extortion and other judicial crimes, he was compelled to pay for his release from im prisonment 1000 marks (Weever, 367), a sum so much less than that imposed upon some of the others that it is to be hoped his offence was not of so deep a dye. Dug dale introduces his name again oil January 2, 1293, as being then appomted a baron of the Exchequer ; but both on the above ac count, and because in Madox's list of those who attended in the court after that date he is never mentioned, it seems not unlikely that his name was by mistake substituted for that of Peter de Leicester, who certainly was appointed about the same time, and whose -subsequent attendance is regularly noted. Peter Leicester of Tabley, his Uneal de scendant, was created a baronet on August j ¦ LENTHALL 403 10, 1660 ; but the title became extinct in 1742. A daughter, however, married Sir Peter Byme, baronet, whose grandson. Sir John Fleming Leicester (thesurname having been assumed), was created Baron de Tab- ley on July 16, 1826. His son George, who has taken the name of Warren, is the pre sent baron. LENTHALL, William, of an ancient Herefordshire family, one member of which shared with Henry V. the glories of Agincourt, was the son of WilUam Lenthall, of Latchford in Oxfordshire, and Frances, daughter of Sir Thomas South well, of St. Faith's in Norfolk, and was born m June I59I. After receivmg the rudiments of his education at Thame School, he was sent to St. Alban's Hall, Oxford. Here he contmued for three years, when, without taking a degree, he was re moved to LincoM's Inn (Athen. Oxon, iii. 603), where he was caUed to the bar m I6I6, became a bencher m 1638, and elected reader in 1638. Long before this date he had got into considerable practice, since, writing to Secretary Nicholas in 1641, he speaks of Ms previous labours of twenty-five years, the profits of the last years of wMch he subsequently stetes to have amounted to 2500/. a year. (Notes and Queries, 1st S. xii. 358.) Clarendon (i. 240, 297) describes him, when elected speaker, as ' a lawyer of no eminent account,' but ' of competent practice.' He became recorder of Gloucester in 1637, and held the same office in the borough, of Woodstock, of which he was elected representative in both the parliaments of 1640, over the latter of which he was chosen to preside as speaker. It is curious to contrast the fulsome compliments and humble professions of his openmg and earlier addresses to the Mng, as the organ of the Commons, with the pro ceedings agamst that sovereign which he was soon to authenticate ; and to watch the gradual diminution of courtly expressions as those proceedmgs became more violent, and the adulatory and submissive strain he adopted towards those who ultimately ac quired the ascendency. Clarendon says, with truth, that he was a weak man, and unequal to the task; yet his answer to King Charles on January 4, 1642, on his coming to the house to demand the five members whom he had accused, bore some semblance both of spirit and ingenuity. When the Mng asked him ' whether any of these persons were m the house ? whe ther he saw any of them ? and where they were ? ' the speaker, falUng on his knees, replied, ' May it please your majesty, I have neither eyes to see nor tongue to speak in this place, but as the house is pleased to direct me, whose servant I am here ; and humbly beg your majesty's par- dd2 404 LENTHALL don that I cannot give any other answer than this to what your majesty is pleased to demand of me.' (Whiteloeke, 52.) When the parliament set on foot the subscription for their defence in June 16-42, the speaker, as his contribution, promised to maintam a horse and to give 50/. m money or plate. So well pleased were the Commons with his conduct in the chair, that on their adopting a new Great Seal for themselves, one of the first uses they made of it was to constitute him master of the Rolls, taking no account of the king's previous appointment of Sir John Colepeper, He was accordingly swom into that office on November 22, 1643, and was continued by special votes in 1645, notwithstanding the self-denying ordinance. (Ibid. 78, 146, 177.) _ In_ con sequence of the difference of opinion in the two houses as to the persons to be named commissioners of the Great Seal in 1646, they placed it ad interim in the custody of the two speakers on October 30, to hold it for a week ; but that period, by their con tinued irresolution, extended to March 15, 1648, when new commissioners were agreed to. In July 1647 the London apprentices tumultuously presented petitions to par liament concerning the militia, and acted so insolently, threatening all manner of violence if their demands were not com plied with, that both houses were from terror compeUed to revoke the ordinances complained of. The speakers accordingly withdrew to the army, and put themselves under its protection ; and though the Com mons had in the meantime elected another speaker in Lenthall's place, he was, on his retum with the army, after a week's ab sence, allowed to resume the chair. It was beUeved that the whole transaation was a plot to give power to the army, and that ¦the speaker was compelled to join in it by a threat that he should be impeached for embezzlement if he did not comply. He was charged also, in the next year, with endeavouring to impede the treaty with the king in the Isle of Wight (Clarendon, v. 461-469 ; ParL Hist. iU. 729-736, 1060) ; and in all the subsequent measures affect ing the king's life he did not hesitate to preside. After the tragic scene of Ja nuary 30, 1649, ' the parliament of Eng land,' or rather the House of Commons, assumed the government, Lenthall, as speaker, being nominally the head. The same honours were ordered to be paid to him when visiting the city of London as had been used to the king, by delivering to him the sword on his reception, and by placing him above the lord mayor at the feast. (Whiteloeke, 406.) But the real power was in a council of state, and that was constituted by the army, over w^Mch LENTHALL Cromwell, by his superior energy and Ms; success in battle, soon acquired unlimited ascendency. In four years both the army and the nation got tired of the parliament, and on April 19, 1658, the speaker was compelled to vacate his chair by Crom weU s forcible expulsion of aU the re maining members from the house. Retiring to the Rolls, he seems to have- kept aloof from any public mterference in politics tiU CromweU summoned his se cond parliament on September 3, 1664, when LenthaU, who sat for Oxfordshire,, was again chosen speaker. It sat for nearly five months, and then, being too- argumentative for the protector's purposes, was dissolved without passing a single act. (ParL Hist. Ui. 1444, 1460, 1481.) The protector and his council, in the April fol lowing, proposed to the commissioners of the Seal and the master of the Rolls a new ordmance for the better regulation of the- Chancery, and for limitmg its jurisdiction, which aU those officers (except L'Isle) strongly opposed. Lenthall was most- earnest against its adoption, protesting- 'that he would be hanged before the RoUs gate before he would execute it;' but no sooner did he see that the two- opposing commissioners were than he 'wheeled about,' and gave m< his adhesion. (Wliitehcke, 625-6^) The next parliament, called by Cromwell m September 1656, though LenthaU was again retumed for Oxforshire, was pre sided over by Sir Thomas Widdrington. In the farce that was enacted in it of offering to CromweU the title of Iring the ¦ master of the Rolls performed a leading part, using the most specious argumente to induce him to accept it. Upon CromweU's refusal and the estabUshment of a new con- - .stitution, Lenth.iU was not at first included in the number of lords which the protector was authorised to nominate ; but on com plaining of the omission he received a summons to take his seat. That parUa ment was dissolved within a fortnight after ¦ the new Lords met, principally from the hostility occasioned by thefr appointment, and Cromwell died seven months after its dissolution. In the parliament which his son, the Protector Richard, caUed m Ja- ¦ unary 1659, Lenthall again appeared as one of the Lords ; but on ite dismissal three months after, the Long Parliament having resumed its sittings, he, after some hesitation, was induced to forget his short lived nobility, and again take his seat as speaker. (ParL Hist. iii. 1488, 1619, 1546 ; Ludlow, 252, 254.) On May 23 he was voted keeper of the Great Seal for eight days, at the end of which other commis sioners were appointed, who, in tum, were - superseded by the Committee of Safety. He again, for a third time, held the Seal ', LEONARD 'for a fortnight m January 1660, by order of the Long or Rump Parliament, which had again met, but which in the following March was finally dissolved, having in the mterval conferred on him the chamberlain- -ship of Chester. ( Whiteloeke, 679, 698.) This and his other places the Restoration -obliged him to resign, though Ludlow says (p. 383) he offered 3000/. to be continued master of the Rolls, As he had been ex cepted by name, together with Cromwell ¦and Bradshaw, from the pardon offered by Charles's proclamation, dated Paris, May 3, 1654, LenthaU no doubt trembled at his present position, till he found that the ex treme penalty was to be confined to those .actually concerned in the king's death. (Harris's Lives, iv. 129^ During the dis cussions on the Act of Indemnity he found it necessary to address a letter to the House of Commons, denying the reports of iMs 'great gains' as speaker. The Com mons, notwithstandmg, excepted him from the bill, to suffer such pains and penalties, not extending to life, as should be proper to inflict on him; but the Lords, pro bably through the influence of Monk, moderated the vote, by directing that the •exception should only take place if he ac cepted any office or public employment. (Pari Hist iv. 68, 91.) Eventually he received the king's pardon. , Thus preserving the wealfn he had acquired m his various offices, he retired to Burford Priory, his seat in Oxfordshire, but not before he had offered another proof -of his timeserving pusillanimity, by for getting his famous reply to the king, and giving evidence of words spoken in par- .liament by Thomas Scott the regicide. (State Trials, v. 1063.) He died on Sep tember 3, 1662, and was buried at Burford. His confession or apology in his last illness, made to Dr. Brideoak, afterwards Bishop ¦ of Chester (Allien. Oxon, iii, 608), confirms the impression universally formed of the weakness of his character, and the narrow- ¦ ness and timidity of Ms dispositon. By his wife Elizabeth, daughter of Am- ¦ brose Evans, of Lodington in Northamp tonshire, he left several children. His ¦eldest son, John, whom Anthony Wood calls 'the grand braggadocio and Iyer of the age,' was a member of the Long Par liament, and held several offices under Cromwell, who created him a baronet. After the Restoration he was sheriff of ' Oxfordshire, and was knighted byCharlesII, LEONABD affords a remarkable instance to prove that those who were appointed justices itinerant to impose the taUages on the different counties were not always selected from the members or officers of the Curia Regis, One of the two who ¦ acted for Berkshire in 20 Henry IL, 1174, vwas this Leonard, who is simply described LEVESHAM 405 as ' a knight of Thomas Basset.' (Madox, i. 124.) He thus probably was a resident in the county, and was well acquainted with the various properties. LETTKNOEE, Geoefket db, was a son or brother of Nicholas de Leuknore, who was keeper of the king's wardrobe at the time of his death in 52 Henry III. In the year after his death Geoffrey had a royal grant of a field in Chiselhampton in Oxfordshire, with a miU late belongmg to a Jew, and two years afterwards he had an additional grant of further property there. (Cal. Rot. Pat. 42, 44,) He appears -with three others as a justice itinerant m 39 Henry IIL, 1256, for that and other counties, perhaps only for pleas of the forest ; but he is next mentioned in the forty-fifth and two fol lowing years as a justice itinerant into various counties. Dugdale does not inti-o- duce him at all as a regular justicier in the reign of Henry IH., but it would seem that he held that position, inasmuch as from March 1266 till September 1271 there are numerous entries on the Rotulus de Fini bus (Excerpt ii. 422-649) of payments made for assizes to be held before Mm. If he were then on the bench, he must have been removed on the death of Henry, for his name does not occur among those appointed to either court on the accession of Edward I. Dugdale, however, mtro duces him as a justice of the Common Pleas on November 2, 1276, in the fourth year; but the patent which he quotes as his authority can scarcely have been read by him, for it merely appoints Geoffi-ey de Leuknore and two others to be justices to hold assizes aud pleas in the liberty of Dunstable, He is mentioned as a justice itinerant in 6 Edward I., but there is no record of his acting beyond the foUowmg year. (Pari. Writs, i. 882.) LE'VESHAM, Thomas, is not mtroduced by Dugdale in his list of appointments to the oifice of baron of the Exchequer, but he notices that John Durem was consti tuted in his place on May 26, 1449, 27 Henry VI. He had been long in the ser vice of the Exchequer, and is always dis tinguished by the clerical designation. At the end of Henry V,'s reign he was employed in the marches of Picardy, ' upon divers inquisitions taken for the kynges avayle ' (Acts Privy Council, iii. 56) ; in 2 Henry 'Vf . he is mentioned as delivering a certain commission to the lord treasurer in the presence of the barons of the Exchequer (KaL E.vch. ii. 122) ; in 14 Henry VI. his name stands next to that of Sir John Juyn, the chief baron, in the Ust of those called upon to contribute to the equipment of the king's army (Acts Privy Council, iv. 325) ; and in 16 Henry YL, being then caUed ' remembrancer on the king's remem brancer's side of the E.xchequer,' he wa 406 LEVINTON paid I/, ' as an especial reward for writing out the statutes of Wales in two rolls for the king's use,' (Devon's Issue RoU, 434.) His appointment as baron must therefore have talien place after the latter entry; but neither that date nor any other fact of his subsequent life has yet been discovered. LE'VINTON, Richaed de, was the son of Adam de Levinton, constable of WalUng ford Castle, who held a barony in Cumber land, and died about 12 John. Rich.yd was implicated in the barons' war with King John, for in 2 Henry III. his_ lands were restored to him on his returning to his allegiance, (Baronage, i. 708; Rot Claus. i. 374.) His barony of Burgh-on- the-Sands not being held by military ser vice, but by cornage, he was not liable to be summoned to join the king's armies ; and in 8 Henry III. the sheriff of Cum berland was commanded not to summon him to the army of Bedford on that ac count. It seems doubtful whether he was not about this time constable of Carlisle, that title immediately following his name on the mandate of 9 Henry IIL, relative to the conveyance of the quinzime of Cum berland to York ; but it may possibly be a distinct person. In the same year he was appointed a justice itinerant for the coun ties of Cumberland and Westmoreland, and in 18 Henry III. for Lancashire. (Rot. Claus. i. 614, U. 73-77.) He died about June 1260, LE-yiNZ, Ceeswell, descended from an ancient and respectable family, seated at Levinz Hall in Westmoreland, was the son of William Levinz, and was born about 1627 at Evenle in Northamptonshire, Ad mitted a sizar of Trinity College, Cam bridge, in 1648, he took no degree, aud en tering Gray's Inn, he was called to the bar in 1661, was made a bencher in 1678, and became treasurer in the following year. What part he took during- Cromwell's sway is not known, but Ms name is found in the Reports from the earliest year of the Restoration. About 1678 he was appointed king's council and knighted, and was em ployed for the crown in the several prosecu tions arising out of thePopishPlot. Though joining, as he apparently did, in the popular belief in the plot, and in reUance on tho witnesses who supported it, he conducted them with great decency and fairness. He was appointed attorney-general in October 1679, and during the sixteen months that he held that office he took the lead in many other trials of persons impUcated in the same charge, in all of which he showed ns much lenity as was consistent with his position. In December 1679 he was directed by the king in council to prepare the famous ' proclamation against tumultuous petitions, ' for which he was called to account aud LEVINZ required to state who assisted Mm in draw ing up the proclamation, a demand which he at first resisted, stating that he alone was responsible ; but on being strongly pressed he at last was compelled to give up the name of CMef Justice North, For this. he is visited by Roger North (E.ramen,. 546-54; Life, 176) -with rather unnecessary blame. If he had persisted in his refusal, he would have certainly incm-red great personal risk, without benefiting any one; and he knew that the proclamation was so- cautiously worded that no harm could come- to the chief justice, the threatened impeach ment against whom soon dropped to the- ground. He was constituted a judge of the Com mon Pleas on February l2, 1681, and filled that se.at for five years, respected for his legal knowledge and upright conduct. Soon after the accession of James II. he- was joined -with three other judges in the- commission to Sir George Jeffreys on the 'Bloody Assizes' in the West; but little- is related with reference to that horrible- visitation implicating any other judge than. the brutal chief justice. On February 6, 1686, he suddenly received a supersedeas to- discharge him from Ms office, ' whereto,' he modestly says in his Reports, 'I humbly submit;' and when called upon by the House of Commons in 1689 to explain the cause of his dismissal, he said, ' I thought my discharge was because I would not gi've- j udgment upon the soldier who deserted his- colours, and for being agamst the dispens ing power.' (Levinz' sRe2Jorts, iu. 257 ; ParL Hist V, 313,) Sir CresweU immediately retumed to the bar, .and Bramston (p. 221) says he 'is not likely, 'tis thought, to loose by the change.'' That this prophecy was weU founded is evident from tbe contemporary Reports, in which Ms name frequently appears. On. the trial of the seven bishops in 1688 he ¦ was one of the counsel employed in the defence. By Lord Macaulay's account (U, 376), Sir CresweU ' was induced to take a brief against the crown, by a threat of the- attorneys that if he refused it he should'. never hold another.' The authority his- lordship cites for this extraordinary state ment seems hardly sufficient to overthrow the contrary impression which Sir Cres- well's conduct tends naturally to produce.. He appears to have played a very active part iu the trial, and to have taken. the objection that there was no proof of publication in Middlesex, which very nearly put an early end to the case of the crown, Ihis does not look as if his was a conir- pulsory or unwilling appearance ; and the ¦ fact that his brother, Baptist Levinz, was . Bishop of Sodor and Man -will more pro bably account both for his being engaged, and for the energy of his advocacy. (State- LEXINTON Trials, xu. .320, &c.) He continued to practise up to 1696, when his Reports termi nate. They were published in three parts the year after his death, which occurred on January 29, I70I. He was buried at Evenle, where there is a monument to his memory. Lord Hardwicke says of him that, though a good lawyer, he was a very careless reporter. By his wife, Mary, daughter of WiUiam Livesay, of Lancashire, he had three children. (Noble's Granger, i. 167 ; Thores- hy's Notts, Ui, 264 ; Luttrell, v. 12,) LEXINTON, John de, was the eldest son of Richard de Lexinton, a baron so called from a manor of that name near Tuxford in Notts. (Baronage,i.7 43.) He was evidently an officer connected with the court, and probably one of the clerks of the Chancery, the Great Seal having been several times placed m his hands apparently in that character— viz., in 1238, in 1242, in 1249, and in 1253. (Hardy's Catalogue.) Within these years he went to Rome on the king's business, and performed other duties in connection with the com-t. In 1241 he had the custody of Griffin, Prince of Wales, in the Tower of London (Rapin, iii. 71) ; and in 1247 he is spoken of as the king's seneschal. (Cal. Rot. Pat. 22.) It is apparent that, though he might be occasionally called to take possession of the Great Seal on a particular emergency after June 1248, 32 Henry IIL, he had then been elevated to the judicial bench ; for on that date and afterwards, till" December 1256, a few week before his death, there are numerous entries of payments made for assizes to be taken before him, precisely in the same manner as before the other judges. In 1261 also he was one of those appointed to hear the pleas in the city of London (E.vcei-pt e Rot. Fin. U. 36-246) ; and in 1264 he is mentioned as having been sent by the king and council to pronounce a judgment ' ad Bancum domini regis.' Abb. Placit 132.) In 37 Henry III. he was made chief justice of the forests north of the Trent, and governor of the castles of Bamburgh, Scarborough, and Pickering, He married Margaret Merlay, but left no children. His property devolved, on his death in February 1267, on his youngest brother, Henry, Bishop of Lincoln. ( Thoro ton's Notts, iu, 220 ; E.vcerpt. e Rot Fin. ii. 250, 287.) LEXINTON, Robeet de, was a younger brother of the above-mentioned John. Brought up as an ecclesiastic, he followed the practice of those times by pursuing also the study of the law ; but never appears to have been further advanced in the former profession than to a prebend in the church of SouthweU, to which he was presented m 16 John. In the same year he acted_ as custos of the archbishopric of York during LEY 407 its vacancy. (!Rot. Pat. 115 ; Rot. Claus. i. 208.) As a lawyer he is first mentioned as taking the acknowledgment of a fine in Michael mas, 4 Hem-y IH,, from which period until a short time before his death there are numerous evidences of his having acted as a justicier, both at Westminster and in the provinces. In 1228 his name is at the head of four justiciers before whom a fine was levied at 'Westminster, and in July 1234 three jus ticiers appointed ' ad Bancum ''were ordered to be admitted by Robert de Lexinton and William of York, he being at that time the oldest judge on the bench, and perhaps the chief of the court. When the king, iu 1240, sent justices itinerant through all the coun ties, under pretence of redressing grievances, but with the real object of extorting money from the people, Robert de Lexinton was placed at the head of those assigned for the northern counties. (Rot. Claus. 461, 468,631 ; Madox, ii. 355.) The subsequent entries of his acting as a judge do not extend beyond Hilary 1243, 27 Henry III, (Excei-pt e Rot Fin. i. 348), in all of which he is placed at the head of his associates. He then pro bably retired, having been on the bench nearly twenty-four years ; but his death did not occur till seven years afterwards. He appears to have added military to his judicial duties, and to have received various proofs of the royal confidence and favour. In 8 Henry III. he was constituted custos of the honor of Pec (Rot. Claus. i. 694, &o,) and govemor of its castle, and that of Bols over in Derbyshire ; and there is a letter from him to Hubert de Burgh, detailing the progress of William, Earl of Albemarle, through Nottingham, with his own prepara tions to oppose him, and stating his in tention to proceed himself into Northumber land, (4 Report Pub. Rec, App. U. 157,) He afterwards also had the charge of the castle of Orford. On his death, in June 1250, his brother, the last-mentioned John, suc ceeded as his heir to all his property. (Rot. Claus. i. 489, &c. ; Excerpt e Rot. Fin. i. 66,) LEY, James (Eael oe M.i.ELB0E0UGH), was born about 1662 in the parish of Tef- font-Evias in Wiltshire, the residence of his father, Henry Ley, Esq. He became a commoner of Brazenose College, Oxford, and, having taken a degree in arts, he en tered on his legal studies at Lincoln's Inn, where, having been called to the bar on October II, 1-584, he worked his way up to the bench of that .society in 1600, and was chosen reader in 1602. He had previously held the post of one of the Welsh judges, and in 1608 he had a separate call to the degree of the coif, probably in preparation for holding the office of lord chief justice of the King's Bench in Ireland, to which he was appointed in the followmg ye.ir, when 408 LEY he was also knighted. While fiUing that position he was one of the commissioners of the Great Seal of that country from April 6 to November 8, 1605, He presided in the Irish King's Bench about four years, resign ing in December 1608 ; and Bacon ( Works, vii, 268) speaks of his ' gravity, temper, and discretion' in that office. Returning to England, he received the profitable place of attorney of the Court of Wards and Liveries, at the same time establishing the right of that officer to take precedence in court ofthe king's attomey-general, for which he had a privy seal dated May 15, 1609. He must then have resigned his rank as serjeant; for ill that and the twelve succeeding years he is recorded as one of the governors of Lin coln's Inn. On the elevation of Sir Francis Bacon to the Great Seal in 1617, Sir James was a candidate for the attorney-general ship, and the Duke of Buckingham told Sir Henry Yelverton that he offered 10,000/. for the office, (Liber Famelicus, 56.) Not suc ceeding in this, he was created a baronet on July 15, 1619. On ,Ianuary 29, 1621, he was constituted lord chief j ustice of the King's Bench, He was then about sixty-nine years of age, and in that year ( Yonge' s Diai-y, 40) mar ried his third wife, Jane, daughter of John Lord Butler, by Elizabeth, the sister of the favourite, George Villiers, Duke of Buck ingham, to whose patronage he probabl}' owed his future advance. Within two months_ after his appointment he was called iipop, in consequence of the proceedings agamst Bacon, to take the place of speaker of the House of Lords ; and in that character he had to pronounce their judgment, first, in the cases of Sir Giles Mompesson and Sir Francis Michell, and then against the chancellor himself and Sir Henry Yelverton, (Pari Hist i. 1207-1258.) After performing the duties of his j udicial office for nearly four years, he imitated the example of his predecessor, Sir Henry Montagu, by retiring from it, and accepting the profitable place of lord treasurer on December 20, 1624. On the 81st he was created Lord Ley of Ley in the county of Devon, the ancient seat of his family, "He was more fortunate, however, than Sir Henry Montagu ; for he retained the royal purse for the remainder of James's i-eign, and for more than three years in that of Charies I., -who in the May following his accession created him Earl of Mari- borough. He was removed in July 1628, to make way for Sir Richard Weston, and re trograded to the almost empty titie of presi dent of the council, -svhich he held for the few remaining months of his life. inter He died on March 14, 1620, and was teri-ed at "\Vestbui'y, Wilts, in the parish church of which a magnificent monument is erected to his memory. LEYE In the midst of corruption among lawyers and statesmen, and holding the highest offices on the bench and in the council, he is said by Milton to have Liv'd in both unstained by gold or fee. Sir James WMtelocke, however, says that he was a great dissembler, and was wontto be called ' Volpone,'and that having borrowed money from some ofthe judges, he would have favom-ed them, but Sir Robert Pye refused to execute the warrant, (Liber Famelicus, 108.) His character is undisputed for ability, temperance, and erudition ; the latter not confined to his legal studies, but extendmg over subjects of general interest. His professional at tainments and industry were exhibited by his Reports, and by his treatise on the king's right of wardship, &c, ; and he con tributed various papers to the Society of An tiquaries, of which he was an early member. He was three times married. His fii-st wife was Mary, daughter of John Pettey, of Stoke Talmage in Oxfordshire; his second was Mary, the widow of Sir WUUam Bower, knight; and the third was Jane, daughter of John Lord Butler. His honours expired on the death of his thu-d sou, William, in 1679. (Baronage, ii. 451 ; Athen. Oxon. U, 441.) LEYE, Ro&EE DE LA, was an experienced officer of the Exchequer, acquiring those royal favours and clerical dignities which were usuaUy distributed among the Mgh in place in that department. In 36 Henry IIL, I26I, he held the office of remem brancer of the Exchequer. (Madox, ii. 266.) During the contests with the barons in 1263, the affairs of the Exchequer having got into great disorder, the rente not being paid, and no baron being resident there, the kmg, on November I, directed that he should fill the office of a baron there, and on the 30th of the s.ame month commanded that he should execute the offices of trea surer and chancellor of the Exchequer until otherwise ordered. In the next year he was directed to continue to act as baron and treasurer. In 52 Henry HI. he was again constituted chancellor of the Exche quer, and remained so for the three foUow ing years. He continued one of the bai'ons of the court during the first two years of Edward's reign, and then was a third time raised to the office of chancellor of the Exchequer. In the latter year, 1276, he was removed, as he is spoken of as ' nuper canceUarius,' and was about that time appointed arch deacon of Essex. (Ibid. ii. 28, 62, &'c., 320.) From that dignity he was raised, on October 25, 1283, II Edward L, to the deanery of Loudon, which he held for less than two years, his death occurring on August 18, 1286, (Le Neve, 183, 189.) LIFFOED IIFFOED, LoED. See J, Hewitt, LINCOLN, Altteed de, is another in- ¦¦stance of a sheriff' being appointed a justice itinerant to fix the assize on the demesnes ¦ ofthe crown in the county under his juris diction. He was so employed m 20 Henry .II.,1174, for Dorsetehire and Somersetshire, ¦ of wMch he held the sheriffalty for six years, commencing 16 Henry II, (Madox, i, 123,) His grandfather of the same name, at the general survey possessed Wimentone in Bedfordshire, and fifty-one lordships in LincoMshire. His father was Robert, who hold the castle of Wareham for the Em press Maud, against Stephen, Alured died inlO Richard I,, 1199, leav ing by his wife, Albreda, the next-named Alured. (Baronage, i. 412,) LINCOLN, Altjeed db, the son of the .above, was in King John's service, aud seems to have been connected with the treasury from various entries on the rolls recording payments of money by him, (Rot. de Liberate, 53 ; Rot. Claus. i. 1, 31, -46,97.) In 12 John he accompanied the Mng to Ireland (Rot. de Prcestito, 184, 204, .216) ; but in the barons' wars he deserted his sovereign, and his lands were conse- ¦ quently seized, but were restored to him in 1 Henry IH. He thenceforward pursued ¦ SO loyal a course that in 9 Henry III. he was selected as one of the j ustices itinerant for the county of Dorset, in which a prin cipal part of his estates were situate. (Rot. Claus. i. 236, 802, ii. 76.) He died about 1240, leaving by Maud his wife a son, also named Alured, who died m 1264, without issue. (Baronage, i. 412.) L'ISLE, John, was born about 1606 at Wootton in the Isle of Wight, the residence •of his father, Sir WUliam L'Isle, who was descended from a branch of the noble family ¦of that name. After being educated at -Magdalen Hall, Oxford, where he took ¦the degree of bachelor of arts in February 1626-6, he repaired, it is said, to one of the Temples as a student in law; but whether he was ever called to the bar is ¦uncertain. He was chosen member for Winchester in both the parliaments of 1640, and in the latter he at once took the po pular side, advocating the violent measures ¦on the king's removal to the north, and ¦obtaining some of the plunder arising from the sale of the crown property. In No vember 1644 he was made master of St, Cross, and retained that valuable prefer ment till it was given to Mr. SoUcitor- General Cook in June 1649, (Fasti O.von. i, 422, 437; WMtelocke, 441,) In De cember 1647, when the king was in duress , at the Isle of Wight, L'Isle was selected as one of the commissioners to cai'ry to him the four bills which were to divest him of .aU sovereignty, and to which they had to .brmg back the king's magnanimous refusal L'ISLE 409 to consent. He showed his extreme inve teracy against his majesty by his speech on September 28, 1648, in support of the motion that the vote which the Commons had come to two days before, that no one proposition in regard to the personal treaty should be binding if the treaty broke oif upon another, should be rescmded ; and by his further speech, some days later, urging a discontinuance of the negotiation, (Pari. Hist iii. 823, 828, 1025, 1038.) He took a prominent part in the Mng"s trial as one of the managers for conducting its details, being present during its whole continuance, and drawing up the form of the sentence. (State Trials, iv. 1053, et seq.) The result of this activity was his receiving the appointment on Februai-y 8, 1648-9, Uttle more than a week after the king's death, of one of the commissioners of the Great Seal, and bemg placed in the council of state. He not only concurred in Decem ber 1658 in nominating Cromwell protec tor, but administered the oath to him ; and, having been re-appointed lord commissioner, was elected member in the new parliament for Southampton, of which town he was the recorder. (ParL Hist 1287, 1290, 1426, 1431.) In June he was constituted presi dent of the High Court of Justice, and in August he was appointed one of the com missioners of the Exchequer. When the ordinance for better regulating the Court of Chancery was submitted to the keepers of the Seal, L'Isle alone was for the execution of it, his colleagues pointing out the incon venience of many of the clauses. The con sequence of his subserviency to Cromwell's wishes was that he was continued in the office on the removal of his colleagues in June 1655, and was again confirmed in it in October 1656 by Cromwell's third par liament, to which he was again retumed as member for Southampton. (Wliitelocke, 671-653.) In December 1657 Cromwell, having revived the House of Lords, sum moned L'Isle as one of his peers. (Pari. Hist iii. 1518.) The death of OUver in September 1658 made no difference in L'lsle's position. Protector Richard preserv ing him in his place ; but when the Long Parliament met again in the foUo-wing May he was compelled to retire, and other com missioners were appointed. (Whiteloeke, 666, 676, 678.) The house, however, named him on January 28, 1660, a commissioner of the Admiralty. (Mercurius Politicus, No. 606.) In the changes that soon occurred, L'Isle, conscious that he had taken such a part that he could not hope for pardon, thought it most prudent to leave the kingdom ; and, escaping- to Switzerland, he established him self first at Vevay, and afterwards at Lau sanne. There he was shot dead on August 11, 1664, on his way to church, by an Irish- 410 LITTLEBERE man, who was indignant at the respect and ceremony with which a regicide was treated. The assassin escaped, and the murdered man was solenmly buried in the church of the city. He married Alice, daughter and heiress of Sir White Beckenshaw, of Moyle's Court in Hampshire, who lived long after him, and perished at last by a violent death, being beheaded in 1685 on a conviction, forced by the brutal Judge Jeffreys" from a jury who had twice returned a verdict of not guilty, for harbouring John Hicks, a preacher, who had been out with the Duke of Monmouth, (Athen. O.von. in. 665 ; State Trials, xi. 297.) LITTLEBEEE, Maeiin de, was evidently brought up to the profession of the law. In 81 Henry III., 1247, an assize was held before Mm in Kent (!Excerpt. e Rot. Fin. ii, 9), but it was not tiU July 1261 that he was appointed a regular justicier. From that date assizes to be taken before him commence, and they continue without in terruption till November 1272, (Ibid. ii. 355-589.) He is mentioned as a judge of the King's Bench in I Edward I. (Devon's Issue Roll, 87) ; and Dugdale quotes a li berate in his favour in the following year, after which his name does not occur. LITTLEDALE, Joseph, descended from au ancient Cumberland family, was the eldest son of Henry Littledale, Esq., of Eton House, Lancashire, and of Mary, daughter of Isaac Wilkinson, Esq., of "Whitehaven, Born in 1767, he completed his education at St. John's College, Cambridge, in 1787, with the honourable distmction of Senior Wrangler and First Smith's Prizeman. En tering Gray's Inn, he practised for some years as a special pleader under the bar till 1798. Being then called, from that time till 1824, a period of twenty-six years, his intimate knowledge of the law and patient industry insured the confidence of all who had the management of business, and gave him very extensive employment. In 1822 he was sent into Scotland with Mr. (afterwardsBaron) Hullock for the pur pose of arranging some government prose cutions. He never accepted a silk gown, nor sought a seat in parliament, and was indeed so little of a party man, and so en tirely a lawyer, that when he was asked by a friend what his politics were he is said to have answered, ' Those of a special pleader.' His professional merits alone recom mended him to a seat in the Court of King's Bench, to which he was appointed on April 80, 1824, with the usual honour of knight hood. With such colleagues as Chief .lus tice Abbott, Mr. Justice Bayley, and Jlr. Justice Holroyd, the court presented for many years as perfect a phalanx of learned and efficient men as had ever been united in the administration of justice. For the remaining years of the reign of George IV., LLOYD for the whole of that of WUUam IV,, and for nearly four years of the present reign, a period altogether of seventeen years. Sir Joseph Littledale performed the duties of his office to the admiration not only of law yers, but of the pubUc in general. There was scarcely a barrister who did not regard him as a judicial father, and none could re call an unkind word of his utterance, or am impatient expression of his countenance. He was so devotedly attached to his pro fession that he heartily enjoyed the discus sion of the legal points before him. Once- when the author of these pages ventured to- express a hope that he was not fetigued -with the labours of a heavy day, he answered, ' Oh ! no, not at aU ; I like it! At the end of Hilary Term 1841, being then seventy-four, he resigned his seat, to the regret of his colleagues, and also of an admiring bar, who paid Mm the weU- merited compUment of an affectionate ad dress, expressive of their sorrow at parting, and of good wishes for his future welfare. Though he was immediately called to the privy council, he had very little opportunity of aiding in the hearings before ite judicial committee, for in less than a year and a half the infirmities that had warned him to re tire made rapid waj', and he died on June- 26, 1842, LLOYD, Richaed, is described m the books of the Middle Temple as the son audi heir of Talbot Lloyd, of Lichfield, deceased: He was sent for his early mstruction to the grammar school of that city, where no less than four of his contemporary judges were educated — viz.. Lord Chief Justice WiUes, Chief Baron Parker, Mr, Justice Noel, and. Sir John Eardley Wilmot, CaUed to the bar in 1723, he was elected a bencher of Ms inn in 1728, and reader in 1744. About that time he was made one ofthe king's counsel. In 1740 he opened the mdictment against Lord Balmerino in the House of Lords, and is on that occasion designated a knight. He was returned to parliament in 1745 for the borough of St. Michael's, in 1747 for Maldon, and in 1754 for Totnes ; but only two of his speeches are recorded, one on the Westminster election iu 1751, and the other on the repeal of the Jew bill in 1753, In 1764 he was advanced to the office of solicitor-general '; but on the change of the ministry in November 1766'lie was removed, to make way for the Hon, Chailes Yorke. On November 14, 1769, his ambition was obliged to be satisfied by bemg placed on the bench of the Exchequer. His judicial career was very short, as he died on Sep tember 6, 1761, at Northallerton, on his re turn from the Northern Circuit. His wife was EUzabeth, daughter of William Field, Esq., of Crastwick in Essex. (Henley's- Lord Northington, 11 ; Harris's Lord Hard wicke, iii. 12, 96; Wright's Essex, ii. 790.) LODELOWE LODELO"WE, Thomas db, belonged to one of the three families of the name of Lodelowe (Ludlow) which flourished in the reign of Edward II,, two of which sent members to parliament respectively for Shropshire and Surrey, and the third held the manor of Campedene in Gloucester shire ; but it is uncertain which. He him self appears to have been established in Kent, as in 83 Edward IH, he was one of the commissioners for keeping the peace m that county, and in 46 Edward III, was among the custodes of the seashore there, (N. Fcedera, Ui. 464, 962.) He was elected recorder of London in 1353, being then an alderman of the city, and held that office till he was constituted chief baron of the Exchequer on October 29, 1365, He acted as a trier of petitions in all the subsequent parUamente till the 47th year (Rot ParL ii. 289-317), when probably his death occurred. During this period he is several times mentioned in the Year Books as a justice of assize. (Issue RoU, 83, 280.) LODINGTON, WiLLiAM, in 1 Henry IV. was constituted the Mng's attoi'uey 'in « « Communi Banco et in aliis locis quibus- cunque' (CaL Rot. Pat. 237), and was called to the degree of serjeant-at-law in 12 Henry IV. It is possible, however, that the serjeant was son of the attorney- general. He was made one of the king's Serjeants on the accession of Henry Y.; and on June 16, 1415, in the third year of that reign, he was constituted a judge of the Common Pleas. He enjoyed the office only four years, as he died on January 9, 1419-20. He was buried in the chm-ch of' St. Peter, at GunM- in Lincolnshire, where there is a monumental brass to his memory. (Proceedings Archceol Inst. Lincoln, liv.) LOKTON, John db, derived his name from the township of Loktou in Yorkshire, where he had property at Malton in its neighbourhood. He was probably the son of Thomas de Lokton and Beatrice, his wife, who purchased half of tho manor of Canewyk in Lincolnshire in 24 Edward IH., and sold it in the same year. (Abb. Rot Orig. U. 218, 215.) He is described as a king's serjeant in 7 Richard IL, 1384, assisting at the trial of John Cavendish for defaming the chancellor, Michael de la Pole. (Rot. Pari iii. 196.) In the same character he subscribed the questions and answers prepared by Chief Justice TresiUan at Nottingham, on August 26, 1387, for which he, with Sir Robert Bea,lknap and other judges, was aftei-wards impeached and condemned to death. As no other of the king's Serjeants were then present, he was no doubt summoned to that councU in consequence of his being designed as the successor of David Hannemere, the judge of the King's Bench, then recently de- LONDON 411 ceased, since his appointment took place two months afterwards, on October 25, On his trial ou March 2, 1388, having pleaded, like the rest, that he acted under compulsion, his sentence was commuted into banishment for life, Waterford, with a circuit of two miles round it, being flxed ¦for his residence, and 20/, per annum as signed for his support. It would appear that he died in exile, but his property was ultimately restored to the family. (Ibid. 23.3— 244, 442 ; Cal Inquis, p. m. Ui, 107, 162,) LONDON, Heney oe (Aechbishop of Ditblin), when archde.icon of Stafl'ord is invariably described at the time by his- Christian name, Henry, only ; but he is called by Le Neve (183) Henry of London, He was probably the same person who, in. 16 Henry IL, is mentioned under the name- of Magister Henricus de Lundonia, as hav ing been sent to Chichester by Richard de- Luci, the chief justiciary, to collect the- rents of that bishopric, then vacant, The- precise year of his being raised to the arch deaconry does not appear ; but it is certain he held it in I John, as he is then stated to- have paid under that title 60/, 6s. 8d., which he owed for having the goodwill of King Richard, into the ' Scaccarium Re- demptionis,' In the same year also he is so called as one of the justices itinerant who flxed the tallage in Berkshire, and as. a justicier before whom fines were levied. (Madov, i. 190, 807, 722,) In 8 John he went on an embassy to the King of Navarre (Rut Pat. 3) ; and m 5 John on another to the King of Connaught,. with Meiller Fitz-Henry, justiciary of Ire land, (Rot. de Liberate, 83.) After his return to England he resumed his duties as one of the regular justiciers. (Rot de Fin. 806, 898, 401), aud was. gratified with various ecclesiastical prefer ments, terminating in March 1213 witli- the archbishopric of Dublin. (^Rot Pat... 11-97 ; Rot Chart 200 ; Lelands Ire land, i. 195.) He -witnessed the charter by which King John resigned the crown to the pope, and was present when he granted MagnaCharta. (R. de Wendover, iii. 254-302.) Holinshed (vi. 43) relates that he obtained the name- of Scorch-bill or Scorch-villein, in conse quence of throwing into the fire the evi dences of their titles which his tenante had brought for his inspection. His motive foi- this remains a mystery, as none of the tenants were turned out of their lands. He assisted at the coronation of Henry- III,, under whom he was appointed justi ciary of Ireland in October, 1221, and ad ministered the aft'airs of that kingdom tilk the middle of 1224, when he sm-rendered, the office to William MareschaU, Earl of Pembroke, (Rot Claus. i. 470-491.). Diuing his presidency he built the castle-- 412 LONDON of Dublin, and dying in the year after his retirement, was buried in Christ Church. LONDON, William de, the nephew of the above Henry de London,- was of the ¦ clerical profession, and in 12 John accom panied the king to Ireland, In 16 John he was presented to the prebend of Stokes in the chapel of WaUingford Castle, and two years afterwards to the church of Breten- ham in the diocese of Ely. (Rot. Pat. 118, 186.) He is called ' our beloved clerk ' by Henry IIL, and had some grants from him, proving the royal favour. (Rot. Claus. i. . 354, ii, 88.) It is not improbable that he was appointed a regular justicier about II Henry III. ; for in the list of justices itine rant nominated in August of that year, 1227, his name in the commission for se veral counties stands the next to Stephen de ¦Segrave, and inl230he holds an equally pro minent position. From 18 to 15 Henry III. fines were levied before him at Westmins ter (IhicL ii. 213 ; Dugdale's Orig. 42) ; so that there is no doubt that he must have been elevated to the bench shortly after, if not before, his first selection as a justice itinerant. LONGCHAMP, William de (de Longo Campo) (Bishop oe Ely), was a Norman by birth and of the lowest extraction, his grandfather being little more than an agri cultural labourer. The earliest notice of him is in the employment of Geoffrey, the natural son of King Henry; afterwards he was taken into that of Richard, while Earl ¦ of Poictiers, In what capacity his earlier services were rendered is notrelated ; but before Richard's coronation as King of England, and while he assumed the title of 'Dominus AngUae' only, Longchamp had acquired such favour with his royal master as to be appointed his chancellor ; and his name, with the addition of 'canceUarius metis,' appe.'irs on a charter granted to Gerard de Camville, whUe the king was at Barfleur, in his progress to this country to take possession of his cro-wn, (Archeeologia, xxvii, 112,) Hewas confirmed in his office on Richard's ¦ coronation, and at the council of PipeweU, on September 16, he was nominated to the see of Ely. King Richard then appointed Hugh Pusar, Bishop of Durham, and WU Uam de MandevUle, Earl of Essex and Albe marle, to be chief justiciaries and regents of the kingdom during his absence; but, the earl dying m November, the king named Longchamp in his place, assigning the rule of the northern parts to the Bishop of Durham, .ind that of the southern to the Bishop of Ely, and at the same time asso ciating with them as a council, Hugh Bar dolf, WilUam Marshall, Geoffrey Fitz-Peter, and William Briwer, The power which Longchamp thus ao- ¦ quired "by holding two such offices as chief LONGCHAMP justiciary and chancellor was still further increased in the foUowing June by Pope Clement appointing him legate in England, Wales, and Ireland, After the king's departure on his progress to the Holy Land, Longchamp, who had up to that period exhibited the greatest pru dence and humility, began to display an arrogantand overbearing disposition. With out believing aU the tales which are related of him by monkish historians, -with whom he was no favourite, it is certain that he assumed to himself the whole authority, neglecting altogether the council appointed by the king, and superseding his coadjutor, the Bishop of Durham, and actually casting himinto prison tiUhe delivered up the casties in his portion of the kingdom. He engrossed all the ecclesiastical patronage, and accumu lated vast sums by appropriatmg the rents of the vacant abbeys and bishoprics to him self. He affected a royal state, and the sons of nobles not only waited on Mm at table, but were happy to take Ms relations in mar riage. He never travelled -without such an enormous attendance that the churches and monasteries where he was enterteined were nearly ruined by providing for him and his , retinue ; and if Benedictus Abbas tells truly, the bishop required rather expensive deli cacies at his table. The people suffered severely from the taxes he imposed on them for the supply of the absent Mng ; the clergy were equally oppressed ; and the gentiyand nobles, besides being obliged to contribute, were disgusted with his insolence and rapa city; so that it was not long before all classes were ready to welcome any oppor tunity to rid themselves of so tyrannous a ruler. Earl John, the king's brother, was not backward in fomenting this dissatisfaction for the furtherance of his own ambitious views, and matters in a short time were brought to a crisis, Longchamp, having ejected Gerard de Camville from the sherift'alty of Lincoln shire, besieged the castle of Lincoln, which the sheriff refused to surrender. Earl John, by surprising the castles of Nottingham and Tickhill, obliged the regent not only to raise the siege, but to enter into certain conditions before he was allowed to resume the royal authority. Not warned b}- this lesson, he persisted in his violent career, and in Sep tember 1191 seized the king's natural bro ther, Geofi'rey, Archbishop of York, at the altar of St. Martin at Dover, where he had taken refuge on his arrival in England, con trary to the king's prohibition. The ai'ch- bishop was dragged through the streete and imprisoned in the castle, whence he was not released until Longchamp, finding that the popular indignation could not be resisted, at the end of eight days allowed him to depart. An assembly of the bishops and LONGCHAMP barons, at which the archbishop and Earl John attended, was immediately afterwards held at Reading, where a letter from King Richard, which some writers consider to have been forged, was read, appointing the Archbishop of Rouen at the head of a council of regency. Longchamp, after an ineffectual attempt at resistance, was eventually, at a council held in St. Paul's Churchyard, on October 10, 1191, condemned to resign his offices to the Archbishop of Rouen, and, fearful of personal consequences, deemed it advisable to quit the kingdom. For this purpose he proceeded to Dover, and, dis guising himself m female attire, waited on the beach for the arrival of the boat that was to convey him to Calais. His awkward gait, however, and Ms total inability to speak the English language, caused his dis covery before his escape was effected, and he was obliged to be taken to the prison of the town to save him from the insults of the populace. After some time he was per mitted to depart, when he proceeded to Normandy, Here he fulminated sentence of excommunication against his adversaries, and, among them, against ' Master Benet, who presumed to hold the Great Seal con trary to the ordinances of the king and the kingdom, and his own prohibition.' It would thus appear, therefore, that on his discharge the office of keeper of the Seal was en-trusted to this Master Benet, He afterwards ventured over to Dover, and opened a negotiation with Earl John for the restoration of his powers, but without effect, and he was compelled again to depart, Longchamp, on hearing of the detention of King Richard, was the first to discover his prison, and to assist in his restoration to Uberty, The bearer of the royal order to the council of regency for raising the tax for his redemption, he rested in his j ourney at the abbey of St, Edmund's Bury, where Abbot Samson would not permit mass to be sung before him imtU the sentence of ex communication issued by the Bishop of London against him had been removed. On Richard's release, although Long champ was not restored to the chief jus- ticiaryship, he was continued in the office of chancellor. He signed in that character the treaty of peace between England and France in July 1195 (Rymer, i. 66), and in the next year he was present at Winchester when a fine was levied before the king him self (Hunter's Preface.) There is nothing to show that he did not continue chancellor till the day of his death. He held the sheriffalty of Essex and Hert fordshire m 1196, and at the latter part of that year, he and Philip, Bishop of Durham, were sent to Rome to induce the supreme pontiff to remove the interdict which the Archbishop of Rouen had pronounced against all Normandy. He, however, never LOSINGA 41.^ reached his destination, for, fallmg sick on the joui-ney, he died at Poictiers on Janu ary 31, 1197, and was buried in the Cis tercian monastery of Pina. It is difficult, anud the conflicting opinions. of historians, to form a just estimate ofthe character of this prelate. While some de nounce him as a monster of impiety, and charge him with pride, lust, arrogance, and tyranny, others describe him as loved of God and of men, wise, amiable, generotis, benign, and meek, and their relation of the- incidente of his life are coloured accordingly. That he was too much elated with his pros perity, and exercised his office with too free a hand, cannot, however, be denied ; but,. recollecting the difficulties of his position,, and the ambitious and treasonable designs- of Earl John, it would be unjust entirely to condemn Mm, the more especially as the- countenance he subsequently received from King Richard tends to show that the com plaints against him were greatly exagge rated. (Godwin, 251; Stow, 41; Madox, i. 22, 34, &c ; AngL Sac i. 478, 682 ; Ric Devizes, 6-59 ; Lmgard, iU. 333-340.) LOED, James, is known only, Uke many of the puisne barons of the Exchequer in these reigns, by his appointment to that. position under Elizabeth on November 12,. 1566, His death occurred about January 1576, LOSING-A, Heebbet (Bishop oe Thet- FOED AND NoEWiCH). Thynne, in hisi ' Collection of Chancellors,' has this passage : ' Herbertus, chancellor in the fourth year of" Henry I., in the year of our salutation 1104 (as appeareth by au anonymall pamphlet in. written hand), of whom I am not resolved. whether this were Herbertus Losinga,, Bishop of Norwich, or noe.' (Holinshed,. iv. 349.)_ This is the sole authority for inserting- Herbert as a chancellor, for the ' anonymall pamphlet in a written hand ' is not forth coming, and no record of the time contains- any fact which gives authenticity to the- assertion. Besides this, there is sufficient evidence that Waldric was chancellor at the- specified date. Bishop Herbert was the son of Robert Losinga, but authorities differ whether he- was a Norman or a Briton, and, if the latter,. in what county he was bom. One says, ' In pago Oximensi in Normannia;' another,. ' In pago Oxunensi in Sudovolgia Anglorumi Comitatu,' which some interpret Orford in Suffolk; and agam another, that he was born at Oxford. The first of these seems the most probable, as there is no doubt that he was prior of Fescamp in Normandy, previous to his coming over to England with WilUam Rufus. Slaking himself use ful in every way at court, he became a great favourite -with that monarch. In 1087 he was preferred to the rich abbey of Ramsey, 414 LOUDHAM ;and four years afterwards, in 1091, was pro moted to the bishopric of Thetford, For this advancement he is stated to have paid to the king the sum of 1900/., and is charged with using the same simoniacal means for procurmg the abbacy of Winchester for his father. His conscience reproving him for these transgressions, he undertook a journey to Rome, where he succeeded in obtaining ab solution from Pope Pascal IL, on condition that he proved his penitence by devoting his riches to the Church. On his return, he, , with the consent of the king and the pontiff, in April 1094, removed the see from Thet ford to Norwich, where, in redemption of liis pledge, he built the cathedral at his own ¦expense, laying the first stone in the year 1096, and endowing it with lands sufficient for the support of sixty monks. His munificence did not end here, for he •erected the palace, and founded five parish ¦churches in the county, and a monastery for Climiac monks at Thetford. He died on July 22, 1119, and was buried in his own cathedral. Weever gives the ¦ epitaph on his monument. He was an excellent scholar for those times, and composed several leamed trea tises, mentioned by Pits, who calls hiin ' vir omnium virtutum, et bonarum Uterarum studiis impense redditus, mitis, affabiUs, ¦ corpore venusto, vultu decoro, moribus can- ¦didus, vita integer,' (WiU. Malmesb. 516- ¦648; Godivin, 426; Weevei-, 786-7 ; AngL Sac U, 700 ; Blomefields Norfolk, i. 405, and Norwich, i. 465,) LOITDHAM, William db, was the last of seven justices itinerant appointed in 16 Henry III. for the county of York ; but no furtherinformationhas been obtained of him. LOTJGHBOEOTJGH, LoED. See A, Wed- DEEBUEN, LOTJTHEE, Hugh de, was descended from a long Ime of ancestors, settled at Louther in Westmoreland, His father was of the same name, and his mother was a daughter of Moriceby, of Moriceby in Cumberland, He practised as an advocate, and in 19 Ed ward I., 1291, was employed by the king. (Devon's Issue Roll, 102.) Dugdale on this account represents Mm as the Mng's at torney-general; but it is to be remarked that Richard de Breteville and William Inge "in those years acted in the same manner m ¦ other counties, and there is no proof that the office then existed as a separate ap pointment. In the second commission of justices of traUbaston, issued on February 18, 1307, 35 Edward I., Louther was named among five to act in Norfolk and Suffolk ; and in the same year he was assigned with John de Insula to enquire into a case which was brought by petition before the parUament, according to the course then usually adopted. LOVEDAY of referring these investigations to judges: and leamed men in the law. Some other instances occur in 2 and 8 Edward IL, in the latter of which he acted as a justice itine rant in Yorkshire, (Rot._ ParL i. 209-341,) He was retumed a knight for the county of Westmoreland in 83 Edward L, and was one of the supervisors of the array for that county in 4 Edward II. (Pari. Writs, i. 714, ii, 1118.) He died in the tenth yearof the latter reign ; and by his wife, who was a daughter of Sir Peter de Filiol, of Scaleby Castle in Cumberland, he left two sons, Hugh and the next-mentioned Thomas, The lineal descendant of the eldest son Hugh was in 1696 raised to the peerage as Viscount Lonsdale and Baron Lo'wther, which titles became extinct in 1760, Dming the life of the last lord there were no less than four baronets of the family alive at the same time. The earldom of Lonsdale was subsequently granted to the representetive of the family, and is now borne by his successor. (CoUins's Peei-age, v, 695-716; Nicolas's Synopsis.) LOUTHEE, 'Thomas de, second son ofthe above Hugh de Louther, was constituted a judge of the King's Bench on December 15, 1330, 4 Edward III,, and remained in that court only till the following year, when he was appointed chief justice of the King's Bench in Ireland. (Cal Rot Pat. 113-120.) In 1884 he was superseded by Robert de Bourchier, being, however, at the same time directed to proceed to DubUn to take upon himself the office of chief justice, m case Robert de Bourchier declined to go, 'with a mandate to act as second judge if BourcMer went, (N Fcedera, ii. 891.) It seems pro bable that he took the second place ac- cordinglv, for he was asain raised to the chiefship in 1338. (Cck Rot Pat. 133.) How long he remamed there afterwards, or when he died, does not appear : but m 33 Edward IH, a commission was issued to en quire into a charge made against a Thomas de Louther, and John de Louther, the son of his brother, for a breach of the law of arms in forcing a Scottish knight, made prisoner, to pay a second ransom for his release. (N. Fosdera, iii. 418.) LO'VEDAY, Rogee, is introduced by Dug dale among those raised to the bench of the Common Pleas on November 2, 1276, 4 Ed ward I., but it turns out to be an error, the patent quoted only constituting him and two others justices to hold assizes and pleas in the liberties of the priory of Dunstable, He was appointed a justice itinerant in 6 Ed ward L, and continued to act in that cha racter till the fourteenth year of the reign, (Pari Writs, i. 8, 16, 382 ; Chron. Petro burg. 136.) He was one of the eight judges whom the king in the eighth year selected to enquire what were the services due from the tenants of the manor of Tavistock; and LOVEL .again in the twelfth year he was a com- I jnissioner of enquiiy into the state of the •avails, ditches, sewers, and bridges in Hey- land iu Lincolnshire, and the damage done 1)V an inundation there. (Abh. Placit. 205, :270,) His property was at Wytheresfield in Suff'olk; and in 15 Edward I. he died, Heaving a son named Richard. His widow, SibiUa, afterwards married William de ?Ormesby, the judge. (Ibid. 207-307 ; Ccd. Jnquis. p. m, i, 49.) LOVEL, John, had the living of Ylingin the diocese of London in 18 Edward I.,' and •complaints were made against him to the parliament by his parishioners for undue .severity. (Rot. Pari. i. 60,) He was one of five justices itinerant sent into the northern ¦counties m 20 Edward I,, 1292, and two years afterwards is introduced into Dug dale's list as ajudge of the King's Bench, He seems to have held that place in 28 and r28 Edward I. ; but in the intervening years he is called clerk of the council, and appears among those known to be clerks in Chancery, In 26 and 28 Edward I. he was one of the j iistices appointed to perambulate the foreste, "(Pari Writs, i. 29-88, 397.) LO-VELL, Salathiel, was the son of Bernard Lovell, of Lapworth in the county -of Warwick, and was bom about the year 1619, He was called to the bar at Gray's Inn in November 1656, and was made an sancient in 1671, In 1684 he appears as -one of the counsel employed for Mr, Sache verell and others on their trial for a riot at the election of mayor of Nottingham, He was called to the degree of the coif in 1688, and in June 1692 he stood for the recordership of London, and was elected by the casting vote of the lord mayor. In the following October he was knighted on -carrying up the address of the coiporation ¦on King William's return from abroad, (State Trials, x. 61 ; Luttrell, i, 446, ii, 478, 598,) He performed the duties of his office so much to the satisfaction of the court that he was promoted to be king's serjeant in TMay 1695, and a judge on the Chester 'Circuit in the foUowing year. He was on the verge of ninety years of age when he was at last appointed a fifth Fbaron of the Court of Exchequer ou June 17, 1708. He sat for the next five years. Taut from his extreme age could not be of miuch use to his colleagues. Distinguished -principally by his want of memory, his titie of recorder was converted into the nickname of the obliviscor of London, His great-grandson, Richard Lovell Edge- worth (iz/e, i, 118), relates that a young LUCI 415 on which he replied, fbro-otten more law thau you wiU ever re member.' This story, however, is told, with a difference, of Serjeant Maynard and of other old lawyers. He died on May 3, 1713, leaving several children. One of them, Samuel Lovell, also became a Welsh judge, of whom a ludicrous anecdote is told, of his refusing, when overtaken by the tide near Beaumaris, to mount the coach-box to escape drowning, unless a precedent could be quoted for a judge's doing so. (Luttrell, vi. 316.) LOVETOT, John de, of the noble family of that name, lords of Wirksop in Not tinghamshire, was the son of Oliver de Lovetot, of Carcolston in that county, and Alicia, his wife, (Baronage, i. 569; Thoroton's Notts, i, 235.) He was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas in 3 Edward I., 1276, and there are entries of fines levied before him from that year till 1289, (Dugdale's Orig. 44,) At this time he was charged with extortion and other crimes committed on the judicial seat, and he was accordingly removed and impri soned in the Tower, for his redemption from which he paid a fine of 3000 marks. (Stow's London, 44 ; Weever, 367.) He died in 1294. (ParL Writs, i. 717 .) LIJCI, Reginald de, of whose parentage nothing is known, had the honor of Egre- mont, with land in the mountainous terri tory of Copland, in Cumberland, by his wife Annabel, one of the daughters of William Fitz-Diincan, Earl of Murray, in Scotland. In 19 Henry IL, 1173, and two follow ing years, he was one of the justices itine rant to set the assize for the united counties of Nottingham and Derby, being at that time govemor of Nottmgham for the Mng, in the rebellion of the Earl of Leicester and others on behalf of Henry, the king's son. He attended with the rest of the barons at the coronation of King Richard I., and died soon after. (Madox, i, 123, 125, 701 ; Baronage, i, 566, 612.) LUCI, Richaed de. The ancestors of this eminent man held lands in Kent, Nor folk, and Suffolk, for which they performed the service of castle-guard at Dover, The first fact that history records of him is that Henry I, granted to him the lordship of Disce, now Diss, in Norfolk, Under King Stephen he was entrusted with the government of Falaise in Nor mandy, which he resolutely defended against the attacks of Geoffrey Earl of Anjou, the husband of the Empress Ma tilda, In the contest between her and the king he distinguished himself on various occasions in support of the latter, and so high did he stand in the estimation of the contending parties, that on the solemn agreement made by King Stephen with Henry, the son of the empress, in 1153, the Tower of London and the castle of 416 LUCI Windsor were both put into his hands, by the desire of the whole clergy, he .swearing to deliver them up to Henry on the death of Stephen, and giving his son as a hostage for his performance of the trust, Madox (i. 33) quotes a writ, addressed ' Ricardo de Luci, Justic. et Vicecomiti de Essexa,' to prove that he was chief ju.s ticiary in the reign of Stephen. But it affords no evidence to that extent. _ It would simply prove that he was a justicier, a terra which in those days was almost synonymous with that of baron ; as when the king covenanted with Milo of Glouces ter, ' sicut justiciario et barone meo! In this instance the word is used as a mere desig nation, and the writ is addressed to him, not as justicier or baron, but simply as sheriff of Essex, to lands in which county it has reference. Under Henry II. there is full evidence that he was placed in the Mgh office of chief justiciary, though some doubt exists as to the precise period of his appointment. At a very early period Robert de Beaumont, Earl of Leicester, and he held the office j ointly, and their separate precepts occurrin g 'in the roUs of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th years of the reign, show that each had high power. He accompanied the king in I16I into Normandy, the Earl of Leicester being left in England to direct the government. They appear to have acted together till the 13th year of the reign, when the Eairl of Lei cester died, Richard de Luci then became, without any question, sole chief justiciary. From that year till 24 Henry IL, 1178, numerous writs in his own name, some of them being grounded on a king's -writ de ultra mare, and the confimiation in the Exchequer of a con vention relative to certain land, made ' co ram Ricardo de Luci et aliis baronibus,' plainly prove that he then held the highest judicial place in the Curia Regis, Of his judicial acts as chief justiciary little is recorded beyond the committal of some London rioters to prison ; but there is sufficient evidence of his activity and dili gence in the execution of the legal branch of Ms office (Madox, i. 146), at the same time that he showed no negligence in his ministerial and political duties. The preparation of the celebrated Con stitutions of Clarendon, in January II64, was entrusted to him and to Josceline de Baliol, both of whom were accordingly sub jected to the rancour of Becket, who two years afterwards pronounced sentence of excommunication against them, as the fa vourers of the kmg's tyranny, and the con trivers of those heretical pravities. This sentence was repeated by Becket in 1169 against him and others ; but it does not appear to have produced much eff'ect on the laymen included in it. LUCI In 1167, on the threat of an invasion by- the Earls of Boulogne and Flanders, Richard de Luci made such preparations of defence- as effectually to deter them. His conduct- and valour as a warrior were brought more- actively forward in 1173, when the king's sons raised the standard of rebellion against- their father. The Earl of Leicester, the son of his late coadjutor, having joined their- party, Richard de Luci besieged the to-wn and castle of Leicester, and soon reducing the former, and demolishing its fortifica tions, he granted a truce to the ganison of the latter, in order to march against WU liam, King of Scotland, who had invaded Cumberland and was besieging CarUsle. Joined by Humphrey de Bohun, the king's constable, he not only forced the Scots and Galwegians to retire, but, in revenge for- then- horrible devastations, he set fire to- Berwick and ravaged Lothian. The Earl of Leicester during this time had arrived in England with a large body of Flemmgs ; but Richard de Luci and Humphrey de Bohun, concluding a truce with the Scottish king, marched immediately against them, and, giving them battle at Fernham in Suffolk, on November 1, 1173, not only defeated' them -with great slaughter, but took the Earl of Leicester and his countess prisoners. The justiciary's activity was not less prominent" during the succeeding year, in opposing the Earls of Derby and Huntingdon ; and the retum of King Henry to England, and the captm-e of WilUam, King of Scotland, oc curring about the same time, the rebellion was effectually suppressed before the end of the year. His services were not unrewarded by the king, who gave him the hundred of Ongar in Essex, -with Stanford and Greensteed, and many broad lands in that county and in Kent. After a life devoted to his country, he- prepared himself a retirement at ite close, by founding, in II78, an abbey at Lesnes oi- "^'"estwood, iu the parish of Erith m Kent, for canons regular of the order of St. Au gustin, endo-wing it nobly with half of his- possessions there. Resisting the entreaties- of his sovereign, who knew how to appre ciate his abiUties, he resigned his office at the commencement of the following year, and, assuming the habit of one of the canons of the house, withdrew from the turmoil of the world to devote the remainder of his days to piety. His seclusion, however, was not of long duration, for he died on July 14, 1179, and was buried in a sumptuous tomb in the choir of his church. To the integi-ity of his character the best testimony is afforded by the conduct of his: sovereign, who, though fmding him in arms against himself, and highly in the confidence of his opponent, wisely showed his admiration of fidelity and worth even LUCI in an enemy, by admitting him into his own counsels, and entrusting him with the sole administration of the realm. By his wife, Rohaise, he had, according to Dugdale (Baronage, i. 563), two sons and two daughters, Maude, the elder of his two daughters, was married to the before- noticed Walter Fitz-Robert ; and Rohaise, the younger, was married to Fulbert, the son of John de Dover, lord of Chilham, also previously noticed. Other authors give a somewhat different account of the family. ( Weevei-, 777 ; Blomefields Noi-folk, i, 2 ; Morant's Essex, i, 127, U. 116 ; Lord Lyt telton ; Pipe RoUs, 2, 8, and 4 Henry II.) Lirci, Robeet db, was probably a rela tive of the great Richard de Luci, but in what manner does not appear. He was joined to Richard de Wilton, the sheriff of Wiltehire, as justice itinerant to set the assize or tallage for that county, in 20 Henry IL, II74. In the following year he was sheriff of the county of Worcester, be yond which no further information occurs. (Madox, i. 124-546,) LlfCI, Godeeey db (Bishop oe Win- chestbe), son of Richard de Ijuci, completed the abbey of Lesnes, m Erith, Kent, which his father had founded. He was appointed one of King Henry's chaplains, and from canonries in St, Paul's, Lincoln, and York, was advanced to the deanery of St. Martin's in London (AngL Sac. i. 302), and afterwards to the archdeaconries of Derby and the East Riding of York. On September 16, 1189, 1 Richard L, he was elected Bishop of Win chester, and presided over that see for flfteen years, (Le Neve, 185, 288, 826.) In 1179, 25 Henry IL, he was named by the council held at Windsor, on the divi sion of the kingdom into four parts for the administration of justice, at the head ofthe six justiciers to whom the northem coun ties were appropriated, and who, besides, were specially appointed to sit in the Curia Regis to hear the complaints of the people. From this time to the end of that reign he regularly acted as a justiciary, not only in the King's Court at Westminster, but on the itinera in various counties. (Madox, i. 113-787, ii. 146.) By a bribe or fine of 3000/. he is said to have obtained the restoration of certain manors which had been taken away from tbe diocese, and to have been made custos of the county of Hants, and of the castles of Winchester and Porchester. But the latter, on the Mng's departure, were seized by the chancellor, WilUam de Longchamp, Bishop of Ely, nor were they restored till that prelate was removed from the regency of the kingdom. During the last four years of Richard's reign, Bishop Godfrey was much engaged in Ms judicial duties, his name appearing frequently on the flnes levied both at West- LUKE 417 minster and on the circuits. His death occurred on September 4, 1204, and his character was that of an amiable, discreet, and kind-hearted man. (Ric. Denizes, 10, 89, 64; Godioin, 217.) LUCI, Stephen de, was one of the sons of Walter de Charlecote, upon whom Henry de Montford conferred the village of that name in Warwickshire, and he and his brother William were the first who as sumed the surname of Luci, He held some office in the court in 7 and 8 John, seve ral mandates being countersigned by him. Seventeen years afterwards he was sent, m 8 and 9 Henry IIL, on royal missions to Rome, in conjunction, on each occasion, with Godfrey de Craucombe, (Rot. Claus. i. 66, 678, U. 42-67,) On his return he was appointed custos of the bishopric of Durham, which he held during the two years of its vacancy. It was no doubt on this account that in 1228 he was nomi nated one of the justices itinerant within the liberties of that bishopric, for his name does not otherwise appear in a judicial capacity. His brother, William de Luci, to whom the Mng granted the hundred of Kineton in Warwickshire to farm (Ex cerpt. K Rot. Fin. 180-166), and who was afterwards sheriff of that county, was the progenitor of Sir Thomas de Luci, the Justice Shallow of Shakspeare, and the property is stiU retained by one of his lineal representatives. LUKE, Waltee, is said to have advanced himself in the world by marrying the nurse of Henry VIIL, with whom he received an estate at Cople in Bedfordshire, and two annuities of 20/. during her life. Her name was Anne, and she is described in the visitation of Huntingdon of 1513 as the daughter and heir of Launcelin of Laiince- linsbury in that county, and the widow of William Oxenbridge. (Visit. Hunts, 60; Gent Mag. July 1828, 28,) In the Mid dle Temple he attained the post of reader in 1514 and 1520. He probably practised in the Court of Chancery, since his name as counsel does not occur in any of the Reporte, and he was one of those assigned in June 1529 to hear causes iu Chancery in aid of Cardinal Wolsey, He had pre viously been connected with the royal household, for when the king's illegitimate son, Henry Fitzroy, Duke of Richmond, was in 1625, at the age of about six years, made lord warden of the North, 'Walter Luke was appointed to attend him as at tomey-general. (Camden MSS. iii,; Mem. H. Fitzroy, xxiii.) The degree of serjeant was conferred upon him in Michaelmas 1631, and in the foUowing year, on August 23, he was promoted to the ermine as a judge of the King's Bench, and knighted. He sat a silent commissioner on the trials of Sir Thomas More and the Bishop of E E 418 LUKE Rochester (State Trials, i. 387, 398), and dying in 1644, was buried m Cople Church, where there is an effigy of him and his wife on a brass plate. (Gent Mag. Ixxxvii. (2), 394,) His only son is the next-men tioned Nicholas, LUEE, Nicholas, the only son of the above Sir Walter Luke, received his legal education also at the Middle Temple, and filled the office of reader in 1684. On AprU 14, 1640, 31 Henry VIIL, he was constituted third baron of the Exchequer, and retained his seat there throughout the reigns of Edward VL and Mary, receiving a renewal of his patent on the accession of Queen EUzabeth, He died in 1663, and , was buried at Cople. His wife was Cecily, daughter of Sir Thomas Walton, of Bassingmede. (Dug dale's Orig. 216 ; Gent. Mag. ut supra.) LUSH, Robeet, now one of the judges of the Court of Queen's Bench, was bom on October 13, 1807, at Shaftesbury, His father was Robert Lush, Esq., of that place, and his mother was Lucy, daughter of — Foote, Esq., of Tollard in WUtehire, After some creditable exertions m the lower branches of the profession, he was called to the bar by the society of Gray's Inn on November 18, 1840, and attended the Home Circuit. In 1857 he was ap pointed a queen's counsel, and though he never held any official station, nor ever had a seat in parliament, he was for his profes sional merits alone selected as the successor of Mr, Justice Crompton, and received his patent as ajudge of the Queen's Bench on October 30, 1865, when he received the customary honour of knighthood. He married EUzabeth Ann, daughter of Christopher Woolacott, Esq., of London. LUT'WYCHE, Edwaed, was the sou and heir of William Lutwyche, of an old Shropshire family of respectabiUty, and, being called to the bar at Gray's Inn in June 1661, was elected an ancient in 1671. Receiving the distinction of the coif in 1683, he was made king's serjeant on Fe bruary 9, 1684, and knighted. In October 1686 James conferred upon him the chief justiceship of Chester, and raised him to the bench of the Common Pleas on April 21, 1686, where he continued to sit till the abdication. He fell -vrith his sovereign, and, in consequence of his ha-ving concurred in the royal claim to dispense -with the penal laws in Sir Edward Hale's case, he was excepted out of the act of indemnity passed in the next reign. Returning to the bar, he was fined, at the York assizes in April 1693 for refusing to take the oaths, but he contmued to practise tiU 1704, as his 're ports and entries ' to that time show. He died in June 1709, and was buried at St. Bride's, London. (Bramston, 207; Luttrell, iii, 83 ; 2 Shower, 476 ; Pari Hist. v. 334,) LYSTER LYDIAED, Ralph de, was appointed a justice itinerant for the county of Somerset in 9 Henry IIL, 1226, He was either an advocate in the court, or in the service of Josceline de Wells, Bishop of Bath, as he was named by that prelate in the follow ing year as his attomey in a suit against a man whom the bishop claimed as 'nativum suum.' (Rot Claus. U. 76, 164,) LYMBEEGH, Adam de, who was of a LincoMshire family, was m constant em ployment m offices of trust and respon sibility under both Edward II. and HI, In 5 Edward IL, 1311, he was appointed one of the remembrancers of the Ex chequer ; and in I32I he was made con stable of Bordeaux, where he remained three or four years, and afterwards, on the accession of Edward IH,, became keeper of the privy seal. From 5 to 8 Edward III, he was chanceUor of Ireland, when from this office he was transferred to the English Court of Exchequer as a baron on November 9, 1834, and probably sat there tUl his death m 13 Edward IH, (Mado.x, U, 267; ParL Writs, U. p, U, 1096; N. Fezdera, ii, 619-596, 812, 891 ; Cal. Inquis. p, m, ii. 89 ; Abb. Rot Orig. 49, 139.) LYNDE, John de la, was of ancient descent and special note m the county of Dorset, where he was baUiff of the forest of Blakemore. One of his famUy, probably he Mmself, havmg kiUed a wMte hart which Henry HI. whUe hunting had spared on account of ite beauty, was not only im prisoned and fined, but his lands were sub jected to an annual tax under the name of the ' White Hart SUver.' He resided at Hartley in Great Mmton, (Hutchins's Dorset, ii, 272-476.) He was employed in Gascony by the Mng, one of Ms letters to whom shows that he acted as a justicier in Yorkshire, in which character his name appears iu Trmity 1266 on a fine, in the next year on the pleas of the com-t, andin May 1270 in a payment made for an assize to be taken before him in Essex, (Dug dale's Orig. 48 ; E.vcerpt. e Rot !Fin. ii. 512.) In 1250 he was joint custos ofthe city and Tower of London, (Cal. Rot Pat. 39,) On his death in 1272 he possessed manors and lands in six counties. (Cal Inqtds. p, m, i, 48.) LYNDHUEST, Loed, See J, S. Copley, LYSTEE, Richaed, was the grandson of Thomas and the son of John, both of W.ikefield iu Yorkshire. His mother was a daughter of Beaumont of Whitley in the same county. He had his legal training in the Middle Temple, where he arrived at the dignity of reader in Lent 1516 and 1522, and was appointed treasurer in 1523. (Dugdale's Orig. 215, 221.) He was placed in the office of solicitor- general on July 8, 1521 ; and was succeeded m this post by Christopher Hales on An- LYTHEGEENES Sust 14, 1525 ; and, although he is not m- -troduced mto the list of attorney-generals in Dugdale's 'Chronica Series,' there is little doubt that he then followed Ralph Swillington m that office, as he is men tioned with the title in the will of Cicily Marchioness of Dorset, dated May 6, 1527. (Testam. Vetust 634.) This office he held till May 12, 1629, when he was appomted chief baron of the Exchequer, and kmghted. After presiding in that court above sixteen years, he was advanced to the office of chief justice of the King's Bench on November 9, 1545, 37 Henry VIII. ; and in this cha racter he attested the submission and confession of Thomas Duke of Norfolk on January 12, 1647, a fortnight before the king's death. (State Trials,i. 887, 898,458.) On the accession of Edward "VI. he was re-appointed, but resigned at the end of the firstfive years ofthe reign, onMarch2I,1552. The remainder of his life he spent at Ms mansion in Southampton, and, dying on March 14, 1554, he was buried in the church of St. Michael there. His first wife was Jane, daughter of Sir Ralph Shirley, of Wistneston, Sussex, and vridow of Sir John Dawtrey, of Petworth ; and his second was a daughter of — Stoke. LYTHEGEENES, John de, was either a native of or established as an advocate in one ofthe northern counties, his name bemg mentioned so early as 52 Henry III, as employed on the part of the Mng in a quo warranto against the mayor of Newcastle- upon-Tyne, (Abb. Placit 170.) In 8 Ed ward I. he was appointed sheriff of York shire, and retained that office for five years ; and he is noticed in the parUament of 18 Edward I. as a commissioner to enquire into the Uberties claimed by the priors of Tyne- mouth and Cariisle, (Rot Pari i. 29, 38,) In 1293 he acted as one of the justices itinerant for Surrey; two years afterwards he was kmg's escheator beyond the Trent, but in the next year exchanged the office for that on this side the Trent. In 28 Ed ward L, and two years afterwards, he was employedin the perambulation ofthe foreste of the northern counties (Pari. Writs, i. 397-8), being also recorded in the inter vening year as a justice itinerant in the county of Kent. He was stUl alive in Ja nuary 1801, when his name appears in the Statute de Escaetoribus as one of the kino-'s council, (St at Large, i. 147.) LYTTELTON, Thomas, was descended from a family established at South Lyttel ton in Worcestershire so early as the reign of Henry IL In that of Henry IH. the successor of the family became possessed of the manor of Franlriey, whose representa tive, EUzabeth, carried the estate to her husband, Thomas Westeote, of Westcote, near Bamstaple, with a provision that her issue inheritable should be caUed by the LYTTELTON 419 name of Lyttelton, This eminent judge was the son of that marriage, upon whom the name devolved. He was born at the family seat, and we have Coke's authority that his legal studies were pursued at the Inner Temple, and that the subject of his public reading there was the statute of Westminster 2, De Donis ConditionaUbus. In 1445 a suitor petitioned the lord chancellor to assign him as counsel in certein proceedings against the -widow of Judge Paston, whom none of the ' men of court' were willing to oppose. (Paston Letters, i. 8.) From this it would seem that Ms practice was at that time principally m the Court of Chancery, which may perhaps account for the infrequent occurrence of his name in the Year Books, m which Chancery cases are seldom recorded. In 30 Henry VI, he had a grant from Sir WilUam Trus- sel of the manor of Sheriff Hales m Stef fordshire for Ms Ufe, ' pro bono et notabili consilio;' affording an example of the manner in which advocates were sometimes rewarded by their opiUent clients m those days, when current coin was scarce. He was called to the degree of the coif on July 2, 1453, and was also appomted steward (or judge) of the Court of Mar shalsea of the Mng's household. His ser vices were soon afterwards further retained by the crown, by granting him a patent as kmg's Serjeant on May 13, 1465, In the first parliament of Edward IV. he was named as an arbitrator in a difference between the Bishop of Winchester and his tenants (!Rot Pari v. 476) ; and two years afterwards he was in personal attendance on the Mng with the two chief justices on one of the royal progresses. (Paston Letters, i. 176.) On the next vacancy he was raised to the bench, being constituted a judge of the Common Pleas on April 17, 1466, and he added a dignity to the law by his leaming and impartiaUty throughout the remamder of Ms Ufe, uninfluenced by the passions of the contendmg parties, and unremoved by either of the royal disputants on the two temporary transfers of the cro-wn wMch he witnessed. In 15 Edward IV. he was honoured with the knighthood of the Bath. He died where he was bom, at Frankley, on August 23, 1481, and was buried m Worcester Cathedral. From his obtaining two general pardons under the Great Seal it has been inferred that he was alternately a partisan of the houses of York and Lancaster, and thus re quired a double protection. But seeing that the first was granted in 1454, before the civil war had commenced, and while he was m the Mng's service as judge of the Mar shalsea, it seems more probable that the m- demnity he then sued for was against any irregular acts he might have committed while he was high sheriff or escheator of E e 2 420 LYTTELTON Worcestershire ; and as to the second grant, dated 1461, when he was in favour with King Edward TV., his desire of a renewal of his pardon must be considered rather as an act of prudent caution at the end of a violent civil convulsion, and the introduction of a new dynasty, a conclusion to which we more readily arrive since we flnd that the latter was granted to him ns ' late sheriff of Worcester, or under-sheriff (Chaufepie's Coat. ofBayle, iii, 86), the Eari of Warwick being the hereditary high sheriff. His name is still sacred in Westminster Hall, and his celebrated work, 'The Teea- tlse on Tenures,' which Coke describes as ' the most perfect and absolute work that ever was written in any human science,' and for which Camden asserts that 'the students of the common law are no less beholden than the civilians are to Justi nian's Institutes,' will ever prevent its being forgotten. The treatise itself is, how ever, now seldom read without the valu able Commentary of Sir Edward Coke, a production which, as no one would dare to enter the legal arena without fully digest ing, has been illustrated succes.sively by the eminent names of Hale, Nottmgham, Hargrave, and Butler. Sir Thomas greatly enlarged his posses sions by his marriage with Joan, one of the daughters and coheirs of Sir William Bur- ley, of Bromscroft Castle, Shropshire, and widow of Sir Philip Chetwynd, of Ingestre in Staffordshire. By her he had three sons, each the progenitor of a noble house — viz., the present Lord Lyttelton of Frankley, from the eldest ; the present Lord Hather- ton, from the second son ; and from the third. Lord Lyttelton of Mounslow, whose name -will be next noticed. LYTTELTON, Edwaed (Lord Lxtiel- ton), was the great-grandson of Thomas, the youngest of the three sons of the last- mentioned judge, and the son of Edward Lyttelton, seated at Henley in Shropshire, who became chief justice of North AVales, was knighted, and married Mary, the daughter of Edmund AValter, chief justice of South Wales, and sister to Sir John Walter, the distinguished lord chief baron of the Exchequer in the reign of James I. Edward Lyttelton was born at Mounslow in 1589, and took his first degree in arts at Christ Church, Oxford, in 1609. At the Inner Temple he was called to the bar. Lord Clarendon (ii. 491) describes him as 'a handsome and proper man, of a very graceful presence, and notorious for courage, which in his youth he had manifested with his sword. He had taken great pains in the hardest and most Itnotty part of the law, as well as that which was more customaiy, and was not only very ready and expert in the books, but exceedingly versed in records, in studying and examin- LYTTELTON ing whereof he had kept Mr. Selden com pany, with whom he had gi-eat friendships and who had much assisted him, so that he was looked upon as the best antiquary of the profession who gave himself up to prac* tice.' His early reputation m his profes* sion is proved by his being on his father's death, in 1621, appointed to succeed him a» chief justice of North Wales. Returned in 1626 to the second parUa- , ment of Charles I., he took an active part in the proceedings against the Duke of Buckingham, argumg that common fame was a sufficient ground for the house to act upon. In the midst of the enquiry the king, to save his favourite, dissolved the parUament, When it met agam in March 1628 Lyttelton was placed in the chafr of the committee of grievances, and on April 3 presented.to the house their report, upon which was founded the famous Petition of Right. In the subsequent conferences with the Lords he ably enforced the reso lutions, and replied to the objections of the crown officers with temper and pointi He was desig'uated by the lord president in reporting the argumente as 'a grave and learned la-wyer,' and great must have been his elation when he heard the king's answer to the petition, ' Soit droit fait comme U est desir^.' On the dissolution of tMs par liament in the foUovring March several members were imprisoned for thefr violence in holding the speaker in the chau- whUe the protestation against tonnage and pound age was passed. On their appUcation to the Court of King's Bench, Lyttelton ap peared for .Tohn Selden, who was on& of those arrested, and learnedly contendecf for his right to be discharged on bail. (Pari. Hist U. 58-823 ; State Trials, m. 85, 252.) Though a strenuous advocate for the liberty of the subject, he had never exhih bited any asperity in his language, noi shown himself a violent partisan of those who opposed the measures of the courfc The kiug could not fail to see the beneflte which would result from his services, and accordingly earnestly recommended hini as recorder of the city of London, to which he was elected on December 7, 1631. About the same time he was appointed counsel to the university of Oxford, and in autumn of the next year he arrived at the post of reader to the Inner Temple. In October 1684 he was made solicitor- general, and knighted. This office he held above five years, and principally distin guished himself by his elaborate argument against Hampden in the case of ship-money,- in delivering which he occupied three days. (State TriaU, in. 923.) An extraordinary compUment was paid by his inu of court to the name of his illustrious ancestor. The soUcitor-general having applied for a chamber, then vacant. LYTTELTON over his own, to be assigned to his kins man, Mr. Thomas Lyttelton, 'the whole company of the bench -with one voice ' not only gi-anted his request, but desired that the ' admittance should be freely without any fine, as a testimony of that great respect the whole society doth owe and acknowledge to the name and family of Lyttelton.' (Inner Temple Books.) He was promoted to the office of chief justice of the Common Pleas on January 27, 1640. (Rymer, xx. 380.) In the April foUo'wing a new parliament was called, and after sitting barety three weeks was dissolved. Another, the Long Parlia ment, met in November, and one of its ifirst enquiries was into the conduct of Lord Keeper Fmch, who, dreading the conse quences, fled the coimtry. The Seal, being thus deserted, was delivered to Lyttelton, ¦vrith the title of lord keeper, on January 18, 164I (Croke, Car. 566) ; and on the 18th of the foUowing month he was created Lord Lyttelton of Mounslow, This ad vance did not add to his reputation or his peace. In the Common Pleas he had pre sided -with great ability ; in the Chancery he was only, an mdiff'erent judge. At the council and in parUament he felt himself out of his element, and was so disturbed with the unhappy state of the king's affairs that he fell into a serious ilMess, and was absent from his place for some months. On the impeachment and attamder of his friend the Earl of Strafford he was pre vented from pleading on his behalf by his iUness. Soon after, on May 18, the lord keeper was placed at the head of a com mission to execute the office of lord high treasurer. On his resuming his seat he had the difficult duty of presiding during all the violent measures that occupied the house. His conduct, while it could not but be displeasing to the king, raising doubte of his fldelity, was so satisfactory to the Commons, and so apparently compliant with their wills, that on their nomination of lieutenante for the several counties they placed him at the head of his native shire, (State Tiials, ii, 1085,) In Mai'ch 1642 the kmg, offended by the parliamentary pro ceedmgs, retired to York. He had been for some time suspicious of the.lord keeper's de votion to him, and was'particularly disgusted with his vote in favour of the ordinance for the militia, and his arguments in support of ite legality. (Whiteloeke, 69.) Lord Lyttelton, however, took an opportunity of explaining to Mr, Hyde (afterwards Lord Clarendon), who was secretly in the con fidence of the king, that he was in gi-eat perplexity how to act, that he had no per son to confer with or to conflde in, and that he had given this vote and others, which he knew would be obnoxious to the king, for the purpose of disarming the LYTTELTON 421 rising distrust of the Commons, and of preventmg their proposed intention of taking the Seal from him. He thereupon planned with Mr. Hyde that he would take advantage of the customary recess of the house, between Saturday and Mondav morning, to send the Great Seal to the Mng, and Mmself to follow after. This important service, as it was then deemed, was successfully effected, and on May 23 the lord keeper's escape was reported to the Lords, who immediately ordered him to be taken into custody ; but at the end of the third day after his departure he kissed the kmg's hand at York. This stetement would seem to be contradicted by his sub sequent letter to the Lords, in which he says that Saturday was the first time that he ever heard of going to "fork, and that he did so by the king's absolute commands. He encloses an affidavit showing his in ability from ilMess to travel to West minster, as ordered, and at the same time proves the evasiveness of the excuse by ' taking the boldness ' to inform the Lords that he has the king's express commands upon his aUegiance not to depart from him. Such weakness of purpose, and such useless attempts to be well with both parties, sufficiently account for his not being re spected by either. It was not till a year afterwards that the parliament voted that if Lord Keeper Lyttelton did not return with the Great Seal within fourteen days he should lose his place, and whatever should be sealed with that Great Seal afterwards should be void ( Whiteloeke, 70) ; and the two houses passed au ordinance for a new Great Seal on November 10, 1648. The king wa.?, at flrst, much dissatisfied with Lyttelton, whose hesitation and fears were rather annoying. But Hyde convinced his majesty of his lord keeper's fidelity, and prevented his being removed from his place, though he was not for some time entrusted with the .ictual custody of the Seal. Of Lyttel ton's .loyal devotion to the crown all sus picion was at last removed. In March he was again appointed M-st commissioner in the Treasury (4 Report Pub. Rec, App. U. 187); and on May 21, 1644, he was actually entrusted with a miUtary commission to raise a regiment of foot-soldiers, consisting of gentlemen of the inns of court and chancery, aud others. Of this regiment, the ranks of which were soon filled, he acted as colonel. Two centm-ies had elapsed since a keeper of the Seal and a soldier were united in the same person; and in the two cen turies that have since passed no other person has served the king in a Uke double capacity. Notwithstanding this ebuUition of zeal and spirit, Lyttelton was an altered man. The sad position of public affairs depressed him ; he became melancholy, and the vigour 422 LYTTELTON of Ms mind and the strength of his body graduaUy decayed, so that he could not contend agamst an attack of illness, which carried him off on August 27, 1645. He was buried in the cathedral of Christ Church, Oxford. That he was a leamed lawyer, power ful advocate, and an excellent judge ;_that in his private character he was highly esteemed; that he was mcormpt amidst corruption, and moderate among the violent; and that he never used power for the gratification of private malignity, nor for the prosecution of party purposes, both friends and enemies readily acknowledge. Deser tion of the popular party for place is some what harshly alleged against him. His subsequent career must rather be blamed as weak than stigmatised as treacherous ; and Ms flight with the Great Seal from the parliament, so dangerous, and indeed so fatal to himself, if he had been stopped, showed a degree of personal courage tha-t must dissipate all doubts as to the principles by which he was guided. He felt it to be his duty to resist the encroachmente on the constitution, and he did resist them ; he felt it equally to be his duty to support the sovereign when his power was threatened, and he fiew to him for that purpose. But he was not a man for the times he Uved in. He was not made for power ; he could not cope with the spirits of the day; he was weak and wavering ; and by endeavourmg to be the friend of all parties he expe rienced the usual consequence of being confided in bv none. But he had dear MACDONALD friends o'n both sides who did not doubt hi* integrity, Hyde, who knew him well, was his friend to the last. Whiteloeke, of the parliament side, always speaks kindly of him, and even in relatmg his ffight caUs him 'a man of courage and of exceUent parts and leaming.' A volume of Reporte in the Common, Pleas and Exchequer, from 2 to 7 Charles- L, was published with his name m 1683 ; but doubts have been raised as to their- being of his composition. His peerage died with him. His first wife was Anne, daughter of John Lyttel ton of Frankley ; and Ms second vrife was Elizabeth, one of the daughters of Sir WilUam Jones, the judge of the King's Bench, and widow of Sir George Calverley, of Cheshire. (Ath. Oxon. iii, 175.) LYTTELTON, Timothy, the brother of the above lord keeper of Charles I., and the seventh son of Sir Edward Lyttelton, of Henley m Shropshire, chief justice of North Wales, was admitted into the Inner Temple in 1626, caUed to the bar in 1635, and elected a bencher m 1640, During the- Rebellion his history is a blank ; but at the- Restoration he held the office of recorder of Bewdley, and was appomted one of the Welsh judges. The only subsequent notice of him is that he was constituted a baron of the Exchequer on February 1, 1670, and that he died early m 1679, and was buried in the Temple Church. (Woods: Fasti, ii. 231 ; Nash's Worcestershire, ii. 279; Cal St. Papers [1660], 212; Gent. Mag. iu. 69.) M MACCLESFIELD, Eael of. See T. Paekee. UACDONALD, Aechibald, was de scended from the old Lords of the Isles, one of whom was created a baronet of Nova Scotia in 1626. The seventh baronet was Sir Alexander, who by his second wife, Margaret, daughter of Alexander, ninth Earl of Egliuton, was father of three sons, the two elder of whom succeeded in tum to the titie, and the latter was in 1776 raised to the barony of Macdonald in the peerage of Ireland, which his repre sentative StiU enjoys. Archibald, the youngest, was born in 1746, and received his education at Westminster School, On being caUed to the bar in England his connection with Scotiand insured him liberal employment in appeals from that country to the House of Lords ; and in the courts of Westminster, though he had not gi-eat practice, he acquired such a character as a lawyer as to be engaged in the great Grenada case in 1775, for his argument in which he was highly praised by Lord Mansfield, (State Trials, xx. 287, 303, 806.) His union in 1777 -with Louisa, the eldest daughter of Granville, second Earl Gower (afterwards Marquis of Staf ford), was a certain precursor of promotion to one who possessed competent legal qualifications. In the same year he was made one of the king's counsel, and was retumed to parliament for the borough of Hindon, and in 1780 for Newcastle-under- Lyne. He gave his support to Lord North while he remained prime minister ; but when that nobleman afterwards joined Mr. Fox in the CoaUtion Ministry, he strenuously opposed the unholy alliance, and made an able speech against the famous East India Bill in answer to Mr. ErsMne. From the very first entrance of Mr. Pitt into the senate in 1781 Mr. Macdonald attached himself to that remarkable man, antici pating his future greatness, and fought MADDINGLEY boldly by his side in the doubtful parlia mentary conflict that raged after the dis persion and ejection of the Coalition in December 1783. (ParL Hist, xix.-xxiv.) He was not long in receiving his reward, being appointed solicitor-general on April 8, 1784. To the pariiamente of 1784 and 1790 he was returned by Ms old consti- tuente, and while he continued in the House of Commons he was a steady and useful adherent to the minister, particularly in reference to the Mng's illness in 1789. In 1780 he was appomted a Welsh judge on the Carmarthen Circuit, and succeeded Sir Pepper Arden as attorney-general on June 28, 1788, and was then knighted. It feU to his lot to prosecute Stockdale by order of the House of Commons, for pub Ushing Mr. Logan's defence of Mr. Hast mgs ; and also Thomas Painfe as the author of 'The Righte of Man;' both of them affordmg Mr. Erskine opportunities of displaymg Ms extraordinary oratorical powers, in the former case with a suc cess which he could not expect m the latter. In the exercise of his office Sir Archibald was distinguished for his pru dence and humanity, which Mr, Burke acknowledged was a striking feature in his character, though in the latter years of his official Ufe the seditious spirit that then prevailed obUged him to institute several prosecutions, (State Trials, xxi. 61, xxU, 247, 285, 380; ParL Hist xxix, 612.) His promotion to the place of lord chief baron of the Exchequer took place on February 12, 1793, a post for which his discriminating powers and judicial mind peculiarly fitted him. After a presidency of twenty years, esteemed by aU for his careful and impartial administration of the law, for his patient attention to every argument, never interrupting the speaker, as well as for the kmdness of his dispo sition and the courtesy of his manners, he retired mto private life in November 1813, and in the same month was rewarded with a baronetcy. He survived his resignation nearly thirteen years, and died on May 18, 1826. His grandson is now the third baronet. MADDINGLEY, Robeet de, of Mad- dingley, a parish in Cambridgeshire, was the son of Thomas de Maddingley, mem ber for Cambridoe in several parliamente of Edward I. He was one of the assessors of the tallage of that and three neigh bouring counties in 6 Edward IL, and was in several judicial commissions in that locality about the same period. In 1314 he was one of the justices of assize in Norfolk and Suffolk, and he continued to perform the same functions in these and other counties till 1821, in which year he died. (ParL Writs, 720, p. U. II29 ; Rot ParL i. 374, 448, 460.) MALBEETHOEF, Robeet de, was so MALDUIT 423 caUed from a manor of that name in Lm- colnsMre. In 6 and 8 Edward H. he is mentioned in connection with property m that county (Abb. Rot Orig. i. 198, 216), and was occasionaUy employed in commis sions there from 10 Edward II. till he was raised to the bench. This event occurred about August 1320, as a judge in the King's Bench. From that time till the end of the reign he was actively engaged m the per formance of his judicial duties, principally in the country. His re-appointment on the accession of Edward III, was delayed on account of Queen Isabella's indignation against him, m consequence of his being concerned in the judgment pronounced, five years before, upon Thomas Earl of Lancaster, But he obtamed his pardon on March 7, 1327, on the testimony of the prelates and peers that he gave that judgment by command of the king, whom he did not dare to disobey, and to avoid danger to himself. Such is the disgraceful entry on the patent of pardon, (N. Fcedera, ii, 690.) It may be presumed, therefore, that he was then permitted to resume his judicial functions. We accord ingly flnd him acting as a justice of assize in this flrst year, and sitting in court m Hilary Term ofthe second. (Year Book.) On February 2, 1329, he was named in the commission to try certain malefactors in the city of London (N. Fcedera, ii, 765), and on May I following had so entirely re covered favour as to be promoted to the office of chief justice of the King's Bench during the temporary absence of Geoffrey le Scrope, This lasted till October 28 in the same year, when he remained in that court till January 18, I33I, and was then removed mto the Common Pleas, The fines levied before him do not extend beyond Martinmas in the same year, and his death soon after occurred. (Rot, ParL ii. 25, 208 ; Pari Writs, U. p. U. 1131 ; Abb. Rot Orig. i, 198, U, 69.) HALDUIT, John, held a place m the Curia Regis or Exchequer in 16 Henry IL, II70. Two years afterwards he and Turstin Fitz- Simon accounted for the profits of the see of Canterbury, which had been committed to their care on the murder of Becket. (Madox, i. 309, 631, U. 253.) In II74 he was one of the justices itine rant for setting the assize in the counties of Nottmgham and Lincoln, in the latter of which he is also mentioned on the rolls of 22 and 23 Henry H. (Ibid, i, 123, 127, 129.) MALDUIT, William (Maledoctus), is mentioned in only two instances (Madox, i. 44, 215) as a baron acting judiciaUy, These are in II and 80 Henry II,, 1165 and 1184; and in both cases he is represented as being present among those sitting in the Exche quer when charters or agreements relative to land were executed or acknowledged 424 MALDUIT there. On each of these occasions he is de scribed as chamberlain, m which character he would have a seat m that court. He does not appear to have been employed as a justice itinerant. He succeeded to the office of chamberlain on the death of his elder brother, Robert, about 31 Henry L, 1130-1. Robert and Willijim were the sons pf William Mauduit, who is mentioned in Domesday Book as possessing seven lord ships in Hampshire, and who was afterwards appointed chtimberlain to Henry I., from whom he received in marriage Maud, the daughter of Michael de Hanslape, with the lands of which he died possessed. It is evident that there were several cham berlains in the King's Court, and that there was one at the head of all, called magistra cameraria, which was an hereditary office. Whatever were their duties in the kmg's household, it is certain that they were offi- ciallj' connected with the Exchequer, and had the care of the receipts and payments of the revenue. They also sat at this time as barons or justices in the Exchequer, That there was some mterval during the reign of Stephen in which William Malduit did not enjoy the office, or that some doubt existed as to the right of possession, seems likely, from his obtiiining from Hemy IL, while Duke of Normandy, a grant of the in heritance of the office of chamberlain of his Exchequer, with the castle of Porchester, and all the lands to the chamberlainship and the castle appertaining, both in England and Normand}'. These were confirmed to him when Henry II. attained the crown. He held the sheriffalty of Rutland from 26 Henry II. till the end of the reign, and his name is recorded as chamberlain up to 7 Richard I., 1196, soon after which he pro bably died, having in the previous year joined an expedition into Normandy, He was succeeded by his son, the next-men tioned Robert. (Dugdale's Baron, i. 398 ; Pipe Rolls, Henry II. and Richard I.) MALDUIT, Robeet, who sat as a justi cier in the Curia Regis in 10 John, 1208-9, when fines were acknowledged there, was the son of the above WilUam Malduit. During the last nine or ten years of the reign of Henry IL he held the sheriffalty of "VVilt- sbire ; aud on his father's death he succeeded to theoffice of chamberlain of the Exchequer, which he exercised during the whole of the reign of John. (Rot de Liberate, passim.) In 1 John, for a fine of 100/., he obtained the custody of Rockingham Castie (Rot de Oblatis, 9) ; and from 2 to 7 John he was sheriff of Rutland, He accompanied the king in Ids Irish expedition in 1210 (Rot de Prcestito, 185, &c.), but afterwards joined the standard of the discontented barons in the contest for their liberties. The Close Roll of 17 John records his name among those who took up MALEBYSSE arms against the king, his son WiUiam act ing a still more prominent part. The con sequence of this revolt was the loss of the family estates, which were seized into the king's hands, and the excommunication and capture of "WiUiam. Soon after the acces sion of King Henry III, both of them re tumed to their allegiance, their submission being accompanied by a restoration of their property, (Rot Claus. i. 237-346.) Robert died about June 1222, 6 Henry III. His widow, Isabella, daughter of Thurstan Basset, sm-vived Mm; and William, their son, married Alice, the daughter of Waleran, Earl of Warwick, whose son, also WiUiam, succeeded to that earldom, which contmued in the famUytill the year 1589, when it became extinct One of the earls, Henry de Beauchamp, was created Duke of Warwick m|1444, but the title died with him, (Baronage, i, 398 ; R. de Wendover, Ui. 297, 349, 366, iv 24.) MALEBYSSE, RiCHAED, was the son of Hugh de Malebysse, who came over fi-oni Normandy, and was settled in 3 Stephen at Scawtou m Yorkshire, His mother was Emma, daughter and heir of Henry de Percy, He was called Richard Malebysse of Acaster, and was one of the foresters of the county of York, In the beginning of the reign of Richard I. he was in some mamier implicated in the horrible massacre of the Jews at York, for which his lands were seized mto the king's hands ; and m 4 Richard I, he paid twenty marks to recover them till the king's return. He was afterwards implicated in some other disturbances, which drew upon him and his brother Hugh the excommuni cation of the pope ; and m 6 Richard I, he paid a fine of three hundred mai'ks to regain the king's favour, and for havmg the full restoration of his lands, wards, and forests. His latter offence was evidently too close a connection -with Earl John ; for though, when that prince came to the throne, he had to pay another fine for some of his lands, he seems to have at once been ad mitted into the royal confidence. In 2 John he had the custody of the castle of Queldric ; in the next year he was employed as a justice itinerant to fix the tallage in Yorkshire ; and in 4 John he was present at Westminster when fines were acknow ledged there, (Mado.r, i. 816, 722,) Be sides these judicial duties, he was sent as one of the embassy to accompany WiUiam, King- of Scotland, to England ; and in 5 John was engaged in enforcing the pay ment of the aids required by the king. He was keeper of the forests of Galti'es, Der went, and Wernerdale, and had permission to stub nnd cultivate eighty acres of land of the king's forest, between Owse and Derwent, at Queldric. (Rot. de Oblatis, 41, 56; Rot Chart 42,) He incurred MALET some disgrace by Ms negligence m keeping the forest of Galtres, and before he could recover the land and castles, which the king thereupon summarily seized, he was compeUed, in 6 John, to pay a fine of flve pounds into the royal treasury. Although he seems to have been a little turbulent in character, he was apparently of a generous nature, and m the disposition of his property, which was very extensive, to have acted with great liberality. He anade grants of lands to various abbeys, .and founded that of Newbo, near Grantham in LincoMshire, for monks of the Prtemon- «tratensian order, endowing it with a third part of the church of Kniveton in Notting hamshire, and with the church of Acaster. {Monast. vi. 887.) He died in II John, 1209, and was suc- ¦ceeded by his son John. One of his ¦descendante. Sir Hercules Malebysse, in compliance with stipulations entered into «n his marriage with Lady Beckwith Bruce, assumed the name of Beckwith, which the family has since preserved, and within the last century has been highly •distinguished m our miUtary annals. MALET, Robeet, was amerced in 14 JiJdward 1. for not appearmg at the Ex- •chequer -with Ms accounts as sheriff of the counties of Bedford and Buckingham. (Madox, U. 287.) But the offence was no doubt speedily removed, for in 18 Ed ward I., 1289, he was appointed a judge of the Kmg's Bench. He is mentioned in that character as late as 1294, in wMch year he died. (Ahb. Rot Orig. i. 87, 88.) MALET, Thomas, was a great-grandson of Sir Baldwin Malet, of St, Audries, Somer setehire, solicitor-general of Henry VIII,, a descendant from the Norman baron of that name, who fought on WiUiam's side at the battle of Hastings, His connection with the above Robert Malet cannot now be traced. He was born about 1582, and took bis legal degrees in the Middle Temple, being caUed to the bar in 1606, and be coming reader in 1626. In the first two parUamente of Charles I. he sided with the govemment, and in the case of the Duke of Buckmgham he argued forcibly against common fame being re ceived as a sufficient ground of accusation. After filling the office of soUcitor-general to the queen he was honoured with the coif in 1635, and was appointed a judge of the King's Bench on July I, 1641 (Rymer, XX. 517), a few days before the impeach ment of six of his brethren, and was there upon knighted. Not deterred by fear of the parliament, at the very next Lent assizes he threw no discouragement on the proposed petition of the grand jury of Kent against the ordmance for the militia without the king's assent, and in support of the Book of Common Prayer; and for having shown MALET 425 this petition to the Earl of Bristol with out flrst revealing it to the house he was committed to the Tower by the Lords on March 28, 1642, but released on May 2 on entering into a recognisance of 1000/. to appear before the Lords when caUed upon. (Pari. Hist. ii. 1148 ; Lords' .Toumals.) In that summer he again went the Home Cir cuit, and on some members of the House of Commons coming to the bench at Maid stone, where he was sitting, and producing certam votes of parlianient on behalf of the militia ordinance and against the king's commission of array, he boldly refused to permit them to be read, as not authorised by the commission under which he sat. For this com-ageous conduct King Charles sent him a letter of thanks, -with a pronuse of protection. TMs however the parUa ment rendered moperative, by promptly despatching a troop of horse and violently taking the judge from the bench at Kings ton in Surrey. Carried prisoner to 'West minster, the house immediately committed him to the Tower. There he remained a prisoner for above two years, till in October 1644 he was redeemed by the king in ex change for another, whose liberty the par liament desired. 'Ihey still regarded him ' as the fomenter and protector of the ma lignant faction,' and by an ordinance in No vember 1645 they disabled him and four of his colleagues 'from being judges asthough they were dead,' (Clarendon, Ui, 153; Whiteloeke, 107, 181.) During the succeeding flfteen years he suffered severely for his loyalty, losing a son in the king's service, and his property being greatly reduced by sequestrations. Two days after the restoration of Charles IL, though then seventy-eight years of age, he was replaced in his old seat in the King's Bench. From his speech on the trial of one of the regicides, showing much of the garruUty of old age, it is evident that he was then nearly superannuated ; but he was, however, sufficiently ali-ve to his interest to petition for and obtain grants of land in Somersetshire and Devonshire. Sitting in court for the three succeeding years, the king on his petition on June 18, 1663, dispensed with his further attend ance, continuing to him the name and salary of a judge (Cal. State Papers [1663], 348, 485 ; State Trials, v. 1030 ; I Siderfin, 150), and granting him a pension of 1000/. a year. At the same time he was honoured with a baronetcy, the flat for which, for some reason or other, he refrained from having completed during the two remain mg years of his Ufe. He died ou December 19, 1666, and was buried in Pointington Church, Somerset shire, Under the recent sufferings of the family, Ms descendante for the three next generations did not .solicit the completion 426 MALINS of the honour which King Charles had awarded to their ancestor. The judge's great-great-grandson, Charles Warre Malet, however, who filled some high offices in India, accepted in 1791 a new patent of baronetcy, but afterwards failed m his claim for precedence under the old patent, and his son now enjoys the new honour, (Malet Papers ; Collinson's Someisef, ii, 377,) MALINS, Richaed, one of the present vice-chancellors, was bom in 1805 at Eve sham, He is the son of the late Richard Malins, Esq,, of Alston in Warwickshire, by a daughter of Thomas Hunter, Esq., of Pershore. Educated at Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, he took his degree of B.A. m 1827, with mathematical honours. Before this time he had entered the Inner Temple, and was called to the bar on May 14, 1880. With an extensive practice in Chancery, he obtained a silk gown in 1849. In 1852 he entered parUament as member for WaUingford, and retained the seat till July 1866, supporting the conservative side of politics. On December 1, 1866, he was ap pointed vice-chanceUor as the successor of that estimable judge Sir R, T. Kindersley, and was then knighted. He married Susannah, daughter of the Rev. Arthur Farwell, rector of St. Martin's, Comwall. MALLOEE, Petee, was probably a de scendant of Gislebert Mallore, one of the Conqueror's followers, and of Anchetil Mal lore, employed in the reign of Henry II. He married Matilda, the widow of Elyas de Rabayne, and a daughter of Stephen de Bayeux, Holding the town of Melcombe, and certain lands at Dodemerton in Dorset shire, in ferm under the king (Madox, i. 385), he was summoned to perform military service against the Scots in 28 Edward I. Nothing is told of his legal life before he was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas, where he sat for above seventeen years, from 1292 to 1809. (Serviens ad Legem, 282 ; Dugdale's Orig. 44.) During this period he seems to have been very ac tively employed. Sir William Wallace was tried before him in 1804 (Tumm-'s England, ii, 90, n.), and in 1307 he was selected as one of the justices of trailbaston for the home counties. He died about July 1310, (CaL Inquis. p. m, i. 289.) MALO LACU, or MAULEY, Petee DE, was great-grandson oi- Peter, a Poictevin, who, being esquire to King John, is said to have owed Ms fortunes to undertaking the murder of Prince Arthur ; in reward for which act Isabel, the daughter of Robert de Turnham, was given to him iu marriage, with all her rich possessions, principally in Yorkshire. He was the fourth baron in succession, and his father (also Peter) married Nichola, daugbter of Gilbert de Gant, grandson of he Earl of Lincoln, and died about 7 Ed- MANDEVILLE ward I., when he, then only three years of age, succeeded to his inheritance. (Ar- chceologia, xxi, 209,) He was engaged in the Welsh and Scot tish wars under Edward I,, and was sum moned to parUament from the twenty-tMrd year of that reign till his death. In 29i Edward I. he signed the barons' letter to- the pope by the title of Dominus de Mus- greve. In 1806 and 1807 he was placed at the head of the justices of trailbaston. appointed for Lmcolnshire, Yorkshire, and eight other counties, (N. Fcedera, i, 970 ; Rot ParL i. 188-218.) He married Eleanor, daughter of Thomas Lord Furnival, and died in 3 Edward IL, I8I0, lea'ving his son Peter, who succeeded him. On the death of the seventh Peter in 1415 without issue, the barony fell mto- abeyance between his sisters. (Baronage, i. 738.) MALTON, Robeet, is oMy known a* having been constituted a baron of the- Exchequer on November 14, 14I3, 1 Henry v., and re-appomted at the commencement. of the following reign, (Cal. Rot. Pat:. 262, 269.) MALUS CATULUS, RoGEE, was one of the chaplains of Richard I., and is mentioned by Hoveden as his vice-chancellor m 1191. He accompanied the kmg on his voyage to the Holy Land, and two charters given under his hand are extant, dated on March 27 and April 3 in that year, at Messina. (Rymei-y i. 53 ; Monast. v. 566.) In the lamentable ship-wreck which occurred m the foUowing M.ay off the island of Cyprus he was drowned ; and the Mng's Seal, which is^ stated to have been suspended round his neck, was lost with him. Richard converted this accident mto an expedient to raise money, by proclaiming that no grante under' it should be deemed valid, and thus com pelling the holders of them to pay the fines^ a second time, for a confirmation under the- new Seal. (Madox, i. 77.) Burke, m his 'Dictionary of Landed Gentry ' (noni. Machell), makes him the great-grandson of Halthe Mains Catulus, son of ' Catulus de Castro Catulino,' in "S^^estmoreland, and younger son of WiUiam Malchael, or Mains Catulus, of Cracken- thorpe. The present family of MacheU of Beverley trace their descent from his elder brother John, MANCHESTEE, Eael OF, -See E, Mon tagu ; 11. Montagu. MANDEVILLE, Geoepeet de (Eael OP Essex), whose name is corrupted from Mag- naviUe, a town in Normandy belonging to his ancestors, wos the second Earl of Essex after the Conquest, His great-grandfather, of the same name, was one of the com panions of the Conqueror in his expedition against England, and was rewarded with many broad lands and lordships, of which MANDEVILLE no less than one hundred and nineteen are noted in Domesday Book. Besides these, the Conqueror granted him the custody of the Tower of London, with the hereditaiy sheriffalty of London and Middlesex and Hertfordshire. His son WilUam succeeded him, and married Margaret, the sole daughter of Eudo the Dapifer, by whom he had a son, named Geoffrey, who was steward of Normandy by descent of his mother, Kmg Stephen raised him to the dignity of Earl of Essex, but the Empress Maud won Mm over to her party by a still more ample charter, confirming to him all the rights and honours and lands which any of his ances tors had held, and making to Mm most ex tensive grante. His future prowess was disgi-aced by so many savage outrages that, although he had founded the abbey of Walden in Essex, and had made several gifts for pious uses, he was excommunicated; and being in 11-44 mortally wounded in battle, the rights of sepulture were refused to Ms body until some years afterwards, when, his absolution being obtained, it was buried in the porch of the Temple Church, where his monumental effigy is still pre served. By his wife, Rohese, the daughter of Alberic de Vere, Earl of Oxford, he had Geoffrey, the subject ofthe present notice, Henry II, created him Earl of Essex, re storing to him all the lands of his family, and employing him both m the coimcil and the field. He and Richard de Luci were sent in 1166-7as justices itinerant to hear criminal and common pleas throughout England ; and they were also entrusted with the ex pedition against the Welsh, during which the earl fell sick at Chester, and died there on October 21, II67. He was buried m the abbey of Walden. Leaving no children, he was succeeded by his brother, the next- mentioned William. (Madov, i. 49, 28, ii, 138, 164; Dugdale's Baron, i. 201.) MANDE'7ILLE, William db (Eael oe Albemaelb and Essex), was the brother of the above Geoffrey Earl of Essex, on whose death he succeeded to that title. He had spent the chief part of his youth with Philip Earl of Flanders, whom he after wards assisted in his wars with the French Mng. On his attaining the earldom he was welcomed vrith distinction by King Henry, whom he accompanied mto France in II78, as one of the generals of his army, and was not only marked for his miUtaiy prowess, but was entrusted by his sovereign with many businesses of nicety and con fidence. In 1177 he joined his patron, the Earl of Flanders, in his expedition to the Holy Land, and, after spending two years there vrith no diminution of his fame, he retiuned to England in 1170. In the following year the king bestowed on him the hand of MANSEL 42r Hawise, the only daughter of William le^ Gros, Earl of Albemarle, recently deceased, together with the property and the earldom,, by which title he was afterwards usuaUy kno-wn. D uring the remainder of the reign,. besides being sent on an embassy to the emperor, he was employed in the various wars in France, both for King Henry and. the Earl of Flanders ; and the French king had good cause to regret that the one had so powerful an ally, and the other so valiant. a general. On Henry's death, the merite of the earl were not overlooked by his successor.. When Ranulp'u de Glanville retired shortly afterwards from' the chief justiciaryship) King Richard appointed the earl to that important office, in conjunction with Hugh Pusar, the aged Bishop of Durham. This< appointment was made at the council of PipeweU, on September 16, 1189 ; but he was not destined long to enjoy the dignity of his new office, for two months afterwards^ he died at Rouen in Normandy, before Richard had commenced his progress. Dugdale gives an account of Ms works of devotional benevolence to various houses, and of his sole foundation of the monastery at Stoneley in Huntingdonshire. But he adds a blundering statement of his marriage vrith a second wife, Chri.3tian, daughter to- Robert Lord Fitz-Walter, who, he says,. survived him, and afterwards married Ray mond de Burgh ; having in a previous page stated that his wife Hawise, after his death, married William de Fortibus, who, as her first husband died childless, became Earl of Albemarle in her right. (Dugdale's Baron, i. 68, 204 ; Lord Lyttelton, iii, 399, 441, 449,) MANNEES, Loed, -See T, M, Sutton. MANSEL, John, is said to have been the grandson of PhiUp de Mansel, who came in with the Conqueror, and the son of Henry, the eldest of Philip's five sons. (Weever, 273; Burke.) It would seem, from a letter written by the king in 1262 to the college of cardinals, that he was brought up at court, for the king says that he was 'sub alls nostris educatus, cujus ingenium, mores, et merita, ab adolescentia sua probavimus.' (Rymer, i. 414.) He is first noticed in a close writ, dated July 5, 1234, 18 Henry HI., commanding Hugh de PateshuU, the treasurer, to admit his beloved clerk John Mansel to reside at the exchequer of receipt in his place, and to have one roll of the said receipt. (Madox, ii, 61,) As Mansel's office appears to have been a new one, it was probably that of chancellor of the Exchequer, which is first spoken of by name a few years afterwards. He is noted for one of the greatest plu- raUsts that were ever kno-wn. Being already one of the royal chaplains, he was in 1242 presented to a prebend iu St, Paul's, and 428 MANSEL was advanced in the next year to the chancellorship of that church, to which stalls in the cathedrals of WeUs and Chi chester were in a short time added. These were grants by the king, to whom his activity of mind and capacity for business made him peculiarly useful in the straitened circumstances of the royal revenue. He was accordingly soon engaged in confi dential and honourable employments, to which he was partly recommended by having received a dangerous wound in an attack on a besieged castle. (Lelanels ColL i. 266.) He had the custody of the Great Seal from November 8, 1246, to August 28, 1247, on which day the king sent him on an embassy to foreign parts. On his return he received back the custody of the Seal on August 10, 1248, and held it till September 8, 1249. In none of these entries is he called chancellor. During this second possession of the Great Seal he obtained the valuable ap pomtment of provost of Beverley, which was the highest clerical dignity he ever enjoyed. The extent of his yearly income from the various benefices he held is pro bably greatly exaggerated. Some assert that the number amounted to 700, pro- ducmg 18,000 marks per annum ; while others limit the number to 300, and the annual produce to 4000 marks. The munificence of his expenditure may be judged fi-om the stately dmner he gave in 1266 at his house in TothiU Fields, when he entertained the Kings and Queens of England and Scotland, Prince Edward, and the nobles and prelates of the king dom. It is recorded that his guests were so numerous that he was compelled to erect tents for their reception, and that seven hundred dishes were scarcely sufficient foifthe flrst course. (Stoio's London, 525.) In 1253 he accompanied WilUam Bitton, Bishop of Bath and WeUs, on a special mission to Spain to negotiate a marriage between Eleanor, the sister of Alphonso, King of Castile, with Prince Edward, Kmg Henry's eldest son ; and the charter which they brought back is still preserved with its golden seal among the archives at Westminster. In his commission for this embassy he is caUed 'secretarius noster,' bemg the flrst occasion on which that title is used. Fabyan (Chron. 340-343) says that in 1267 he was ' made knyte and chefe ius- tyce of Englande,' and that under that name, in the June following, he was one of the twelve peers appointed by the parlia ment at Oxford to correct the enormities that had crept into the government. He adds that he was thereupon discharged of his office, and Sir Hugh Bygot ad mitted in his place. There is, however, MANSFIELD no reasonable ground for belie'vmg that he ever was appointed chief justiciary, and the title is never added to his signatures or his description at the period. When the barons compeUed the king at Oxford, in 1258, to consent to the appoint ment of twenty-four of their number to draw up articles for the govemment of the realm, John Mansel was one of the twelve selected on the kmg's part, and he is charged with having urged the Mng to disregard the provisions then made, and with having procured the pope's dispensa tion from the oath he had taken to keep them. During the conflict that foUowed he firmly adhered to his royal master, and was entrusted with the command of the Tower of London. About the same time he again held the Great Seal for a short period, accompanying the Mng abroad with it in July 1262, and resigning it on October 10 following. (Hardy's Cat!) The period of his prosperity was now drawing to its close. When the Earl of Leicester, in 1263, took up arms, his first attacks were directed agamst the king's favourites, and the prmcipal of these was John Mansel, whose estates were accord ingly plundered and property wasted. He retired -with the Mng to the Tower of London, and thence accompanied Prince Edmund, the Mng's younger son, toDover; and about the end of June, finding himself unsafe m England, he hastily fled fi'om the kingdom. Although he was present m the following January at Amiens, when the King of France decided in favour of Henry (Chron. Rishanger, 12, 17, 118), he did not venture to retum to the EngUsh court, and his career is said to have terminated m po verty and wretchedness. The date of Ms death is steted by some to have been 1264, by others 1268, "but it seems to have been even beyond the latter date, as he is named as one of the executors of King Henry's -will, dated in June 1269. (Rymer, i. 496.) The place of Ms death has never been re corded. Whatever may be considered of his cle rical or political character, it is clear that upon au emergency he could act the part of a brave and resolute soldier. In 1253 he founded the priory of BUsington, near Romiiey, and amply endowed it, (Monast. vi. 492.) A wife, with issue, has been given to him, which as au ecclesiastic is not very probable. The confusion may have arisen from there having been another John Mansel at the period, MANSFIELD, Eael or, -See W, MuEEAT. MANSFIELD, James. Under the act for the regulation of attomeys (st. 2 Geo. II, c. 23), the father of Sir James Mans field, who was an attorney practising at Ringwood in Hampshire, is entered on the MANSFIELD ToU in November 1730 as John James Manfield. It has been a question when the name was altered to Mansfield, and what was the motive. The Ringwood attomey was the son of a gentleman who came to England with one of the Georges, and held an appomtment in Windsor Castle ; and it was asserted that the attomey thought it more advantageous to him to Anglicise Ms name by calling himself Mansfield. But it is clear that he had not formed this determination in 1730, when he was in practice. Neither had he done so up to 1754, when his son was nominated a fellow of King's College, Cambridge, under the name of Manfield. But on the latter taMng his degree of B.A, m 1765 he signed his name Mansfield. By this date the imputation, which has prevailed, that he made the alteration with the hope of being supposed to be connected with the great lord chief justice, entirely falls to the ground, inasmuch as Sir William Murray did not receive the title of Lord Mansfield till the end of the foUovring year, November 1756. He entered the society of the Middle Temple under that name in February 1755, and was called to the bar in November 1758. He began to practise in the com mon law courts, but ultimately removed into Chancery, where he was very success ful. In 1768 he was one of the counsel for John Wilkes on his application to be admitted to bail ; and four years after, in Michaelmas 1772, he was made king's counsel. His imiversity appointed him their counsel, and returned him as their representative to the parliament of 1774. On the trial of the Duchess of Kingston for bigamy in 1776 he appeared for the defen dant, when, though he failed in procuring her acquittal, he succeeded in obtaining her release vrithout any punishment at all. In September of 1780 he accepted the solicitor-generalsMp, and while in office was engaged in the prosecution of those concerned m the riots of 1780, and in that of Lord George Gordon he had the dis advantage of replying to the splendid speech of Mr Erskine for the prisoner, resulting in an acquittal. The same duty devolved upon him on the trial of De la Motte for high treason, whose palpable guilt insured a con-riction. On the defeat of Lord North's ministry in March 1782 Mr. Mansfield was necessarily superaeded, and immediately placed hiraseu in the ranks of the opposition. Soon after the constitution of the CoaUtion Ministiy Mr. Mansfield was again appointed solicitor- general, in November 1783, but was fated to be again removed m less than a month, the Coalition having in ite turn succumbed to the ministry of Mr, Pitt. (Pari. Hist xxi, 193, xxui, 9; State Trials, xxi. 621, 794.) In the new parliament called in the MANWOOD 429 following May, Mr. Mansfield had the mortification of surrendmg his seat for the university of Cambridge to the popular minister, and never afterwards entered the house. He remained unemployed for nearly sixteen years, when m 1799 he was con stituted chief justice of Chester, Five years afterwards, at the close of Mr. Addmgton's admimstration, he succeeded Lord Alvanley as chief justice ofthe Com mon Pleas, in AprU 1804, and was there upon knighted. The motto on his rings on his necessarily takmg the degree of a ser jeant alludes humorously to his long ex clusion : ' Serus m caelum redeas.' Though a good average lawyer, his pro motion occurred rather too late in life ; and, though anxious to dispense justice in the cfises that came before him, he was too apt to give way to the irritation of the moment. Of this deficiency of temper the seijeants were not backward in taMng advantage; and towards the end of his career they worried him to such a degree that he could not always refrain from venting in audible whispers curses against his tormentors. So great was the annoyance that he resigned, his post in Hilary vacation 1814. He lived nearly eight years afterwards, and died on November 23, 1821. MANTELL, Robeet, was for twelve years from 16 Henry IL, 1170, sheriff of the united counties of Essex and Hertford. In 1173 and the six following years he acted as a justice itinerant, not only in those counties, but also in eight others ; and Ms name appears as one of the justi ciers in the Curia Regis in 1177. Besides these duties, he seems likevrise to have been employed as a Justice of the forest in 17 and 18 Henry IL, and ag.am in I Richard I. His parentage is not recorded, but in 1184 his son Slatthew came before the Exchequer as his 'future heir,' and acknow ledged that he had no claim to a certain field called Holm. (Mado.v, i. 94-701, U. 134 ; Pipe Roll, 79.) MAN'WOOD, Rogee, was the grandson of Roger Manwood, twice mayor of Sandwich, and its representative in parUament in 1523 ; one of whose sons, Thomas, was a draper in the town, and by his wife Catherine, the daughter of John Callaway,, of Clare m Norfolk, was the father of three sons, of whom this Roger was the second. He was bom at Sand-wich in 1525, and was educated in a grammar school there. No account is given of any further place of study till he was entered at the Inner Temple, He was called to the bar by that society before 1655, when he was appointed steward or recorder of his native town, aud was elected its representative in that and the foUo-wing parUament in Mary's reign, and in aU those of Queen Elizabeth, till he was elevated to the judicial bench. 430 MAN'WOOD In his progress towards that advance ment he seems to have owed much to the popularity of his manners and a happy choice of friends. He was evidently a favourite among his brethren of the_ Inner Temple, since he was selected at Christmas 1561 as one of the chief officers in 'the grand revel then held there, over which Lord Robert Dudley, afterwsu-ds Earl of Leicester, presided under the title of Pala- philos. Curiously enough, the role which Manwood then performed was that which, eighteen years later, he was called upon actuaUy to fill— that of chief baron of the Exchequer, In Lent 1665 he attained the •degree of reader, (Dugdale's Orig. 150, 166,) At this period of his life he testified his gratitude for the favours he was receiving tfrom the town of his birth by establishing .and liberally endowing a free school there, which was incorporated in 1663, and still exists under his name. In 1566 he resigned Ms office of recorder, but still continued the principal adviser of the corporation, receiv ing an annual salary of 3/,, which, according to the corporation papers, would appear to liave been paid to Mm even after he had .attained his Mghest preferment. He held also the office of steward of the Chanceiy -and Admiralty Court at Dover, Among his friends was Sir Thomas •Gresham, who took great interest in his : success; through whose recommendation he probably received the grant of the house and park in th'e queen's manor of Hawe m the parish of Hackington, near Canterbury, where he then resided, and also m 1567 the degree of serjeant. The profits and privi leges of the coif were so great that when au opening occurred for his elevation to the bench, in April 1572, he agam employed Gresham's infiuence with the minister to .avert it. (Burgon's Gresham, ii. 175, 478.) The serjeant, however, saw reason to ¦change his incUiiation, on another vacancy in the same court, which soon after occurred, for on October 14 he received his patent as justice of the Common Pleas, He does not seem the most merciful of j udges, for in a letter to Sir Walter Mildmay, dated TSTovember 18, 1577, he recommends either imprisonment for Ufe, or the cutting off part of his tongue, as the punishment to be awarded to a man who persisted m speaking ill of the queen, after having suffered the ^lillory and had his ears cut off, (Cal, .State Papers [1547-80], 566,) He was promoted to the chief seat in the Exchequer on November 17, 1578, and Imighted, There is no doubt that he was a man of great activity and energy, both of which were shown in his exertions towards upholding Rochester Bridge, and regulat ing the estates which had been originaUy devoted to its repair. He built also a new House ' of Correction in Westgate Street, MANWOOD Canterbury, and erected seven almshouses in St. Stephen's or Hackmgton. All these works he had performed before he arrived at the post of chief baron ; so that it is not surprising that he should have been looked upon with favour by the court as a man peculiarly fitted for his position. But, as a set-off to these good qualities, he was am bitious and arbitrary, and somewhat regard less of the means by which he obtained th^. objects on which he had set his heart. On the death of Sir James Dyer, in March 1682, the chief baron was suspected of offering a large bribe to be appointed to the vacant office of chief justice ofthe Common Pleas ; and this, being privately communi cated by Recorder Fleetwood to Lord Burleigh, ' was the means of keeping him from that cusMon,' and no doubt rendered the lord treasurer less incUned to doubt the charges that were subsequently brought against him. One of these was that on a barbarous murder bemg committed m the streets of Canterbury, the cMef baron had expressed a solemn determmation to pursue the murderer to justice, but, instead of this, he procured him a free pardon, after which the murderer paraded the streets m the chief baron's Uvery. It was imputed to the chief baron that this impunity was purchased by the payment of 240/, by the murderer's father, a rich brewer there. Numerous charges of oppression, of more or less weight, were made from time to time by various persons in Kent. In the meantime, however, he was one of the commissioners for the trial of the Queen of Scote, but does not appear to have taken any active part in the proceedings. In those against Secretary Davison, which were consequent upon her execution, he made Mmself more conspicuous. After going through the whole history of Queen Mary, he came at last to the offence of the unfortunate secretary, which, making the same evasive distmction as the other com missioners, he termed 'a misprision because you prevented the time in doing it before you were commanded, although the, tMng were lawful ; for you did justum, but not juste! (State Tiials, i. 1167, 1236.) From various letters addressed by him to the lord treasurer, preserved among the Harleian MSS,, it is evident that frequent complamte were made against Mm which he was called upon to justify; and by one, in May 1691, it appears that he was under the queen's displeasure for taMng money for a place in his gift, and that he broug'nt forward as his warranty the example of other judges, his contemporaries, who had pursued the same course. In addition to these public attacks, private suits had been commenced against him, and some of the complainants had succeeded in their causes. In a letter to Lord Burleigh on April 18, MAP 1592, he speaks of the lord treasurer's bit- "temess against him in a recent interview, «,nd, assuming a high hand, demands that upon any future complainte of his adver- isaries his goods may not be taken ' without due course of j ustice in some of her majesty's public courte,' meaning that he was not to "be called upon to answer before the lords of the council, Burleigh, however, thought differently, probably considering that the conduct of a-public officer was a fit subject ¦of investigation. The chief baron was forth with restricted to his o-wn house in Great St. Bartholomew's, and within a month after Lis former letter he humbled himself in .another, and two days afterwards, on May 14, he signed at Greenwich an abject sub- imission to answer all complaints before their ' honourable lordships,' What was the result of these proceedings 'does not appear, but his presence in court is not again mentioned by the reporters, and it is not improbable that the grief and anx iety he suffered from his disgrace hastened his decease, which occurred on the I4th of the foUovring December. Notwithstanding the blote in Ms es cutcheon, it is clear (so curious is the mix ture of which mortaUty is compounded) that he was pious and charitable according to the fasMon of the times, and in many respects a kmd-hearted man. The foundation during Ms life of a school for the young and a hos pital for the aged speak strongly in his favour ; and to these may be added his erec tion of the south aisle of the church of St, Stephen, and his liberal augmentation of the vicarage of the parish by a grant of the great tithes, subject only to a fixed payment of 10/, a year to the archdeacon of Canter bury, From his will (a tedious and some what vainglorious document) we learn that he erected during his Ufe the superb monu ment stiU remaining in the church, which is ornamented with his bust m his robes as chief baron, and with small figures of his two -wives and of his children. His first wife was Dorothy, the daughter of John Theobald, Esq., of Shepey in Kent, and widow first of Dr, John Crooke, and next of Ralph Allen, alderman of London, By her he left a son Peter, whose family failed in 1653. His second wife was Eliza beth, daughter o^ Mr, John Copinger, of AU haUows, near Rochester, and -widow of John Wilkins, of Stoke Parsonage, (Holinshed, iv, 560 ; Hasted, ix. 46, 52 ; Boys' s Sandwich.) MAP, Waltee, more commonly though erroneously called Mapes, the facetious poet and satirist, was one of the justices itine rant in 19 Henry IL, 1173, joined -with John Cumin and Turstin Fitz- Simon in setting the assize for the Mng's demesnes in Glou cestershire (Madox, i. 701), m which county he held the living of Westbury. He was probably omitted in future years, because MAP 431 he alwa3's insisted on adding to the ac customed oath required to be taken by his colleagues and himself, that they would ad minister right to every one, an exception against the Jews and white monks. His hostility against the latter originated, ac cording to Giraldus, in the encroachments made by the Cistercians of Newenham on the righte and property of his church of Westbury, and was exhibited against the whole order in various Latin compositions, both in prose and verse, highly humorous and severe. None of them, however, re main, those which have been preserved being of a more general character. He was born on the Marches of Wales, probably in the county of Pembroke ; but of his parents he states nothing, except that they had rendered importantservicesto King Henry both before and after his accession to the throne. He studied at Paris, and at tended the school of Gerard la PuceUe, who lectured there about II60, Distinguished as well by his -wit and leaming as by his courtly manners, he became on his return a favourite of the Mng, and he repeats con versations he had vrith Becket before he was made archbishop in II62. He was em ployed by the king m missions to the courts of France and Rome, and at the latter he was selected by Pope Alexander IH. to ex amine and argue -with the deputies of the then rising sect of the Waldenses, With these proofs of the consideration in which he was held, he received substantial marks of the royal favour. Besides several smaller ecclesiastical prefermente, he held at various periods canonries in the churches of Salis bury and St, Paul's, was precentor of Lin coM, and ultimately archdeacon of Oxford, to which he was advanced about the year 1196, He was alive in 9 John, 1207, as in that year the custodes of the abbey of Eyn sham were ordered to pay Mm his accus tomed rent of flve marks per annum fi-om that abbey (Rot Claus. 106) ; but he cer tainly died before Giraldus Cambrensis wrote the preface to his 'Hiberma Expugnata,' which was dedicated to Kmg John. Some of his writings, which were com posed in short rhyming verse, were so popular in his day that the copies of them were greatly multipUed, and any effusions which were remark. grandson Cresacre More, was Johanna, daughter of — Hanoombe, of Holywell, Bedfordshire ; but whether he was ever married to this lady is very doubtful, and it has been clearly shown by entries in an old MS, in Trmity College Library (Notes and Queries, 4th S. U. 865) that John More married, in 1474, when he was 21, Agnes, daughter of Thomas Graunger, at St. Giles's, Cripplegate, The second wife was Mrs. Bowes, a widow, whose maiden name was Barton; and his third was Alice Clarke, named in a commission as relict of William Huntyngdon of Exeter (Cal. State Papers [1509-14], 292), the daughter of John More of Loseley in Surrey. By his first wife only, whether Hancombe or Graunger, had he any issue, and she produced him, with three other children who probably died early, one son, Thomas More the chancellor, and two daughters, Jane, the elder, was married to Richard Stafforton, or Staidton, Elizabeth, the younger, be came the wife of John Rastell the printer, and the mother of WilUam Rastell the judge. The manor of Gobyons in North Mimms in Hertfordshire, belonging to Sir John at his death, he left to his wife for Ufe, and then to the chancellor, on whose attainder in 1534 his mother-in-law was illegally evicted. She died about ten years after wards at Northall in that neighbourhood. MOEE, Thomas, the only son of the above Sir John by his first wife, whether her maiden name was Graunger or Han combe, was born on February 7, 1478, in his father's house in Milk Street, London, The rudiments of his education he re ceived under Nicholas Holt, at St. An thony's School in Threadneedle Street, which bore the highest reputation of any of the London estabUshments, and produced some other celebrated men, among whom were Heath, Archbishop of York; Whit gift, Archbishop of Canterbury ; and Dean Colet, More's father, who was at that time merely an apprentice-at-law, not having been yet called to the degree of a serjeant, obtained an early introduction for him into the house of Cardinal Morton, who, Uke other ecclesiastics of the age, received MOEE young persons of name and character into his family, nonUnaUy as pages, but really to be instructed under his own eye in aU the learning of the time, More's quickness and ready vrit soon made him a favourite vrith his fellows. In the plays which it was then the custom, even in bishops' houses, to perform at Christmas, he would intermingle with the actors, and, adopting a character appropriate to the piece, would improvise the part to the sport and admi ration of the audience. The worthy car dinal, of whom More always spoke -with affectionate gi-atitude, was not the last to see his merit and to prophesy his future eminence ; and, that no opportunity might be lost for improvement, he placed the pro- mismg youth at the univer.sity of Oxford, Both Canterbury CoUege (now part of Christ Church) and St. Mary HaU are mentioned as Ms place of study, but the deficiency of the registers has left the question in doubt. There is less uncertamty m fixmg the date of his college career. His friendship ¦with Erasmus commenced in 1497, when that eminent man first visited England, who m a letter to a friend in Italy dated on December 6, 1497, after eulogising the leammg of Colet, Grocyn, and Lmacre, who were aU at Oxford at that period, adds, ' Nor did nature ever form anytMng more elegant, exquisite, and better accomplished than More.' TMs fascinating character is peculiarly appropriate to a youth between nineteen and twenty, and suggests the great probability of that year being the date of his entrance at Oxford. With aU the three eminent men mentioned by Erasmus he formed an intimacy, and -with their en couragement, and Thomas Lmacre for Ms tutor, he enthusiastically pursued his Greek studies, aud successfuUy resisted the faction in the university which, under the name of Trojans, attempted to prevent the introduc tion of that language into the system of education there. Here he also began those epigrams and translations that appear in his works, and devoted himself entirely to the allm-ements of literatm-e. His allowance was scarcely sufficient to provide necessaries, and of his expenditure of it he was required to give a most exact account. Whether his father so closely cm'tailed him from frugal motives, or from the fear that his son's delight in these studies would create a distaste for the legal profession, for which he was designed, the son ever after spoke of it in terms of commendation, as prevent ing him from mdulging in idle pleasures and extravagance. There is no record of his having taken any degree, and his stay at the university is steted not to have exceeded two years. The period of his retum to London is uncertain, but the records of LincoM's Inn show that his ad- ^ MORE 'mission into that society must have taken place either during or before his residence at Oxford, The entry is under II Henry VIL, 1496, when he was eighteen, and is as follows : — Thomas More admissus est in Societat. xij die Februar. a" sup. dicte, et pardonat, est quatuor vacacSes ad Instauciam Johis More patris sui. Although his name is not to be found on the books of New Inn, a society then re cently esteblished, there is no doubt that he was placed there for some time either before or after his leavmg Oxford, He was in due time removed to Lincoln's Inn, and, havmg passed through the usual com-se of study, he was admitted as au utter bai- rister, but the early books of the society do not give the date of the calls to the bar. The character he acquired as a lawyer may be judged from his being soon afterwards selected to deliver lectures on the science at Fumival's Inn, which were so highly esti mated that this annual appointment was renewed for three successive years. At this period he seems to have been im pressed 'with strong reUgious feelings, and not only to have employed his time in devotional exercises, but to have subjected his body to penitential austerities. For the purpose of pursuing these spiritual objects, he established himself near the Charterhouse, that he might daUy attend the services of that foundation, and during the four years of his residence there his mmd wavered between the choice of a monastic life and the adoption ofthe priest hood. It was perhaps while in this state of mental probation that he deUvered lectures at St. Lawrence's Church in the Old Jewry on the work of St. Augustine, 'De Civitate Dei,' to a crowded audience comprehending the most leai-ned men, both lay and clerical, in the city. That these lectures formed no part of his legal require ments may be presumed from the absence of any other similar example, and it is even doubtful, from a passage in one of Erasmus's letters, whether they were not in fact de Uvered at Oxford, But time, or perhaps the attractions of female society, cured him of his disposition to a pious retirement. His son-in-law Roper thus simply relates his course of love : ' He resorted to the house of one Maister Colte, a gentleman of Essex, that had oft invited him thither, having three daughters, whose honest conversation and virtuous education provoked him there specially to set Ms affection. And albeit his mind most served him to the second daughter, for that he thought her the fairest and best fayoured, yet when he considered that it would be both great grief and some shame also to the eldest to see her younger sister pre ferred before her m marriage, he then of a MOEE 457 certain pity framed his fancy towards her, and soon after married her, never the more discontinuing his study of the law at Lin coln's Inn, but applymg still the same until he was caUed to the bench, and had read there twice, which is as often as any judge of the law doth ordmarily read.' This marriage, which took place in 1505, proved a very happy one, but was dissolved by the death of the lady m little more than six years, after giving birth to tMee daugh ters and one son, whom Roper quaintly says ' he would often exhort to teke virtue and learning for their meat, and play for their sauce.' They lived in BucMersbury. It must have been about a year previous to this marriage that the mcident related by Roper occurred which distinguishes More as the first pubUc opponent to a par liamentary grant of money to the crown. The last parUament in the reign of Henry VII. met in January 1504, and m it a bill was introduced demandmg an aid of three fifteenths for the recent marriage of the king's eldest daughter Margaret with the King of Scote. On the debate of this bill. More, who had been returned a burgess, used 'such arguments and reasons there against that the king's demands were thereby clean overthrown.' The statute itself shows that the king excused not onlv the aid, but 10,000/. also of the 40,000/. offered by the Commons. (Stat, of Realm, ii. 975.) But his majesty being informed ' that a beardless boy had disappointed all his purpose,' and 'conceiving great indig nation against him, could not be satisfied until he had some way revenged it. And forasmuch as he, nothing having, nothing could lose, his grace devised a causeless quarrel against his father, keeping him in the Tower till he had made him pay to him a hundred pounds' fine.' It was not tUl after the accession of Henry VIII. that More was appomted one of the governors of LincoM's Inn. In the autumn of I5II his first reading took place, and his second in Lent I5I6, about two years before his father became a judge. In the interval between these two dates More's legal reputation rose so high that there was scarcely any controversy in the courts in which he was not employed as counsel for one of the parties. On Septem ber 8, 1510, he had been made under-sheriff of London, on whom in those days not only devolved the duties which that officer has now to perform, but he acted also as the judicial representative of the sheriff m aU those numerous cases which came under Ms jurisdiction, part of which have since been decided by a regularly constituted judge of the Sheriff's Comt, An entry m the city records states that on May 8, 1514, it was agreed by the common council ' that Thomas More, gentleman, one of the under- 458 MORE sheriffs of London, should occupy his office and chamber by a sufficient deputy during his absence as the king's ambassador in Flanders.' As this shows that he still held the office, and as there is evidence of his continuing in it for several years beyond this licence, and that the nomination was then in the common council, there is no doubt that, though it might nominally receive an annual confirmation, it was the practice to select for the sheriff's assessor some eminent individual leamed in the law, and not to remove him but for serious cause. Although in the above entry he is called ' the king's ambassador in Flanders,' there is no record in Rymer of such an appoint ment. It may be presumed, however, that this was one of the two occasions men tioned by Roper, when he was sent, with the kmg's concurrence, to arrange certain questions between the EngUsh and foreign merchants established in the Steel Yard, who enjoyed great privileges in this coun try. The other embassy was probably that in I5I5 (for which he received a similar licence from the city), for in a letter of I6I6 he tells Erasmus, ' When I returned from my embassage of Flanders the Mng's majesty would have granted me a yearly pension ; which, surely, if I should respect honour and profit, was not to be contemned by me; yet have I as yet refused it, and I think I shall refuse it, because either I should forsake my present means which I have in the city, which I esteem more than a better, or else 1 should keep it with some grudge of the citizens, between whom and his high ness if there should happen any controver sies (which may sometime chance), they may suspect me as not trusty aud sincere with them because I am obliged to the king with an annual stipend,' He might indeed very reasonably hesitate to risk any change in his position, since he estimated the gains fromhis office andhis private busi ness at 400/. a year, which according to the then value of money would be considered a splendid income. It is not unUkely that the appointment of his father as a judge two years afterwards operated more effec tually in securing Ms services to the court. Hall's description of him (p. 588) as ' Syr Thomas More late undershrife and then of the kinges counsaill,' in the account given by that chronicler of the London insurrec tion on Evil May-day 1517, is clearly erro neous in two parts of it, and probably so in the third. The city records, as quoted by Sir James Mackintosh, state his resignation of the undersheriffalty on July 28, 1519. His entrance into the privy council was not likely to precede that event, and pro bably occurred immediately afterwards. The earliest recorded notice of his connec tion with the court is in April 1520, when he was the last named of four comniis- MOEE sioners to settle provisions in the treaty of commerce -with Charles V, His name is there inserted -without any addition, and he is only caUed ' Armiger ' in another com mission of June in the same year, by which he was one of those appomted to accom modate certain questions with the 'socios' of the Hanse Towns. Between this date and May 1522 he received his kmghthood, being then named as one of the kmghts assigned to attend the kmg on the visit of the emperor, (Rymer, xui. 714, 722, 768,) The immediate cause of his elevation is stated to have been his successful resistence in the Star Chamber to the king's claim for the forfeiture of a ship belonging to the pope, which had been seized at South ampton, The erudition which he then dis played, and his powerful argumente in the cause, 80 pleased the Mng that he would listen to no further excuses, but at once retamed More m Ms service, by infro- ducmg him mto the privy councU. In May 1522 and January 1525 he was re warded vrith divers manors and lands to the value of 60/, a year, the grante of wMch were annuUed soon after his disgrace, (Stat, Realm, iii, 528.) His mtimate relation both -with the Mng and Cardmal Wolsey at this period is ma nifest from a variety of letters, pubUshed in Sir Henry ElUs's first series, exhibiting the closest confidential communication on political affairs. The conferences to which they relate generaUy took place in the royal closet after supper. He became engaged in many other diplomatic missions besides those before referred to, and he appears from his correspondence -with Erasmus to have been for a long time stationed at Calais for the convenience of continental negotiations, a position wMch was not only distateful to him, but unprofitable also. He accompanied Wolsey m his ostentatious embassy to France in 1527, and it was pro bably on this occasion that the cardinal, on asking him to point out anything that was objectionable in the treaty he had prepared, flew into a rage because More ventured to suggest some . amendment, concludmg his violence by saying, ' By the mass, thou art the veriest fool of all the council' More, smiling, answered simply, ' God be thanked the king our master hath but one fool in his council,' His last mission was two years afterwards to Cambray, in conjunc tion with his old friend Bishop TunstaU, as ambassador to the emperor. It was on one of these journeys that More silenced a bragging fellow who had posted a challenge in Bruges that he would answer whatever question could be propounded to him in any art whatsoever. Sir Thomas demanded an answer to thefoUo-wing: 'An Averia capta in Withernamia sunt irreple- gibilia ? ' adding that there was one of the MOEE English ambassador's retinue who would dispute Vith him thereof. The derision of the city was fairly excited by the arrogant presumer bemg obUged to acknowledge that ne did not even understand the terms ofthe proposition. Not long after the death of his first wife he contracted a second marriage with Mrs, Alice Middleton, a widow, who survived him without giving any addition to his family. As over his first choice, so over this, a little romance is thrown ; for the lady is reported to have suggested to him while urging the suit of a friend that if he pleaded in his own behalf he might be more successful, ' Upon this hint he spake,' and, his friend wisely withdrawing, he soon after married her. From Bucklersbury he removed to Crosby Place (Burgon's Gre sham, i, 420), and in 1523 to the house he built at Chelsea. The picture of his do mestic life is most delightfully dra-wn by Erasmus. His family circle, increased as it was by the husbands of his daughters and the -wife of his son, seems to have been the centre of happiness. The duties of reli gion were never omitted ; every hour was employed in useful study, or inteUectual intercourse, or sober mirth ; gentleness was the spirit that guided, and love the bond that united them. While employed in the study and prac tice of the law he had not deserted the Uterary path in which he had first de lighted. He improved himself in all the leaming then attainable ; he associated with the most eminent and mtellectual men of the time; he kept up a constant correspondence -with Erasmus ; and he even found leisure for literary composi- tion._ The 'History of Richard HI.' is published among his works, but doubts have been raised whether he was reaUy its author, some attributing the compo sition of the Latin original to Cardinal Morton, and only the English translation to More. His ' Utopia,' upon which his fame as an author principally rests, is the history of an imaginary commonwealth, m which he advances and advocates some doctrines in philosophy and reli gion gi-eatly in advance of the age, -with so much force and liberality that it seems surprising that the work escaped the cen sures of the govemment. It was -written m Latin, and published about I5I6, Being now a member of the privy coun cil, he was selected as speaker of the par liament which, after eight years' discon tinuance of that assembly, met on April 15, 1628, His address on being presented to the king, containing the protes-tation of Ms own disability and the claim for freedom of debate so customary at the present day, 'will always serve as a model for future speakers. Though the Commons did not make a MOEE 45& grant equivalent to the extravagant de mand of the court, they imposed a tax with which Cardinal Wolsey was obliged to appear content ; and he not only re quested the kmg to grant the usual reward of 200/. to the speaker, 'because no man could better deserve the same than he had done,' but added this complimentary ex pression to his letter: '1 am the rather moved to put your highness in remem brance thereof, because he is not the most ready to speake and solicite his own cause.' But the cardmal could not entirely sup press his dissatisfaction. He said to the speaker, ' Would to God you had been at Rome, Master More, when I made you speaker.' 'Your grace not offended,' an swered More, 'so would I too, my lord.' And Roper charges the cardmal with en deavouring to remove him from his path by counselling the king to send him ambassa dor to Spain. More, however, remonstoated with his majesty, who replied, ' It is not our pleasure. Master More, to do you hurt, but to do you good we would be glad ; we there fore for this purpose vrill devise upon some other, and employ your service othervrise,' The date of More's appomtment as under- treasurer of the Exchequer is imcertain, but he is described in that character in August 1625 as one of the ambassadors to conclude a treaty with France, (Rymer, iv. 66, 69, 74.) From this office he was raised to that of chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster on December 26 foUowing (Mackintosh, 48), which he held till he became chancellor of England. The Great Seal was delivered to More by the king, ' at Ms manor of Plesaunce, alias Estgrenewiche,' on October 25, 1529, eight days after Cardinal Wolsey had been de prived of it. The next day he was m- ducted into his seat in the Court of Chancery, ' after a noble exhortation ' by the Duke of Norfolk, ' as well to the chan cellor as to the people, and an answer of the chancellor.' No previous example of any introductory address on such an occa sion occurs, and the object of the duke's speech seems to have been to justify the king's selection of a layman mstead of an ecclesiastic or a nobleman, by eMarging on the wisdom, integrity, and wit of Sir Tho mas, and the extraordinary abiUties he had already shown in the affairs that had been entrusted to him, More's answer was mo dest and becoming, with a graceful and feel ing aUusion to the fall of his predecessor. The contrast between his modesty and the cardinal's arrogance eould not fail to secure universal satisfaction at his appoint ment to this high office, and his whole conduct whUe he retained it justifled the favourable opinion that had been formed of him. Although he presided in the court little more than two years and a half, his 460 MOEE diligence in the performance ot its duties was so great that he is said on one occasion to have risen from his seat because there was no other cause depending before him. It must not be forgotten, however, that the number of suits in that age will bear no comparison with those in the present day. At the time of his elevation his father was a judge of the King's Bench. The two courts were opposite to each other in Westminster HaU, and every day during the sittings a rare example of fllial piety was exhibited to those around, of the head of the law kneeling before his aged parent to receive his blessing ere the business com menced. The old man died in the course of the following year ; but his death added little to the fortune of his son, for the estate was settled on Sir John's widow during her life, which extended ten years beyond that of Sir Thomas. Various anecdotes are told of him during his elevation, which, while they show his own integrity, raise a suspicion that cor ruption in the judgment-seat had not been preriously uncommon. The poorest suitor obtained ready access to him and speedy trial, while the richest offered presents in vain, and the claims of kindred found no favour. Even his son-in-law Giles Heron, refusing, m his reliance on the chancellor's family affection, to faU into a reasonable arbitrement, was obUged to submit to ' a flat decree against him,' The custom of presenting new year's gifte often afforded a cover to suitors in his court for tendering bribes, which, when attempted, he would -vrith sly humour evade, A rich -widow named Croker, who had obtained a decree against Lord Arundel, presented him one new year's day with a pair of gloves and forty pounds in angels in them. Emptying the money into her lap, he told her that, as it was ' against good manners to forsake a gentlewoman's new year's gift, he would take her gloves, but refuse the lining.' Another suitor brought him a gilt cup, ' the fashion whereof he very well UMng, caused one of his own, better in value, to be brought, which he willed the messenger in recompense to deliver to his master.' And on a complaint made to the council after his resignation, that he had accepted a great gilt cup which a party in whose favour he_ had pronounced a decree had sent to him by his wife, he acknowledged that he had done so, but ' further declared that albeit he had indeed received that cup, yet immediately thereupon caused he his butler to fill it -with wine, and of that cup drank to her; and that when he had so done, and she pledged him, then as freely as her husband had given it to him, even so freely gave he the same again to her to give amto her husband for his new year's gift.' Besides his regular attendance in the MOEE court, he encouraged those who had com plaints to resort to him at his own house, where he would sit m his open hall, in many instances bringing the parties to a friendly reconcilement of thefr disputes. He forbade any subpoena to be granted until the matter in issue had been laid before him ¦with the lawyer's name attached to it, when if he found it sufficient he would add his fiat, but if too trifiing for discussion would refuse the writ. Even in the performance of this duty he could not restrain his hu mour ; and it is related that a case having been laid before him by one 'Tubbe,' an attorney, which he found to be on a very frivolous matter, he retumed the paper vrith the words, 'a tale of a' prefixed to the lawyer's signature, ' Tubbe.' The common law judges having complamed then, as in deed they did for a long time afterwards, that their judgments were suspended by injunctions out of Chancery, Sir Thomas caused a list of those he had granted to be made out, and m'ritiug the judges to dinner, discussed with them the grounds of Ms de cision m each case. On their acknowledging these to be just and reasonable, he recom mended them themselves m future to qualify the extreme rigour of the law by Uke equit able considerations, and thus prevent the necessity of the chanceUor's mterference. More's retirement from the chanceUorship arose from no diminution of the Mng's fa vour, but was the result of his own eamest appUcation. Durmg his whole tenure of it, the question of the kmg's marriage, wMch had been so fatal to 'Vv olsey, continued to be agitated. The opmions of the foreign as well as the English universities had been taken, and the chanceUor had been caUed upon to present these, and the answers of many theologians and canoniste, to the House of Commons ; but stiU his o-wn con science was not satisfied, and, not only dreading the evil consequences which he thought he foresaw from these proceedings, but lookmg no doubt -with a suspicious eye on the interference m ecclesiastical matters which Cromwell was then anxiously urging, he sought to be reUeved from the responsi biUty of measiu-es which he could not con scientiously sanction. Still so prudent had been his bearing that when, under pretence of illness, he obtained permission to resign the Seal on May 16, 1532, the king granted his discharge with cordial acknowledgments of his services, and gi-acious promises of continued favour, causing the Duke of Nor^ folk, on introducing his successor, to say that he had been only aUowed to retire at Ms own earnest .entreaty, and obliging the new chancellor to repeat the expression in the royal presence at the openmg of par liament, _ It is much to the credit of King Henry's discrimination that from More's first en- MORE trance mto his service he distmguished him with peculiar confidence. He not only re cognised in Sir Thomas that soUdity of un derstandmg and that integrity of character so valuable in a counseUor, but appreciated those inteUectual powers and that liveUness of humour which made him so attractive as a compamon. Thus, while he was employed abroad in most important missions, he was honoured when at home with a large share of royal famiUarity, So frequently was his presence required by the kmg^ as well to enter into scientific and learned, discussions as to enliven the royal table by his merry conversation, that, m order to relieve Mm self from a restraint which kept him from his own family, he was compelled to assume a more solemn deportment, and by gradually discontinumg Ms former mirth to secure himself from such frequent in-ritations. The king's continued enjoyment of Ms so ciety would be often sho-wn by his sudden visits to More's house at Chelsea, partakmg of his dinner, and treating him -with that sort of playful kindness of which there is no other example than the intercourse between Henry H, and Becket before the latter was invested with the archiepiscopal mitre. More, however, was not deceived as to the real character of his sovereign. On one occasion, when the king had been strolling for an hour in the garden at Chelsea with his arm round More's neck, his son-in-law Roper congratulated him on being ' so fa miliarly entertained,' saying he had never seen the king do so to any before except Cardinal Wolsey, -with whom he had once seen ' his grace walk arm in arm,' ' I thank our Lord,' answered More, ' 1 flnd his grace my very good lord indeed, and I believe he doth as singularly favour me as any subject withm this realm ; howbeit, son Roper, I may tell thee I have no cause to be proud thereof, for if my head would win a castle in France it should not fail to go.' In less than a year after More's resigna tion, the king's marriage with Anne Boleyn was acknowledged. Many were the at tempts made by Henry to induce Sir Tho mas, at flrst by flattering messages and large promises, and afterwards by menaces, to give his concurrence. His inflexible adhe rence to his opinion gradually irritated the kmg to such an extent that in his anger he forgot all the services More had rendered, and determined either to force his acquies cence or to punish his refusal. It was only by the stiong representations made by the new chancellor (Audley) and his other mimsters, of his imminent risk of being de feated in parliament, that the king consented to leave More's name out of the bill of at tainder against parties supposed to be im plicated m the ti-eason of Elizabeth Bai-ton, the Holy Maid of Kent, The desired op portunity, however, was not long wanting. MORE 461 On the Mng's marriage an act had been passed, flxmg the succession of the throne on_Ms issue by Anne Boleyn; and by one of its clauses an oath was required from aU the Mng's subjects to mamtain that settle ment, (Stat Realm, iii, 471,) This oath More vvould not have hesitated to take, as he admitted the right of parliament to regu late the settlement. But the form submitted to him containing in addition assertions of the invalidity of the king's flrst marriage, and of the validity of the second and of the divorce. More felt himself obliged to refuse it. He was accordingly committed to the Tower on AprU 17, 1634, and was attainted for misprision of treason on this account, by a separate act passed in the foUovring No vember, which rendered void the kmg's former grante to him, and deprived him of aU his other property of every kmd. (Ihid 538.) _ Not content with keeping his unfortunate victim m strict conflnement for more than a year, the arbitrary monarch, urged on, it is feared, by the new queen, resolved to pursue him to extremities. Another statute of the same parUament enacted that the Mng should be reputed the only supreme head on earth of the Church of England, and should have the title and style thereof annexed to his imperial cro-wn ; and by this act it was declared high treason to attempt to deprive the kmg of his title. (Ihid. 492, 508.) More, in all the interrogatories to which^he was artfully subjected with a -new to entrap him, evaded the question either by total silence or by saying, ' I -will not meddle with such matters, for I am fully determined to serve God, and to think upon his passion and my passage out of this world,' At last, on June 12, 1685, a depu tation waiting on him to take away his books. Rich, the solicitor-general, who was one of the party, under pretence of friendly remonstrance, inveigled More into an argu ment, by putting the case whether he would not acknowledge Rich to be king if par liament had declared him so. To this More answered in the affimative, because parlia ment could both make and depose Mngs ; but in return asked Rich whether he could, in obedience to an act of -parliament, say that God was not God, Rich agreed that he could not, because it was impossible, but, suggestmg that this was too high a case, cunningly proposed one which he said was between the two, asMng him why, if he would acknowledge a king made by act of parliament, he should not take King Henry as supreme head of the Church, since he was so constituted by act of parUament. The reply to this, as aUeged by Rich, but denied by Moore, was, that a subject could not be thus bound, because it was not a thing to which he could give his consent in parliament. 462 MORE DisgracefuUy interpreting these words into a malicious denial of his title, the sangmnary tyrant, glad to find any pretence to vent his animosity, caused an indictment to be im mediately prepared, (Mr. Bruce in Archeeo logia, xvii, 361-374,) On the trial Rich made himself infamous by his perjured re presentation of this 'famUiar secret talk,' an obsequious jury declared More to be guilty, and the traitor's sentence was pro nounced against him by the court — the former no way regarding his unanswerable defence, and the latter disallo-wing all his exceptions to the indictment. With asolemn prayer that his judges might be pardoned for his condemnation, he retired from the bar. On leaving the com-t his son met him, and kneeUng down begged his blessing; and as he entered the Tower, his favourite daughter Margaret rushed through the crowd, and throwing her arms round his neck covered Mm with kisses, but, over whelmed by her grief, could utter nothmg but ' Oh my father ! oh my father ! ' Little time was allowed to elapse ere the final scene was enacted. His conviction took place on July I, 1536 (Baga de Se cretis), and on the 6th his head was severed from his body in the front of the Tower, Even m his last moments, impressed as he showed himself to be vrith the a-wful so lemnity of his position, he exMbited no fear, and, amidst the prayers that he piously ut tered, could not repress the humour which Lad always characterised him. When he was informed that the horrible part of the sentence was changed into beheading, he answered merrUy, 'God forbid the kmg should use any more such mercy unto my friends, and God bless aU my posterity from such pardons.' ' Pray, master lieutenant,' said he to that officer as he was ascending the scaffold, which seemed to give way, ' pray see me safe up, and as to my coming down I -will shift tor myself And when he laid Ms head on the block, he desfred the execu tioner to stop tiU he had put his beard aside ; ' for that,' saidhe, ' has committed no treason.' His body was buried in St. Peter's within the Tower, but was at last removed by his daughter Margaret to the tomb in Chelsea Church which he had prepared during his Ufe, His head, after remaining for some time exposed on London Bridge, a disgust ing evidence of the ingratitude of prmces, came also into the possession of his affec tionate child, on whose death it was buried in her arms in St. Dunstan's, Canterbury, Two years after his execution an annuity of 20/, was granted to his widow. Lady AUce More, and subsequently a lease of one of his houses at Chelsea, (Auditor's Patent Book, i. 160 ; 26 Report Pub. Rec, App. 2.) His three daughters were all married during Ms life. The eldest, Margaret, was imited MOEEVILLE to William Roper, whose memoir of his father-in-law forms the staple of all his sub sequent biographies. He was son of John Roper, Esq., of St, Dunstan's, near Canter bury, at flrst prothonotaiy of the Court of Kmg's Bench (in wMch office WilUam succeeded him), and afterwards the Mng's attomey-general. The second daughter, Elizabeth, was married to WilUam Dauncy, Esq, ; and the husband of the third daughter was Giles Heron, Esq, John, the only son and last-born child of Sir Thomas, married Anne, daughter and heir of Edward Cres acre, of Bamburgh in Yorkshire ; and his grandson Cresacre More has been proved by Mr, Hunter to be the author of the life of his ancestor, which had been preriously at tributed to his brother Thomas, Mr. Hunter conceives that the male progeny of the chan ceUor became extinct in 1796, MOEETON, Eael of. See Robeet, MOEETILLE, Hhgh de, who had the barony of Burgh-on-the-Sands m Cumber land, and other possessions m that and the neighbourmg counties, as successor to his father Roger, and Ms grandfather Simon, was forester of Cumberland, and added to Ms property that of his -wife, Helewise de Stuteville, a relative, probably a sister, of the Baron Robert de StuteviUe, In conjunction with the latter, he was a justice itinerant for the counties of North umberland and Cumberland m 16 Henry H., II70 (Madox, i, 144) ; but although Robert de StuteviUe acted in the same capacity in the foUo'wmg year, the name of Hugh de MoreviUe no longer appears as his associate. His discontmuance m this honourable office arose from the part he took m December 1170 in the murder of Becket, as before re lated. After the assassmation, he and his coUeagues retired without interruption, and repaired to a castle at Knaresborough, which belonged to Hugh de MoreviUe, where they stayed many months, not darmg to return to Hem-y's court. It is added by WiUiam of Newbury, 'that, being stung 'with remorse, they wilUngly went to Rome, and were sent by the pope to Jerusalem, where, after they had for some years performed not remissly the penance enjoined them, they aU ended their lives.' However this may be vrith regard to the others, it certainly is not tiue in reference to Hugh de Morerille's death. During the remainder of the reign of Henry IL, and the whole of that of Richai'd I., no mention is made of his name ; but in the flrst year of Kmg John he is recorded as paying flfteen marks and three good pal freys for holding his court with his liberties ' de Tol et Theam, et Infangenetheif, et Furto, et de Judicio Ferri et Aquse,' as long as Helewise his wife should coutmue in a secular habit. (Rot.de Oblatis, 54.) He died shortly afterwards, leaving two daughters, one of whom, Ada, became the wife of the MORE'WIC after-mentioned justicier, Thomas de Mule ton, (Dugdale's Baron, i. 612; Lord Lyttel ton, U. 3, iOI, 589 ; Hasted, xU. 381,) MOEE-WIC, Hugh de, the son of Emulf de Morewic, held the manor of Chidington in Northumberland, by the service of one Imight's fee. He was in attendance on the Mng at Waltham in II82, whose will then made he witnessed. In 80 Henry IL, II84, lie was one of the justiciers and barons before whom a fine was acknowledged in the Kmg's Court at Westminster, and he afterwards acted as a justice itinerant in LincoMshire and Yorkshire. (Pipe Roll, 60, 78.) He held the sheriffalty of Cumberland in 31 Henry II, and two following years. On the fine he is styled ' dapifer regis,' ¦an office which he held with Hugh Bardolf, It is not improbable that they were dapifers of Normandy, since an aUowance was made to them in the Norman Roll of that year for 100/. disbursed for the king's expenses when he was at Gisors, (Mado.v,i.l68.) His death occurred about 1190, (!Baronage, i. 678,) MOEGAN, Hamon, although one of the justices itinerant who actually fixed the assize of the county of Hants in 20 Henry H., 1174, by vfrtue of the writ of Richard de Luci, does not seem to have been origmally appointed, the words ' qui fuit in loco constebularii ' being added to his name. (Madox, i, 125,) The constable at that time was either Henry or Mabel, sons of Milo de Gloucester, Earl of Hereford. MOEGAN, Feancis, is frequently con founded with the under-mentioned Richard Morgan. They were not even of the same family. That of Francis was settled at Kingsthorpe in Northamptonshire, m which county he was born. His legal ti-aining took place in the Middle Temple, where he was reader m 1653, He was advanced by Queen Mary to the degree of the coif on October 16, 1665 ; and his elevation to the judgeship ofthe Queen'sBench did not occur tUl Januai-y 23, 1568 (Dugdale's Orig. 128, 217 ; Dyer, 158), more than eighteen months after the death of his namesake the chief justice. He survived Ms appointment for seven months only, during a great part of which he was prevented by UMess from act ing, and died on August 19 in the same year. His funeral monument is in the church of Nether Heyford in Northamptonshire, He mamed Anne, the daughter of Christopher Pemberton, and both his sons died vrithout male issue, (Bridges' North- umptonshire, i. 621 ; Baker's, i. 40, 183-189.) MOEGAN, Richaed, of whose family no certain account is given, was admitted at LincoM's Inn in 1523, and called to the bar in 1629, He became reader in 1642, and agam m 1646, when he was summoned to take the degree of the coif. He was elected recorder of Gloucester in 1646, and was returned member for that city in both MORLAND 463 the parliaments of Edward VI, His name occurs occasionally m Plowden's Reporte, but he does not appear to have acquired any eminence as an advocate, his religion, which was Roman CathoUc, perhaps opera ting to the injury of his practice. Attached no doubt by this tie to the family of the Princess Mary, he was com mitted to the Fleet in March 1551 for hearing mass in her chapel (Strype' s Cran mer, ii. 233) ; and on King Edward's death, in July 1553, he was among the first of those who, disregardmg the proclamation of Lady Jane Grey as queen, immediately joined the princess at Kenninghall Castle in Norfolk, He did not wait long for his reward for this early proof of his devotion. In the same month he acted as one of the commissioners to hear Bishop Tunstall's appeal against his conviction (Rymer, xv. 384), and on September 6 was raised to the office of chief justice of the Common Pleas and knighted. One of the earliest commissions he was named upon was that for the trial of Lady Jane Grey on November 13, when she pleaded guilty, and was condemned by him to burned alive on Tower HiU, or beheaded, as the queen should please. (4 Report !Pub. Rec, App. ii. 238.) Morgan remained chief justice for nearly two years afterthis, his suc cessor, Sir Robert Brooke, being appomted on October 8, 1565, His death, however, did not take place till the following year, when he was buried on June 2, at St. Magnus's, LondonBridge. (Machyn's Diary, 106.) His removal from the bench before his death gives some weight to the story that he became mad from the bitter re membrance of the dreadful sentence he had pronounced upon the Lady Jane, and that in his raving he cried continually to have her taken away from him, (Holinshed, iv. 23.) MOEIN, Ralph, was an officer of the Exchequer, and seems to have been a care less keeper of the treasure, as Adam de Sanford accounts for him on the roll of I Richard I. for five marks of the money from Winchester which were deposited in the castle at Northampton, and lost. (Pipe Boll, 34.) In 2 and 8 John he acted as a justicier in the country, when flnes were levied before the court. In the flrst of these years he was appointed sheriff of Devon shire; but in 4 John he was ordered to deliver up the castle of Exeter to William Briwer, for whom, in 7 John, he accounts for that county. (Rot Chart 100 ; Rot Pat 12 ; Madox, i, 276.) FuUer says that he held the same office for Northampton shire in 80 Henry II, MOELAND, William, held the office of master of the RoUs only during the last two months of the temporary restoration of Henry VL, between February 12 and April 29, 147L He had previously been 464 MORTIMEE one of the masters in Chancery, and after Edward's re-conquest of the throne he fell back into his former place, acting like his brethren as a receiver of petitions in par Uament until 4 Henry VII. (Rot ParL vi. 167-409.) In February 1470 he was installed dean of Windsor, but was deprived in October 1471, a few months after Edward's return. (Le Neve, 875.) MOETIMEE, William de, probably one of the many coUateral branches of the noble famiUes of Mortuomari, was one of the jus tices itinerant appointed in 20 Edward I., 1292, for the northern counties, a.nd in the thirty-second year acted as a justice of assize in ten of the inland counties. In the folio-wing year he was named a re ceiver ofthe petitions of Ireland and Guern sey, in the parUament held at Westmmster in September. (Hot ParL i. 159.) During the reign of Edward II, he contmued to act as a justice itinerant, and_ to be sum moned as such to parUament till the ninth year. (Pari Writs, n. 1205.) MOETON, John (Aechbishop oe Can teebuet), was bom either at Bere Regis, or at Milborne St. Andrew, in the county of Dorset, places not above three miles apart. He was the son of Richard Morton, of a very ancient Nottinghamshire family. One of the archbishop's brothera was an cestor of a baronet created in 1619, but whose male descendants failed in 1698. John Morton was educated in Ceme Abbey,'and he is even said to have been for some time a monk there. It is certain, however, that he was sent to Bailiol Col lege, Oxford, where he took the degree of doctor in both laws. His conduct and learning caused him to be appointed one of the commissaries of the university m 1446, and moderator of the civil law school. In 1453 he was made principal of Peckwater Inn, and in 1494 he was advanced to the head of the university as chancellor. Commencing his public career as an ad vocate m the Court of Arches, he soon at tracted the notice of Archbishop Bourchier, to whose friendship and estimation of his talente he owed several of his advance ments in the Church and the state. In 1466, while that prelate still held the Great Seal, Morton was placed about the person of Edward Prince of Wales, son of Henry VL, as his chancellor (Cal. Rot. Pat. 297), and was also made clerk or master in Chancery. His ecclesiastical preferments were nu merous. Besides several prebends and livings, he was from 1474 to 1477 succes sively instituted into four archdeaconries — those of Winchester, Huntingdon, Berks, and Leicester (Le Neve) — some of which he retained till his elevation to the epis copal bench. MOETON On the dethronement of Henry VLj neither his clerical nor official character prevented him from joining his unfortunate sovereign in the fleld of Towton, on Palm Sunday 1461. He escaped from the battle,- and accompanied Queen Margaret to Flanders. Beyond his being among those who were attainted of high treason in the parUament of the following November, he is not mentioned during the flrst ten years of Edward's reign, nor in the short restora- , tion of Henry "VL The tragical evente' which soon after occurred having left no immediate representative of the house of Lancaster, Morton sued for and obtained his pardon in July 1471, with the reversal of his attainder in October of the foUo'wing year. (Rot Pari v. 477, 480, vi. 26.) It is not improbable that his restoration to royal favour was as much owmg to King Edward's admiration of his constancy to the fallen fortunes of Henry, as to the intercession of his friend Archbishop Bourchier ; for m less than a year after his pardon he was appomted master of the Rolls, his patent being dated March 16, 1472. In 1473 the Great Seal was several times deposited -with him as keeper; and at the end of that year he was sent vrith Sir Thomas Montgomery on an emb.issy to Nuys in Germany, then under siege, to negotiate a treaty with the Duke of Bur gundy. (Paston Letters, U. 78, 90.) There is a second patent to him as master of the Rolls, dated May 2, 1475, more than three years after his first appointment. On comparing the two, the cause of this re newal seems to be a doubt he entertained whether the grant in the first patent of the Domus Conversorum, ' pro habitatione sua,' did not prevent him fi-om residing in any other place, as the only variation m the second patent is in reference to that house, the custody of which was then granted to him ' per se vel per sufficientem deputetum suum, sive sumcientes deputatos suos,' Soon after this, Kmg Edward revived his claim to the cro-wn of France ; and Dr, Morton was one of the negotiators of the treaty by which Louis XI. stopped the in-> vasion by giving to the English Mng an annual pension, and distributing large sums among the most powerful in his court, of which Dr. Morton, -with such examples before him, deemed it no disgrace to be a participator. ( CaL Rot. Pat. 321 ; Rymei-, xii. 46, 48 ; Turner, Ui. 855.) If there was any previous doubt enter tained by the king in reference to Morton's loyalty, it is manifest that it was now entirely dissipated. The earliest oppor tunity was taken to advance him in the Church. Bishop William Grey had not been dead above four diiys ere Morton was, by the king's request, elected as his suc cessor in the see of Ely on August 8, 1478. MORTON On January 9, 1479, he resigned the master ship of the Rolls to his nephew Robert Morton, for whom he had procured the grant in reversion nearly two years before. (Rymer, ii, 57,) Durmg the remaining four years of Ed ward's reign the new bishop quietly per formed his episcopal duties ; and the king's confldence in his prudence and attachment is said to have been further evidenced by ' his making him one of the executors of his will, of which, however, no record has been discovered. That this was so, and that he was therefore supposed to feel a devoted interest in Edward's infant family, is rendered probable by the violent conduct of the Protector Richard towards him, for which no other reason appears. The young king's council had been summoned on the 18th of .Tune, to deliberate on the coronation ; and the protector, attending it, had courteously requested the bishop to let him have some strawberries from his garden in Holborn for his dinner, and had then retired. Shortly afterwards he returned, and that furious scene which terminated m the hurried execution of Lord Hastings was performed, Bishop Morton and the Primate of York being immediately arrested, and imprisoned in the Tower. The petition, however, of the imiversity of Oxford pro cm-ed his release from that fortress, and he was sent to Brecon under the wardship of the Duke of Buckingham, On that nobleman's subsequent discontent and re tirement to Brecon, the bishop contrived to glide mto his confidence ; and between them they concocted the plan of raising the Earl of Richmond to the throne, and uniting the two factions of York and Lancaster by the marriage of the earl with Elizabeth, the eldest daughter of the late King Edward, He urged his dismissal, under the pretence that by his presence in Ely he could assist the project; but the duke would not part with so vrise and politic an adviser. The bishop therefore contrived Ms o-wn escape, and, obtaining a supply of money in Ely, immediately joined the Earl of Richmond in Flanders. The duke's capture, and sudden execution on November 2, quickly foUowed; and the bishop, in the pailiament of January, was deprived of all his posses sions, (Rot Pari. vi. 245, 250, 273.) The Earl of Richmond's fleet having been scattered by a storm, it was not till nearly two years afterwards that his hopes of acquu-ing the English crown were realised by the defeat of Richard at Bosworth, on August 22, 1485. During the interval Bishop Morton had remained in Flanders, and had been of great service to Richmond in advising him of Richard's projects against him. The earl had not long assumed the cro-wn, with the title of Henry VIL, ere he summoned MORTON 465 the bishop to England, and, admitting him into the council, loaded him with favom-s. His attainder being reversed in the flrst parliament, he was constituted lord chan cellor on March 6, I486 ; and in July, ou the death of Cardinal BourcMer, the temporalities of the see of Canterbury were placed in his custody during the vacancy, in preparation for his own elec tion to the primacy, which immediately foUowed, the papal bull of translation being dated on October 6. (Rijmer, xu. 802, 817.) Thus placed in possession of the highest offices, both in Church and stete, he re tained them during the remainder of his life. As a minister of the former, one of his flrst efforts was directed to the reformation ofthe priests, who, living inluxurious extra vagance, were guilty of drunkenness and incontinence, and even worse crimes. The dissolute life led in the monasteries was the next object of his attention, and the laxity of morals and general profligacy of the monks are incontestably proved by his letter to the abbot of St. Alban's. His strenuous exertions in pursuing his eccle siastical reforms naturallyproduced hostility on the part of those attacked, and were even opposed by some of the bishops. Con spiracies formed agamst his life were said to have occasioned the passing of the statute 3 Henry VII. c, 14, making such an offence against any of the king's servants felony. His energy, however, was sup ported by the king, and approved by the pope, by whom he was rewarded with the cardinal's hat, with the title of St Athana- sius, in 1493. As a minister of the cro-wn, historians differ as to his character, some asserting him to be the author of Henry's oppressive measures, and others vindicating him from the charge by sho-wing that after his death the king did not diminish his seve rity. The former, in support of thefr views, cite the argument he used to the unwilling to enforce the ' benevolence ' — a dilemma which received the name of the Bishop's Fork or Crutch, and which Fuller, with his usual quaintness, describes as ' perswad- ing prodigals to part with their money because they did spend it most, and -the covetous because they might spare it best ; so making both extreams to meet in one medium, to supply the king's necessities.' The latter declare, on the contrary, that, so far from encouraging, he endeavoured to soften and restr.iin the Mng. The truth probably lies something between the two extiemes. The haughtiness of his manners would make him unpopular ; but his -wis dom and eloquence, his zeal and discretion (which all allow him), must have secured the favour of his sovereign ; while his loyal devotion to the family he had served (not leaving it tiU its total extinction), and his H H 466 MORTON successful efforts to terminate the civil war which had so long distracted the Mngdom, are claims on the admiration of posterity which cannot fail to be acknowledged. After presiding over the province of Canterbury for fourteen years, he died on September 13, 1600, at his palace of Knoll in Kent, whence his remains were removed for interment in Canterbury Cathedral. To both his dioceses he was a liberal benefactor, restoring their cathedrals and repairing thefr palaces, and executing in Ely a work of pubUc utUity m draining the fens, by a cut called the New Leame, or Morton's Leame, more thau twelve miles long. The poor were not forgotten by Mm, either in his life or his testamentary remembrances, and both the universities were partakers of his bounty. {Godwin, ISO, 269 ; Athen. O.von. U. 683 ; Hutchins's Doi-set, i. 478 ; Holinshed, iii, 404, &c, ; Turner, iv, 109, 136,) MOETON, Robeet (Bishop oe Woeces- iee), was the son of Sir Rowland Morton, of Thwining iu Gloucestershfre, who was a younger brother of the above Archbishop John Morton. To that celebrated prelate he was probably indebted for his advance ment in the Church, and to the judicial position he filled ; for there is nothing in his history which would give him a per sonal claim to either. His uncle, previous to Ms elevation to the episcopal bench, had procured for Robert, on May 30, 1477, a grant in reversion of the mastership of the Rolls on his death or resignation. The latter contingency occurred on his promo tion to the bishopric of Ely, and Robert took possession of the office on January 9, 1479. He also succeeded his uncle in the archdeaconry of Winchester. During the four remaining years of the reign of Edward IV., and the few weeks of which that of Edward V. consisted, Robert Morton preserved his place ; but no sooner had Ms uncle, then Bishop of Ely, become suspected of implication in the Duke of BucMngham's conspiracy against Richard, than his supposed crime was -risited upon Robert, who was at once superseded by Thomas Barowe, on September 22, 1488. On the termination of the usurper's short career, Thomas Barowe retired from the mastership of the Rolls, as an intruder, and Robert Morton was of course reinstated. He was named as one of the commissioners to perform the office of steward at Henry's coronation (Rymer, xii, 277), and he seems to have been otherwise actively employed in the Mng's affairs, since that is stated to be the reason why his request to have a partner in his office of master of the Rolls was complied with. He and WiUiam Eliot accordingly received a joint appointment for their lives and that of the longest liver, by patent dated November 13, 1486, On MORTON October 16 in the following year he was advanced to the bishopric of Worcester. Having then resigned the mastership of the Rolls, for the next ten years he per formed the duties of his prelacy in a quiet and unobtrusive manner. He died (be tween three and four years before his uncle) in the first week of May 1497, and was buried m St, Paul's Cathedral, It is curious that about six weeks before Ms death he deemed it necessary to obtam ' a charter of general pardon for aU offences he had in any way committed. (Rymer, xU. 648.) This was, no doubt, appUed for by the cautious recommendation of the archbishop, for the purpose of securmg the property of his dymg nephew from those extortions to which too many in that reign were compelled to submit, under the pre tence of breaches of unrepealed but obso lete laws, the power of enforcing which had been rerived by a statute of the pre ceding vear. (Godwin, 467; Le Neve, 290, 298 ; Stat Realm, v. 475.) MOETON, William, was great-grandson of Sir Rowland Morton, one of the masters of requests in the reign of Henry 'VUI., and son of James Morton of Clifton, m the parish of Severne Stoke in Worcestershire, by Jane, daughter of WilUam Cook, of Shillwood m the same county, (Visitation Worcester, 1634.) Educated at Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, he took the degrees of B.A. aud M.A. in 1622 and 1625, and was admitted into the Inner Temple, He was called to the bar m 1630, and is men tioned m Croke's Reporte in 1639, The troubles immediately succeeded that date, when the young barrister exchanged his gown for the sword and joined the kmg, who conferred on Mm the honour of knight hood. He served as Ueutenant-colonel in Lord Chaudos's regiment of horse, and was entrusted -with the govemment of his lord ship's castle at Sudeley when it was at tacked m 1644 by the parUamentery general Waller ; and being betrayed by an officer of the garrison, he was made prisoner and sent to the Tower, Clarendon says (iv. 489) that ' he had given so fi-equent testi mony of Ms sig-nal courage in several ac tions, in which he had received many wounds both by the pistol and the sword, that his mettle was never suspected, and his fideUty as Uttle questioned ; and after many years of imprisonment, sustained -with great firmness and constancy, he lived to receive the reward of his merit, after the return of the king.' Some years after the end of the war he was released, and resumed his pro fession, probably confining himself to cham ber practice. He was made a bencher of his inn in 1669, and withm a few days after the Re storation was summoned to take the degree ofthe coif In 1662 he was elected recorder MOTELOW of Gloucester, and was appointed ' consi- liarius ' to the dean and chapter of Wor cester, In July 1663 he was created kmg's serjeant, and on November 23, 1665, he was nominated a judge of the King's Bench, This position he filled respectably for nearly seven years, and had the good fortune to avoid censure, but was the terror of high waymen ; and they had some reason so to regard him, for when Claude Duval, the French page of the Duke of Richmond, took the road, and was after many wonderful escapes at last captured and convicted, the judge prevented the mercy of the cro-wn being extended to him by threatenmg to resign if so notorious an offender was al lowed to escape, Duval was the most popular of his stamp, and an especial fa vourite with the ladies, to one of whom he retumed 300/, out of 400/. he had teken from her, upon her dancing a coranto -with him on the heath where he had stopped her coach. Dames of Mgh rank visited him in prison and interceded for Ms life, and the good-natured king would probably have granted his pardon but for the interference of the j udge, (LordMacaulay's!England, i. 383,) Sir 'William married Anme, daughter and sole heir of John Smyth, of Kidlmgton in Oxfordshire, and died in the summer vacation of 1672, MOTELO'W, Henet de, appears among the advocates in the Year Books from 18 Edward IIL, and was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas on July 4, 1857, Fines were not acknowledged before him later than Easter I36I, 85 Edward HL {Dugdale's Orig. 45.) MOUBEAY, .loHN DE, was lineally de scended from Robert de Moubray, a younger brother of the ancestor of Mou bray Duke of Norfolk. He is described as of Kirklington in Yorkshfre, and had evidently very extensive practice as an advocate from 17 Edward HL, attaining the rank of Mng's serjeant m the 28th year. He was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas on July II, 1369, and was soon after made a knight of the Bath. The fines acknowledged before him extend to 1373, (Dugdale's Orig. 46, 108.) He married Margaret, sister of Sir Alex ander Percy, of Kildare. (Testam. Ebor. 158; Nates and Queries, 2nd S, xi. 298.) MOYLE, Waltee, acquired the manor and large demesnes of Stevenstone iu Devonshire by his marriage with Mar garet, the heiress of that property. He probably was born in Cornwall, as his father, Henry, was the third son of Tho mas Moyle, of Bodmin. He was after wards established at EastweU in Kent, and was named a comnussioner in that county in 83 Henry VL, 1454, to raise money for the defence of Calais. (Acts Privy Council, vi, 239.) MDCEGEOS 467 He is said to have been a reader at Gray's Inn. In 1443 he was caUed to the degree of the coif, and is mentioned as one of the king's serjeante in 1454. (Rot. Pari. v. 240.) Ou July 9, 1454, he was constituted a judge of the Common Pleas, where he acted for the next seventeen years, ex tending through the remaining portion of Henry's reign, the first ten years of that of Edward I"V., and the six months in 1470-1 during which Henry reassumed his seat on the throne. (Dugdale's Orig. 46.) Whether his non-appointment on the retum of Edward IV. was occasioned by the act of the Mng or his O'wn retirement does not appear ; probably the latter, as he must have been then considerably advanced m age. He died before July 31, 1480, when his -will was proved. In it he grants two acres of land in EastweU, in trust for the use of the church there, ' in recompense of a certain annual rent of 21bs. of wax, by me wrested and detained from the said church against my conscience,' The estate of EastweU was carried by one of his female descendante in marriage to the noble family of the Earl of 'WinchUsea, (Hasted, vii. 392 ; CoUins's Peerage, iii, 379, viii. 610; Testam. Vetust 349.) MOYNE, John lb, is first mentioned when he was fined twenty marks in 26 Henry IIL, 1242, for marrying Isabella, one of the hefrs of Eustace de Fercles, vrithout the kmg's licence. (Excerpt, e Rot Fin. ii. 471.) In 88 Henry III. he was sheriff of the counties of Cambridge and Huntmgdon, and complaints were made against him that he took money at the sheriff's toum contrary to the custom in those counties; and also that he re ceived a conveyance of sixty acres of land, twenty-three acres of meadow, and two messuages, from a man charged with the murder of his father, of which he was con victed and hanged. (Ibid. ii. 218 ; Madox, i. 446.) The result of the investigation does not appear. But on December 6, 1265, he and Ro bert de Fulham were constituted justices , of the Jews (Madox, i, 234), in which office he did not long remain, for at the end of the foUowing September there are entries of assizes dfrected to be held before him in conjunction with WilUam de Poy- wick, which extend to August 1267, in the counties of Hereford, Gloucester, and Wor cester; and on December 25, 1268, his name appears as the kmg's escheator south of Trent, and mandates are directed to him in that character till August I, 1270. (Exceipt e Rot Fin. U. 444, 457, 481-519.) He died about 1274. (Cal. Inquis. p.m. i. 54.) MUCEGEOS, Milo de, is not otherwise mentioned than as one of the justices itine rant to settle the assize of Herefordshire in 20 Henry IL, 1174 (Madox, i. 124), and as 468 MUCEGEOS sheriff of the county with William Torell in 29 Hemy IL MUCEGEOS, Richaed de, was the son of a gentleman of the same name who was sheriff of Gloucestershire in 2 and 3 Richard I., which the son afterwards held in 9 John, paying 250/, for holding it at the old rent, with 100/. of increase for every year, (Rot. de Fin. 385.) In that year he was aUowed a payment of ten marks for the queen's expenses during her stay at Gloucester. (Rot. Claus. i, 96.) In the previous year the castle of Glou cester, with the prisoners and hostages there, was committed to his custody, and soon afterwards the castle of Chichester also. (Rot Pat. 71, 74, 79.) His employment as a justicier for six years, commencing 6 John, 1204, appears from various fines acknowledged before him. (Hunter's Preface.) During the intestine troubles at the end of the reign he adhered to the king, and was rewarded by a mandate to William the earl mar shal to provide him with some escheats from the lands of ' the king's enemies,' and by a grant of the estate of John Fitz- Richard. He was still alive in 5 Henry III. (Rot. aaus. i. 287, 248, 470.) MULETON, Thomas de, was the son of Lambert de Muleton, whose possessions were at a place of that name in Lincoln shire, where his ancestors for three genera tions had resided. (Baronage, i. 567. ) He was in 7 John and the two foUowing years sheriff of that county, for which appoint ment he paid a fine of five hundred marks and five palfreys. (Rot. de Fin. 338, &c.) At the termination of his office he seems to have offended the king, since Reginald de CornhiU was commanded to take his body and imprison him in Rochester Castle until he had paid what he owed to the crown to the last penny, (Rot. Pat. 85.) He was not long m disgrace, but in 12 John accom panied the kmg to Ireland, and was with him in 14 John, when he appears to have been responsibly employed. His attesta tion is appended to several charters during this and the two following years. (Rot. ChaH.) On the rising of the barons he joined their party, and was unlucky enough to be taken prisoner vrith his son Alan in the castle of Rochester. He had been pre viously excommunicated, and was now im prisoned in the castle of Corff, and his own castle and other possessions were seized into the king's hands, but soon after the accession of Henry III, they were fully re stored to him on his returning to his alleoi- ance, (Rot Claus. i. 241, 317; Rot Pat 164.) Early in the reign of King John he was married to the daughter of Richard Del- fliet (Rot. Cancell 198), on whose death he contracted a second marriage, without applying for the king's Ucence, wUh Ada, MURDAC the widow of Richard de Luci of E^e- mont, and daughter of the before-noticed Hugh de MoreviUe, This rashness met im mediate punishment in the seizure of all his lands in Cumberland, which were only restored by the ultimate payment of a large flne for his transgression. (Rot. aaus. i, 854, 358, 366,) By virtue of this marriage he obtained the office of forester of Cum berland, which was confirmed to him by the kmg, (Ihid 513, 532.) Holding now large possessions in those parts, he was in 3 Henry III,, 1219, ap pointed one of the justices itinerant m the counties of Cumberland, Westmoreland, and Lancaster, His legal abilities were probably brought under observation by this appoint ment, as withm flve years afterwards he was raised to the bench at Westminster, on wMch he continued to sit untU nearly the close of his life. The flnes acknowledged before him extend from Easter 1224 to Easter 1236. (Dugdale's Orig. 42.) In the earUer years he held a second or inferior station ; but in January 1227 he was placed at the head of one of the commissions, and he retained this position in aU Ms remainmg cfrcuits, except that in one mstance, 1232, he was preceded by Stephen de Segrave, who then was Justiciarius Anglise, In 1286 Dugdale inserts him among the justices of the Com mon Pleas, the expression in the record being ' Justiciarius de Banco ; ' and he adds, ' Capitalis ut videtur,' a suggestion difficult to be reconciled with the position ascribed to Robert de Lexinton about the same pe riod, the more especially as there is no proof of Thomas de Muleton's acting m a judicial character after that vear. He Uved, how ever, tiU 1240. He was evidently of an impetuous dis position, somewhat covetous and overhear ing, and disinclined to aUow any obstacle to stand in the way of his ambition. Of his learning in the laws nothing remains for us to j udge ; but the proofs of his charity appear m his pious benefactions. By his flrst -wife he had three sons, one of whom obtained with his wife Anabel, a daughter of Richard de Luci, the barony of Egremont, which feU into abeyance in 1834. By his second wife, Ada, he had two chil dren — Julian, who married Robert le Vava sour ; and Thomas, who succeeded him, and obtained the barony of GUlesland by his marriage with Maud, the daughter and heir of Hubert de Vaux. He is now represented in the House of Lords by two peerages— viz.. Lord Dacre and the Earl of Carlisle. MUEDAC, Hugh, was a chaplain of Henry II. , and doubtless of the same family as Henry Murdac, Archbishop of York, He was one of the j ustices itinerant selected by the king at the council of Windsor iu II79_, and was appointed -with four others to ex ercise judicial functions in the counties of MURDAC the home district, m which he acted also in the foUowmg year. Madox quotes an entry in a book in the possession of the dean and chapter of London, showmg that he was present in the Exchequer m 30 Henry H., when an acknowledgment as to certain lands was made there. In the next year he had the custody of the abbey of Selby, then in the Mng's hands. (Madov, i. 188, 216, 809,) The archdeaconry of Cleveland was given to him in 1200, and he held it tiU 1204, (Le Neve, 828 ; Rot Chart 103.) MUEDAC, Ralph, appears as one of those present m the Exchequer on an acknow ledgment relative to some land Ijeing made there in 30 Henry IL, 1184, immediately followmg that of the above Hugh Murdac (Mado.v, i. 215), and he acted as a justice itmerant in some of the subsequent years of that reign. The Pipe Roll of I Richard I, (35-194) contains proof that he held a high place among the justices itinerant of that year also, in no less than ten counties. He was sheriff of Derbyshire and Nottingham- shfre from 27 Henry IL to I Richard I. In the latter reign he seems to have contri buted some fine to the royal coffers 'pro habendo amore Regis Ricardi,' an arrear of 50/. 6s, 8d. being charged on that account at so late a date as the roll of II John, in the county of O.xford. (Madox, i. 474.) He, however, died about I John, and the custody of his land and heir was given to WilUam Briwer, (Rot. de Liberate, 13,) MUEEAY, William (Eael oe Mans- eield), than whom there never has been a judge more venerated by his contempo raries, nor whose memory is regarded with greater respect and affection, even at this distance of time, as the great oracle of law, and the founder of commercial juris prudence, was the fourth son of David the fifth Viscount Stormont and third Lord Balvaird, being one of fourteen cMldren borne to him by Margery, daughter of David Scot of Scotstarvet, of 'the noble family of Buccleuch, He was born at his father's palace of Scone, near Perth, on March 2, 1704-5, Educated at the grammar school at Perth till he was fourteen years old, he was then sent to Westminster School in May 1718, and was elected kmg's scholar m the next year. Here his proficiency was so great, both m his exercises and declama tions, that at the examination in 1723 he -Was placed at the head of the list selected for Christ Church, Oxford. In his admission there on June 18 his place of birth is mis takenly written 'Bath,' owing probably to the broad pronunciation ofthe word ' Perth' by the giver of his description. Though in tended for the Church, he felt a natural voca^ tion for the bar, in which he was conscious that his father with his fourteen children could not afford to indulge him. Fortu nately for the world, he was enabled to gra- MURRAY 469 tify his mclination, by the assistance of the first Lord Foley, whose son had formed an mtimacy-with him at Westminster, and who had in his visits m the holidays been at once taken by his amiable disposition and pro mising abiUties. He was accordingly entered at Lincoln's Inn on AprU 23, 1724. In both places he pursued his studies assiduously. In the former, besides industriously master ing the usual academic course, he especially devoted himself to the improvement of Ms natural powers of oratory, taMng Demos thenes, .and, above aU, Cicero as his models. In the latter his sedulous appUcation was successfully employed in acqMring that knowledge of practice and of law by which he was enabled so soon to prove himself an accompUshed advocate, and to use his elo quence, not in mere ornamentation, but m unravellmg the contradictory facts and the abstruse points of the cases which he might have to conduct. ^At Oxford he took his degree of B.A. in 1727, at the same time gaining the prize for a Latin poem on the death of George I, ; and in June 1730 he became M.A., and was caUed to the bar at Lincoln's Inn on November 23. In the interval between his two degrees he familiarised himself with the courts by frequenting Westminster HaU, and he practised his argumentative and rhetorical powers by discussing knotty questions of law at a debatmg society. As a relaxation from his severer studies he amused himself with the current works of literature, and by associating freely -with that class to which his rank and his talents gave him an easy introduction. Though strictly tem perate in his habits, BosweU teUs us that he sometimes ' drank champagne with the wits,' introduced probably by Alexander Pope, with whom he had from boyhood contracted an intimacy, and who showed his affection for his young friend not only by devoting some Unes at an early period of his career to a eulogistic aUusion to his merits, and even by dedicatmg to him the 'Imitation of the First Book of Horace,' but also by teaching him to add grace of action to the charm of his voice. On one occasion au intimate friend, it is said, surprised him iu the act of practising before a glass, with Pope sitting by as his instructor. He commenced Ms career as a barrister in the Court of Chancery; and that for the flrst eighteen months he was entirely with out adequate encouragement, as has been asserted, seems scarcely prohable, smce he is found at the end of that time to be en gaged in no less than three appeals m the House of Lords, one of which was on the all-absorbing subject of the South Sea Bubble. He so distmgmshed himself by his arguments in them that, whatever may have been his former progress, no doubt of his advance could any longer exist. Not 470 MURRAY only was he immediately engaged in numerous cases before the same august tribunal, but he came into regular employ ment in Westminster Hall, where his rising fame was universally recognised. This was fully confirmed by his eloquent defence of Colonel Sloper in an action of a-irn. con. brought against him by TheopMlus Cibber, and by his argument before parliament against the Mil to disfranchise the city oL-be attributed to his rule_ never to prosecute Edinburgh on account of the Porteous riots, in gratitude for which that corpora tion presented him with the freedom of the city in a gold box. The dean and chapter of Christ Church also complimented him with the nomination of a student in their college, in acknowledgment of his successful efforts in the Court of Chan cery on a question of much importance to them. In November 1742, soon after the dis solution of Sir Robert Walpole's mmistry, he was made solicitor-general, and entered parliament as member for Boroughbiidge. He held the post of solicitor for twelve years, and in May 1754 succeeded to the place of attorney- gen oral, which he held for two years more. His success in the House of Commons was as briUiant as it was at the bar. During these fourteen years he continued to sit for Boroughbridge, and from his entrance into the senate till the hour of his removal from it he acquired by the force of his arguments, by the clearness of his expositions, and by the eloquence in language, manner, and action in which they were clothed, an undisputed ascen dency, out-shining every other speaker, except his chief antagonist and rival Mr. Pitt, whem he equalled in everything but the power of invective. To him the Pel ham administration were indebted for the most effective support of their measures; and in that of the Duke of Newcastle he was the trusted leader and almost the entire prop of the govemment. When the weakness of that govemment was nearly overcome by a powerful opposition, the death of Sir Dudley Ryder, chief justice of the King's Bench, occurred; and so essential to the existence of the ministry was the continuance of the attomey-general deemed in the House of Commons that, though Sir Dudley died in May 1756, the office was not fllled up till November, the interval being occupied by the offer to Sir "WilUam of every species of inducement in the sh.ipe of tellerships, reversions, and a large pension, to induce him to forego his acknowledged right to the office. Murray however resisted all temptation, and at last was obliged to tell the duke that, if not immediately ap pointed chief justice and created a peer, he would no longer sit in the house as attorney- general. The duke was obUged to submit, MURRAY but, with the loss of his able lieutenant, was soon forced to resign his command. In the exercise of his official duties as solicitor and attorney general he had never outraged popular feeling by undue severity; and against the few prosecutions which he sanctioned, or his manner of conducting them, no possible objection could be raised. His success in those he instituted was to where there was any risk of failure. In the proceedings against those implicated in the rebellion of 1746 he was necessarily concerned for the crown, but was careful to avoid everything that could aggravate the crimes of the prisoners, or inflame the passions of those who were to try them. In all the trials, and more particmarly iu that of Lord Lovat, he exercised a degree of candour and humamty wMch drew forth the admiration of all his hearers. In re ference to that rebeUion an absurd charge was made against him, that he had in his youth joined some Jacobite friends m drink ing the health of the pretender on his knees. Although the Mng treated the imputation with the contempt that it deserved, the folly of one of the parties impUcated forced an enquiry before the privy council, m which Murray indignantly denied its truth. The result of course was a complete acqmttal from every part of it. His last appearance as a barrister was one of the most graceful of his life. On the ceremony of taking leave of LincoM's Inn for the purpose of being called to the degree of the coif, he delivered a fareweU address, in which, after a well-merif ed and eloquent eulogy of Lork Hardwicke, the chanceUor under whom he had practised, he paid an elegant compUment to the Hon. Charles Yorke, the treasurer, who had delivered to him, l^with warm congratulations, the customary offermg of the society. He received Ms appomtment as lord chief justice of the King's Bench, andhis patent of creation as Lord Mansfield of Mansfleld in the county of Nottingham, on the same day, November 8, 1756. From that date for the long period of thirty-two years he presided over his coiu't with such extraordinai-y power and efficiency that, hy his learning, discrimination, and judgment, he not only gained the admfration of all who were competent to appreciate them, hut by the fairness and impartiality of his de cisions, and by the patient courtesy of his manners, his private virtues, and the firm ness he displayed m trying circumstances, he lived down and nullified the charges and insinuations which jealousy and party spirit at one time raised against Mm. He intro duced some reforms in his court, and re moved some impediments in its practice, which had much delayed the decision of the causes and unnecessarily increased the MURRAY expense of the suitors ; and by his punctu ality and despatch he kept down aU accu mulation of arrears, and thus was enabled to meet the vast mcrease of business which was caused by the advancing commerce of the country. In dealing with the number less cases arising from this increasing com merce, he not only carefully weighed the justice of the particular claim, but laid down the principle upon which all similar ques tions should be in future decided, and in the end established such a system that, in the words of Mr. Justice Buller, he acqufred the character of being ' the foimder of the commercial law of the country.' Though his decisions both in this branch of law, and on other questions in reference to colonial and mternational principle, are most cu rious, satisfactory, and instructive, a detail of them would fail to be interesting. But some of those which wiU be ever connected -with his name deserve to be commemorated. He first pronounced that a slave once brought into England became free; that Turks, Hindoos, and others of different faith from our o-wn, may be sworn as witnesses according to the ceremonies of their o-wn religion ; that governors of English provinces are amenable in English courts for -wrongful acte done while governors against indi viduals ; and that the property of wrecks does not belong to the king or his grantee, where it can be identified by the real owner, although no living thmg comes to shore with the wreck. Though, besides the three judges whom he found on the bench of his court, there were no less than eight who took their places afterwards as his colleagues, it is a strong evidence of the soundness of his law that during the thirty-two years of his pre sidency there were only two cases in which the whole bench were not unanimous ; and, what is stiU more extraordinary, two only of his judgmente were reversed on appeal ; but some ofthem were not entirely approved by the legal community. The system on which he acted was censured as mtroducing too much of the Roman law into our juris prudence ; and he was charged -with over stepping the boundary between equity and law, and of allo-wing the principles of the former to operate too strongly in his legal decisions. How far these criticisms were justified stiU remains a question; but recent legislation proves how little his system de served censure. Lord Thurlow used to say that Lord Mansfield was 'a surprising man; nmety-nine times out of a hundred he was right in Ms opinions and deci sions ; and when once in a hundred times he was wrong, ninety-nine men out of a hundred woiUd not discover it. He was a wonderful man,' He was particularly attentive to the stu dente who attended his com-t, admitting MUREAY .471 them to sit on the bench with him, and explaming the points that happened to be raised. In his time the Mng's counsel used the same courtesy towards the young aspi rants, but after the accession of Lord Ken yon the practice was discontmued both by the bench and the bar. In the upper house of parUament he shone vrith as much brilliancy as he had done in the lowey. During the greater part of his senatorial life the ' Parliamentary History ' contains comparatively few of his speeches, because the prohibition against reporters was rigidly eni'orced. But those which have been by other means given to the world amply confirm the general opinion of their elegance and effectiveness, and justify the universal admiration which they eUoited. His contests with his old antagonist m the House of Commons, the Earl of Chatham, were renewed with even more virulence than formerly, and when they were expected to occur were attended by crowds desirous of witnessing the gladiatorial exhibition. Though he was as often the victor as the vanquished in these trials of strength, it would have been better for his fame if he had more strictly confined himself to ju dicial questions. However transcendent his talents, political controversy should be avoided by a j udge, whose decisions should never be subjected to the suspicion even of political bias. The last intended display between the two combatants was on the subject of the American war in 1778, but was prevented by the fatal seizure of the great statesman at the commencement of his address. Though several times pressed to accept the office of lord chancellor, he persisted in his refusal to change his court, from his love of the position he held and his con scious aptitude for his duties, as well as from the uncertainty attendant on the possession of the Great Seal. Soon after he became chief justice he by virtue of that office re ceived the seal of chanceUor of the Ex chequer during the three months' vacancy occasioned by the removal of Sir. Legge, but he performed no other than its formal duties, and ten years after he again temporarily held that office on the death of the Hon. Charles Townshend. On the establishment of the joint minista-y of Mr. Pitt and the Duke of Newcastle in 1757, the coalition between whom he was the prmcipal instru ment in effecting, he consented to become, with questionable propriety, one of the cabinet council. He remained so for some years ; and this was no doubt the cause of the unpopularity under which he laboured in the early part ofthe reign of George HI. — an unpopularity which was not diminished by the suspicion that he was the secret ad viser of Ms sovereign, by his contmued de fence of mmisterial measures m the House 472 MUREAY of Lords, and by his acting subsequently for a long period as speaker of that assembly — an unpopularity which was kept alive and greatly increased by the virulent attacks made against him by Junius, which con tinued till that bold, powerful, and impudent writer was in 1772, by means yet unkno-wn, effectually silenced. Yet during the whole period his fame as a great magistrate was spreading over the whole of Europe as well as in his own country ; and there even the populace might have seen his disregard of political influence, in his affirmation of the verdict against those who had illegally acted under the general warrant against the ' North Briton,' and iu his reversal of the outlawry of the demagogue Wilkes, its dis reputable author. Though assailed with abuse, lampoons, and personal threats, the most uncharitable of his libellers could not but be impressed by the noble and dignified speech made by him on granting that reversal. His liberal opinions on the subject of re ligion, and the principles of toleration which he advocated in all cases in which the question arose, whether relating to Dis senters or Roman Catholics, while they raised him in the estimation of the honest and well-disposed, had a contrary efl'ect on the bigoted class of society, by whom the old story of his beiug a Jacobite was re vived, with the additional stigma of his being a Jesuit in disguise. The sad effect of these mistaken notions appeared in the disgraceful No Popery riots of 1780, in which he was not only personally attacked and insulted, but his house in Bloomsbury Square, contaming his valuable library, was burnt down to the ground by the mob. Nothmg more tended than his conduct on that occasion to estabUsh his character, and to dissipate and overcome the prejudices against him, which some men still continued to foster. The courage also which he dis played when the houses of parliament were threatened, the philosophic calmness with which he met his personal calamity, his generous justification of ministers in calling in the military to quell the riots, and par ticularly his impartiaUty and total absence of resentment in the trial of Lord Georo-e Gordon, whose violent harangues had firat evoked the outbreak, excited universal ad miration, and increased the respect with which he was regarded. For six years after this event he continued to exercise, almost without a day's inter mission, the functions of his hio-h office -when, being then eighty-one years of age' his weakness and infirmity prevented him attending the court. He did not imme diately resign, but, with the expectation of being enabled still to act, he delayed his re tirement for nearly two years, leaving a most efficient substitute to perform his duties. This was Mr. Justice Buller, whom he hoped MUSAED to see, and endeavoured to induce the mi nister to appomt, his successor. But when he found that Mr. Pitt had determined otherwise, and that his declining strength totally prevented him from again taking his seat, he closed, on June 4, 1788, a legal career which had extended over fifty-eight years, twenty-six as an advocate, and thirty- two as a judge, in both capacities achieving such a character as few can equal, and none -will ever surpass. Both branches of the profession expressed in affecting addresses their respect, their veneration, their attach ment to his person, and their regret at his retirement — sentiments in which the whole community united. The aged lord survived for nearly five years, enjoying Ufe at his beautiful seat at Caen Wood, near Highgate, in social and intellectual converse, and with unabated health and undecayed memory, but with increasing feebleness, till his exhausted frame at last gave way on March 20, 1793, havmg just entered the eighty-nmth year of his age. He was buried in Westminster Abbey, m the same grave as his -wife. Lady Elizabeth Fmch, daughter of the Earl of Winchilsea, whom he had married in 1788, and who, after a happy union of forty-six years, had preceded him by nine years. By the gratitude of one of those whom he had benefited b}- his advocacy a splendid monument was erected, the work of Flaxman, When he had gi-aced the seat of justice for twenty years, the Mng in 1776 re warded his judicial and poUtical serrices by creating him Earl of Mansfield in Not tinghamshire, a title which imder a special remainder is now enjoyed by a descendant, (Lives by Hallidmj, Burke, Welshy, Lord Campbell, and Roscoe.) MUSAED, Ralph, was the great-grand son of Hascoit Musai-d, a ;,baron who is recorded in Domesday Book as having large possessions in various counties. These were afterwards held by his son Richard, his grandson Hascoit, and then by this Ralph, who succeeded to them on the death of the latter. In 17 John he was appointed sheriff of Gloucester, an office which he retained till the end of 9 Henry HI. (Rot Pat 148 ; Rot Claus. i. 276, &c.) He adhered to King John during all his troubles, as is evident from the grante which were made to him out of the for feited lands. Under Henry IIL he was several times from the fifth to the eleventh year appointed a justice itinerant for va- riotis counties. (Rot Claus. i. 274, ii. 151, 208, 218.) He married Isabella, the widow of John de Neville, without licence of the king, whose pardon he procured by a fine of one hundred marks. It would seem that she must have been his second wife, inasmuch MUSCHAMPE as on his death, only ten years afterwards, in 14 Henry IIL, Robert, his son, was of fuU age, and entered on some of Ms father's lands. (Exeiei-pt eRot Fin. i. 43, 198, 203,) The male Une of the family failed in 1300, 29 Edward I. (Baronage, 'i. 612,) MUSCHAMPE, Cheistophee, the third son of WilUam Muschampe, of Camber- weU, Surrey, by his second wife, Elizabeth, daughter of Richard Sandes and reUot of Richard Mimes, is another of the barons of the Exchequer of whom little is told, ex cept that his patent of appointment is dated November 8, 1677, and that he was buried at Carshalton in Surrey on June 4, 1679, thus making his tenure of office only about nmeteen months. By his wife Dennys he had several sons. (Manning and Bray's Surrey, iii. 414.) MUTFOED, John de, of a knightly family settled in the parish of that name in Suff'olk, m pursmng the profession of the law, arrived at that eminence to be engaged in conducting the king's causes in 22 and 30 Edward I, Although it does not appear that the office of attorney- general was then established m a separate individual, an entry on the Rolls of Par Uament (i, 197) in 36 Edward I., in which John de Mutford is directed to be called before the treasurer nnd barons of the Ex chequer, to inform them of the king's right NAEES 473 m the matter of a petition then presented, seems to show that his duties were very similar to those now performed by that officer. In that same year (the last of the king) he was appointed one of the justices of trailbaston to act in Comwall and nine other counties, (Rot. ParL i, 218,) From the commencement of Edward II,'s reign he attended the parliament among the judges, and we find him on various occasions acting as a justice itme rant, and commanded to cause his pro ceedings to be estreated into the exchequer. In 5 Edward H, he was sent to Ireland as one of the commissioners to quiet the dis contents and disturbances there, and two years afterwards was summoned to appear before the council ready to proceed on the king's service to parts beyond the seas. After being in continual and active em ployment as a justice of assize, he was raised to the bench at Westmmster, being constituted a judge of the Common Pleas by patent, dated April'20, 1316, 9 Edward lI. In this court he continued to act during the remainder of the reign, and for the first three years of that of Edward HI,, the last fine acknowledged before him being dated in Hilary 1329, in which year he died and was buried in Norwich Ca thedral. (Ibid. 341-350 ; ParL Writs, ii. 1218 ; Blomefield's Norwich, ii. 39.) N HAEES, Geoege, This judge's father, who was for many years steward to the Earls of Abmgdoii, had two sons, both of whom became eminent in the professions they had selected. The elder was Dr. James Nares of musical celebrity, and the younger was Sir George Nares of legal fame, George was born at Hanwell in Middlesex in I7I6, and having been first sent to the school of Magdalen College, Oxford, was afterwards admitted into New CoUege. Becoming a student at the Inner Temple, he was called to the bar m 1741, His marriage in 1751 with Mary, daughter of Sir John Strange, master of the Rolls, is an indication of his early success in his profession. His practice seems to have been principally in the criminal courts, to judge from the speeches he made in de fence of Timothy Murphy, convicted of forgery m 1758, and of Elizabeth Cannmg, convicted of perjury in 1754. In 1769 he received the degree of the coif, and was made king's serjeant at the same time. From 1703 to 1770 he was engaged on the part of the crown in most of the cases arising out of the general war rant issued against the author, pubUsher, and printers of No, 46 of the ' North Bri ton ; ' and the unpopularity which he shared with all the opposers of Mr, Wilkes may perhaps account for Mr, Foote holding him up to ridicule under the character of Serjeant Circuit in his farcical comedy of the ' Lame Lover,' In May 1768 he was elected member for the city of Oxford, which soon after chose him its recorder. In the fourth session of that parliament he was appointed a judge of the Common Pleas on January 25, I77I, and was at the same time Imighted. After fiUing that honourable post -with great credit for more than fifteen years, he died at Ramsgate of a gradual decay, on July 20, 1786, and was buried at Eversley in Hampshire. His cheerfulness of disposi tion and pleasing manners endeared him to his contemporaries, enhanced as they were by the strict integrity of his life and his unaffected piety. Sfr George left several children, one of whom became regius professor of modern history in the university of Oxford. (Gent, Mag, Ivi. 622 ; State Tiials, xix. 451, 702, 1158; Hairis's Lord Hardwicke, iU, 349; Blackstone's Rep, 734.) 474 NEEDHAM NEEDHAM, J OHN, was the second son of Robert Needham, of Cravach, and Dorothy, daughter of Sir John Savage, K.G., of Clifton in Cheshire, from whose eldest son descended the present Earl of Kilmorey. John became common serjeant of London in 1449, and was elected member for that city in the parliament of the following year. He was called to the degree of the coif in 1458, and on July 13, 1454, was appointed one of the Mng's Serjeants. From that time his name appears in the Year Books, till he was advanced to the bench as a judge of the Common Pleas on May 9, 1457, 35 Henry VL On the deposition of that monarch, Edward IV. continued him in his place, and he was still there at the end of ten years, when Henry was restored in October 1470. It is a clear proof that at that time politics little influenced the legal appointments, since we find not only that he was included in Henry's new pa tent to the judges of the court, but that after Edward's return in the following April he was removed into the Court of King's Bench. His judgments are re corded as late as Hilary Term 1479. He was knighted by Henry VL, and Phillips (Grandeur ofthe Laiv [1684], 31) says that he had a seat at Shevington, or Sheinton, in Shropshire, and was chief justice of Chester. (Dugdale's Orig. 46 ; Rot. Pari. vi. 3, 167.) NEELE, Richaed, was a judge under five sovereigns, and was buried at Prest- would in Leicestershire, being described on his tomb as lord of that manor. He was a member of Gray's Inn, whence he was called serjeant in Michaelmas 1468, 3 Edward IV., and was made king's ser jeant in the next year. His first elevation to the judicial ermine was on the restora tion of Henry VL, when he was added to the other judges of the King's Bench ou October 9, 1470, Edward IV., on his re turn, did not degrade him, but removed him into the Court of Common Pleas on May 29, 1471, where he remained through the short reigns of Edward V. and Richard IIL, and for the first ten months of that of Henry VII. ; when he died. By his wife Isabella, daughter of — But ler, of Warrington in Lancashire, he left two sons, ( Y. B. ; Gough's Monum. ii. 294.) NEVILLE, Alan de (Nova-viUa), is mentioned as one of the ' assidentes justi- cias regis ' in the Exchequer in II Henry IL, 1165, before whom a charter was executed 'between the abbots of St. Alban's and Westminster ; and from 12 Henry II. for many years he filled the office of jus tice of the forests throughout all England. (Madov, i, 44, 144, &c.) According to Dugdale, he was the bro ther of Gilbert de Neville, of Lincolnshire, Rutland, and Oxfordshire, but with some NEVILLE confusion as to the latter. He held the forest of Savernao in Wiltshire, and was one of those lords of the council who, for the energy of their measures in support of the king against Becket, were excommunicated in 1166 ; but he afterwards received abso lution from Gilbert Foliot, Bishop of Lon don, on condition that he should go to Rome and submit himself to the pope. He died m 2 Richard I., leavmg two sons, the under-mentioned Alan, and Geofirey. (Dug dale's Baron, i. 287.) NE-yiLLE, Alan de. Junior, was em ployed as a justice itinerant during his lather's Ufe, being so called in the Great Rolls, wMch mention his pleas in twelve counties from 16 to 26 Henry IL, II70- 1179, He seems to have acted also as justice of the forest, perhaps as deputy to Ms father. This office was afterwards possessed by several members of the fanuly; but the account wMch Dugdale gives is too indistinct to decide on the precise relation ship they bore to this justicier. (Madox, i. 133, 144, &c. ; Baronage, ut supra.) NE'VILLE, Geofeeby de, the yoimger brother of the under-mentioned Robert de Neville, of Raby, was in 64 Henry HI., 1270, appomted govemor of Scarborough Castle, and succeeded his brother as warden of the king's forests beyond Trent (Cal Rot. Pat, 42), bemg in that year at the head of th^ justices itinerant for pleas of the forest in the northern counties. In 8 Edward 1, 1280, also, he sat at BUthworth m Not tinghamshire, concermng forest matters, (Thoroton, i. 178.) He died in 1285, leaving by his -wife, Margaret, the daughter and heir of Sfr John LongvUlers, of Hornby Castle in Lancashire, a son named John, the father of a long Une settled at that place. (Baronage, i. 291.) NE-yiLLE,. JoLLAsr DB, and Ms elder brother, John, are called by Dugdale (Baronage, i. 288) the grandsons of Ralph de Neville, the founder of the priory of Hoton in Yorkshire, and the sous of Hugh de Neville, whose prowess m slaymg a Uon in the Holy Land was recorded in tMs verse: Viribus Hugonis "vires periere leonis. By the entries on the rolls, however, it is manifest that they were the sons of another JoUan, who perhaps was the son of that Hugh, as he had livery of his property in I John, which Dugdale fixes as the date of Hugh's death. This last-mentioned JoUan, the father, was connected with the Exche quer, the Rot. de Oblatis of 2 and 7 John containing entries that evidence his employ-> ment. He died in 9 John, leaving two sons, John and this JoUan, who on John's death without issue in 4 Henry III, suc ceeded to his property, (Rot. aaus. i, 409, 490, ii, 43.) He appears as a justice itine- ra,nt in 1284, and again in 1240. But fi-om NEVILLE Michaelmas 1241 to HUary 1245 he was present when flnes were levied (DugdaWs Orig. 43), and during the latter interval there are several instances of payments being made for writs of assize of novel disseisin to be taken before him (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. i, 418-426), plainly provmg that he was then one of the superior justices at Westminster. He died in the next year. The ancient record . m the Exchequer, caUed ' Testa de Neville,' containing an ac count of the king's fees throughout a great part of England, with inquisitions of lands escheated and lands held in grand or petit serjeanty, is traditionally reported to have received its name from, and to have owed its existence to, JoUan de Neville ; and he is generaUy spoken of as the justice itine rant, A question, however, may be fairly raised, whether this celebrated MS. is the work of the father or of the son, Dugdale and other genealogists were evidently igno rant that there were two of the same name ; and, adverting to the fact that the father was an officer in the Exchequer, it seems more Ukely that he should have made such a compilation than the son, of whom there is no proof that he ever was connected vrith that department, and who, neither in his capacity of justice itinerant, nor in that of justicier, which he held only for the last four years of his life, would be called upon to pay any peculiar attention to the king's revenue. NE'VILLE, Ralph de (Bishop oe Chi chestbe), m a MS, account of his Ufe in the chapter-books of the cathedral of Chichester is stated to have been born at Raby Castle, the seat of the baronial family of De Neville, in the county of Durham, He is entered on the Patent Roll of 16 John as having had ' the Great Seal deli vered to him on the 22nd of December, 1213, to be held under the Bishop of Wm chester,' Peter de Rupibus, then the chan cellor, and certainly was not, as some state, chancellor during John's reign. Several churches were successively given to Mm about this time, and in April 1214 he was appomted dean of Lichfleld, (Rot, Pat. 113,) On the accession of Henry III., Sir T, D, Hardy has inserted Ralph de Neville's name as keeper of the Seal imder Richard de Marisco, referring to several original letters ¦written between the years 1218 and 1222, ad dressed to him as the king's vice-chancellor, and relating to his custody of the Seal, It is difficult to ascertain precisely what were the duties which he performed. Richard de Marisco was absent from England in 6 Hemy IH., 1221, and it is probable that his duties as chancellor were then performed by Ralph de Neville, There is a curious letter from the chancellor to Mm given in Lord Campbell's work (i. 127), which, re monstrating for his suppression of the title NEVILLE 475 of chancellor in the letters he had addressed to him, shows that the old man was some what apprehensive of being superseded by his disrespectful deputy. In 1222 he was appointed chancellor of Chichester, and on November I m the fol lowing year he was elected bishop of that see. In 1224 he sat as a justicier in Shrop shire with WiUiam de lioubrug. (Excerpt. e Rot Fin. i. 122.) Cn the death of Richard de Marisco on May 1, 1226, the chancellorship became vacant. Although the date assigned by Dugdale and other -writers to Ralph de Neville's appointment as chanceUor is not tiU February 12, 1227, it is quite clear that his elevation occurred shortly after Richard de Marisco's death. In the grant to him of a market at Preston in Sussex, dated June 28, 1226 (Rot Claus. ii, 113), he is expressly designated by that title; and there are charters under his hand in the foUovring December. (Rymer, i. 188-4.) The date of February 12, 1227, was that of the charter which he subsequently received, granting to him the Chancery for his life, a charter which was renewed in 13, 16, and 17 Henry III. There is also another charter,' dated June 14, 16 Henry IH., grantmg to him the custody of the Great Seal during his life, and enabling him to appoint a deputy. No cause is apparent for these renewals, and it is difficult to account for them otherwise than by his apprehensions lest the disgrace of Hubert de Burgh, which occurred about that time, might operate to his disadvantage, as there is no doubt he was chanceUor during the whole period, and no want of the royal confidence had as yet been exhi bited. On the contrary, he had been further gratified with the chancellorship of Ireland for life, G. de Turville being appointed to act as his deputy there, (Ihid. i. 212,) On the death of Richard Weathershed, Archbishop of Canterbury, in 1281, Ralph de Neville was elected by the monks as his successor, and, being approved by the king, was admitted into the temporalities. The pope, however, at the instigation of Simon de Langton that he was unlearned and hasty, and would endeavour to .shake off the papal yoke, refused to confirm the elec tion. It is on the other hand stated that the bishop himself objected to assume the primacy, and that when appUed to by the monks for the expenses of their journey to Rome, he declared that he would not con tribute ' obolum unum ' for the purpose. In 1233 he was 'with the king when he was surprised and defeated by the Earl of Pembroke before the castle of Grosmont in Monmouthshire, and was one of those who escaped 'midi fugientes omnia quae sua erant amiserunt.' (R. de Wendover, iv. 227,279.) Hitherto Ralph de NeviUe had contmued 476 NEVILLE high m the king's confldence ; but on the arrival of the queen's uncle, WiUiam of Provence, Bishop of Valence, all the royal favours were bestowed on the foreign pre late and his connections. No doubt the chancellor joined in the dissatisfaction ex pressed by the barons ; and Matthew Paris relates that the Mng attempted, in 1286, to remove Mm from the chancellorship. De pending on the support of the barons, and conscious of their approval of his conduct in his office, he at once refused to resign, aUeging that he had been entrusted with the office b3^i the parUament, and could not quit it without their authority. But the royal indignation against him was_grea,tly increased two years afterwards by his being elected Bishop of Winchester, where the king had earnestly desired to place his favoured relative. Henry not only induced the pope to annul the election, but took away the Great Seal from the bishop, and committed it to the custody of Geoifrey the Templar and John de Lexinton, reserving, however, to the bishop as chancellor the pro fits of the office. Matthew Paris adds that the king afterwards endeavoured to induce him to resume the Seal, and on his refusal placed it in the hands of Simon the Norman. It was not tUl 1242 that Ralph de Neville was restored to the king's favour, from which year till his death there are several docu ments to which his name is attached with the title of chancellor. (Rymer, i. 244, 263,) That event occurred on February 1, 1244, at the magniflcent mansion he had erected for the residence of himself and his suc cessors. Bishops of Chichester, while in London. This house was situate ' in vico novo ante Novum Templum ' (Rot. Claus. i. 107), now called Chancery Lane, and, be coming afterwards the hospitium or inn of the Earls of Lincoln, was ultimately trans ferred to the students of the law, and is still designated by the name of its last possessor. The memory of the original founder is preserved in the name of the lane, corrupted from Chancellor's Lane, and in that part ofthe estate which alone remains to the see, and is now called Chichester Rents, That Ralph de Neville was an ambitious man none can deny ; that he accumulated vast riches is equally certain ; but that he misused the one, or that the other led him into degrading courses, there is no evidence. On the contrary, the highest character is given him by contemporary historians, not only for his fidelity to his sovereign in times of severe trial, but for the able and irre proachable administration of his office. He was as accessible to the poor as to the rich, and dealt equal justice to all. To his church he was a signal benefactor, defending its rights on many occasions, obtaining various grants for its benefit, devoting large sums to the repairs of the NEVILL cathedral, increasing the endowmente of the dean and chapter, and bequeathing to his successors the estate he had purchased and the palace he had erected in London, (Godwin, 504 ; Angl. Sac. i, 488 ; Le Neve; Dugdale's Orig. 231,) NEVILLE, Robeet de, was a clerk m the Exchequer; and in' 15 John he coun tersigned a mandate on the part of Richard de Marisco, to whom, in 18 John, he had a letter of safe conduct to go and retum, no doubt on the business of his office. Another charter is also countersigned by him m 3 Henry III. Madox gives the copy of a fine taken before him in the King's Court at Westminster in the latter year, m which he is designated as a justicier. He was, as was then usual with the officers of the Ex chequer, an ecclesiastic, and in 16 John had letters patent of presentation to the church of Wigborough in the diocese of London, He died about 1229. (Rot Claus. i. 137, 883; Rot Pat 129, 198; Madox, ii. 43; Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. i. 190.) NEVILLE, Robeet de, was of the noble house of Raby, bemg the son of Geoffrey de Ne-vUle, whose father, Robert Fitz-Maldred, lord of fRaby, married Isabel, the daughter, and ultimately the heir of the first Geoffiey de NeviUe. Robert de NeviUe had Uvery of his grandfather's lands in 38 Henry HI., paying, besides Ms fine to the king, a sum of 15/. 6s. 3d. to the queen, m the nature probably of aurum regmae. (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. ii. 186.) In 45 Henry IH, he was made warden of the king's foreste beyond Trent, and in the next year, 1262, was at the head of the justices itmerant for the northern counties, the pleas, however, being confined to the forests. He then was ap.- pointed captain-general of the Mng's forces in those parts, sheriff of Yorkshire, and govemor of the castles of York and Derizes, Although he for a time joined the rebellious barons, he contrived to regain the royal favom-, and was afterwards entrusted vrith the custody of the castles of Pickering and Bamburgh. He died in 1282, ha-ring had, by his wife Ida, the widow of Roger Ber tram, a son, two of whose representatives now sit in the House of Lords as Earls of Abergavenny and Westmoreland, (Baron age, i. 291 ; Nicolas's Synopsis.) NEVILL, Richaed (Eael oe Salis- nuEv), the only lay chaucellor in the reign of Henry VL, was one of the twenty-two children of Ral{)h NeviU, the first Earl of Westmoreland, That nobleman married two wives, by the flrst of whom he had two sons, the elder succeeding to his honom-s. The second wife was Joane, daughter of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, by Cathe rine Swinford. She produced him eight sons, of whom the eldest was this Richard Nevill, born about 1400. He married Alice, the only daughter of NEVILL Thomas de Montacute, Earl of SaUsbuiy, and upon the death of her father in 1428, had a grant of the title for his Ufe. En gaged from his earUest youth m the pro fession of arms, he had served with con siderable personal distinction in the French wars ; so that the appomtment of so inex perienced a person as chancellor, at a period when legal and statesmanlike attainments were required for the execution of ite duties, could not fail to excite wonder. It was in fact a mere political proceeding, and arose thus : — When the late chancellor. Arch bishop Kempe, died on March 22, 1454, the kingwas affiicted with one of those sicknesses to which he was subject, and which rendered him altogether incompetent to attend to the affafrs of government. The parliament accordingly a few days afterwards named Richard Duke of York protector of he kingdom, one of whose flrst acts was to in vest the earl with the office of chancellor, m wMch character he is named in an ordi nance dated March 30 (Rot. Pari. v. 450), but the Great Seal was not delivered to him till April 2. It was a curious com mencement of his judicial career, that on the next day he, with four other lords, was appointed to ' entende with all diligence to them possible, to the saufgarde and kepyng of the see,' for the resistance of the king's enemies. (Ihid. 144.) His tenure of office was very short, and was undistinguished by any important inci dent. On the king's recovery no time was lost in removing the protector and his chan ceUor, the successor of the latter being sworn in on March 7, 1456. Then commenced the civil war, and in less than three months the flrst battle of St. Albans was fought, in which the Duke of Somerset was killed ; and the king, being defeated and left in the Duke of York's power, was compelled. to pardon all the rebels, among whom was the Earl of Salis bury, At the end, however, of the miser able events of the succeeding years, the duke was defeated and killed in the battle of Wakefield on December 30, 1460, and the earl himself taken aud beheaded the next day at Pontefract. His eldest son, Ri chard, the famous Earl of Warwick, suc ceeded in placing th'e duke's son on the throne by the name of Edward IV., and Ms youngest son George became the next-men tioned chancellor of England, (Baronage, i, 302.) NEVILL, Geoege (Aechbishop oe York), was the youngest son of the above Richard Earl of SaUsbury, and, being de signed for the Chm-ch, was educated at BaUiol College, Oxford, of which university he was afterwards chancellor. One of the first acts of the council, after his father's atceptance of the Seals, was to recommend him to the first vacant bishopric, although NEVILL 477 he was not yet twenty-two years of age. The bishopric of Exeter became void before the close of the following year, and though the earl had been removed from the chan cellorship, he and his son Richard Earl of War-wick had such ascendency that George Nevill was elected (Rymer, xi. 376) ; but the pope would not permit him to be con secrated till he had attained the age of twenty-seven. He presided over that diocese about nine years, during which there is nothing to show that he took any active part in the unhappy contests vrith the crown until the fatal battle of Northampton had placed the king in the hands of his enemies, who, taking care to have their friends about him, obUged him to nominate Bishop Nevill as his chancellor. Accordingly on July 25, 1460, fifteen days after the battle, he re ceived the Seal, and took it home to his house m St. Clement Danes, being that which was afterwards called Essex House, on the site of which Essex Street and De- vereux Court now stand. In the next parUament the Duke of York openly claimed the crown; an Ulusory compro mise was arranged ; the civil "war again broke out, resulting in the death of the claimant, and the momentary triumph of the royaUste m the fields of 'Wakefield and St. Albans ; but succeeded -within five days by the successful entry of the Earl of Warwick into London, and in less than a fortnight by the proclamation, on March 4, 1461, of Edward, the duke's son, as Mng. Six days after this event the bishop took the oath as chancellor to Edward IV. (Rymer, xi. 478.) For the next six years he uninterruptedly retained the Great Seal, during which, in 1466, he was raised to the archbishopric of York. A cooMess had already commenced between King Edward and the NeviUs, arising from the precipi tancy -with which the relatives of the new queen were advanced, and the jealousy created by their sudden rise, and by the powerful influence they acquired. This feeling became more apparent by the Earl of Warwick's resistance to the marriage of Margaret, the king's sister, to Charles, the son of the Duke of Burgundy, which the WydeviUes had suggested ; and the earl was further disgusted by being sent to negotiate a pretended treaty for a union with one of the French princes, which he soon found was never intended to be effected. During the earl's absence in France a parUament was held, from which for the first time the chancellor absented himself. Five days afterwards, June 8, 1467, the king went to his house and demanded the Great Seal. The act of resumption, how ever, passed in this parliament, excepted all the grants which had been made to NeviU. (Rot Pari v. 671,604, 607.) In 478 NEVILL the course of the next year he was instru mental in promoting a reconcUiation be tween his brother the earl and the Mng, and for his good services therein he was rewarded with the manor of Penley and other lands in the counties of Hertford and Buckmgham, (Rymer, xi. 640,) TMs reconciliation could scarcely be ex pected to be permanent. In disohedience to the king, Warwick soon after gave his daughter in marriage to the Duke of Clarence, the king's brother, and the arch bishop accompanied them to Calais to solemnise the nuptials. Thus united to the duke, the Warwick faction, taking advantage of a rising soon after under Robin of Redesdale in Yorkshire, vented its animosity against the WydeviUes by ex ecuting the queen's father and brother, and proceeded with such spirit that King Edward, in 1469, found himself a prisoner to the duke, the earl, and the archbishop at OMey (Oundle), and was therefore placed for security in the custody of the latter at Middleham. How the Mng obtamed his release from confinement is somewhat doubtful ; but the better opinion seems to be that it was with the consent of Warvrick, who proved that he had not yet caist off his allegiance to Edward by attacking and defeating Sir Humphrey NeviU on his raising the standard for King Henry, The archbishop, who had treated the king -with the greatest courtesy during his detention, accompanied him to London, where the king issued a general pardon to all concerned in the outbreak. Apparently restored to favour, the arch bishop had invited the Mng, in the follow mg February, 1470, to meet Clarence and Warwick at an entertainment at the Moor in Hertfordshire ; but a hmt, whether true or false is uncertain, being whispered in the royal ear that treachery was intended, the king revived the dissensions by secretly departing from the house. Though peace for the moment was -with difficulty re stored, Clarence and War-wick soon flew to arms, and eventually restored King Henry to the throne, from which they had assisted in expelling him ten years before. That Archbishop Nevill, as was natural under the ministry of his powerful brother, was restored to his former office of chan cellor there is no doubt ; for, though the record of his appointment does not exist, his name appears with that designation in three several documents, dated respectively December 20, 1470, and February 13 and 16, 1471. (Rymer, xi. 672, 681, 692.) He was also rewarded with the grant of the manors of Wodestoke, Ilang'burgh, Wot ton, and Stonefleld, and the hundred of Wotton for life, But even these favours could not make him more faithful to his brother Warwick than he had before NEVILL shown himself first to King Henry and^ then to King Edward, The latter soon re-appeared on the scene to reclaim the kmgdom ; and the city of London and the person of Henry being entrusted to the archbishop, Edward found means, by tempting the prelate's avarice or exciting his fears, to secure his treacherous assist ance. Edward marched to the capitel; where the recorder Urswyke, by the arcM bishop's order, admitted him on April 11 through a postem in thewaUs; and Henry, who had been purposely kept out of sanc tuary, became again the prisoner of his rival. Two days after, the archbishop, regardless of the ruin m which he in volved his brother, took the oath of fideUty to Edward on the Sacrament at St. Paul's Cross, and immediately received a fuU pardon for all offences he had previously committed. (Ibid. 709, 710.) It would seem, however, from a passage m a letter of Sir John Paston (Letters, U. 60), who fought for King Henry at Barnet on the next day, that the archbishop was then a prisoner in the Tower. This might perhaps have been done as a cover to his treason, the same letter mentioning that he was in possession of a pardon, or perhaps Edward could not trujt him at large when leavmg London on so momentous an expedition. The successful battles of Barnet and Tewkesbury, and the murders of King Henry and his sou, having secured the throne to Edward, that monarch took an early opportunity of getting rid of the archbishop, whose fideUty we cannot be surprised that he doubted. Under the mask of friendship he had agreed to hunt at the Moor with the prelate, who accord ingly prepared a magniflcent entertainment, embellished -with all the plate he possessed, besides much that he had borrowed to do honour to the occasion. But on the day before he was summoned to the Mng's pre sence, and immediately imprisoned on a pretended charge ; the riches which he had thus fooUshly exposed were confiscated, and the revenues of his bishopric seized into the Mng's hand. In the Ust of the plunder a magnificent mitre is mentioned, the jewels of which were so large and precious that they were appropriated by the Mng to form a cro-wn for himself. His confinement, which was sometimes in Calais and some times at Guisnes, lasted for about three years; but eventually, through the mter cession of his friends, he procured his re lease, and returned to England in December 1475, He did not long sur-vive his libera tion. Although only in the prime of life, he sunk under his disgrace ; and dymg at Blithlaw on June 8, 1476, was buried in Ms own cathedral without tomb or gravestone. He is spoken of as a patron of scientific men ; but no literary character can counter- NEVIL act the unfavourable sentence which every 'honest man must pronounce against him, on the manifest proofs which his life offers of fickleness, deceit, and treachery, ( Goel- win, 413, 693 ; Lingard; Drake's Eborac) NE'VIL, Edwaed, was the second son of Henry NevU, of Bathwick in Somersetshire, Admitted a member of Gray's Inn in 1650, he was called to the bar in 1668, and became an ancient m 1676, He received the honour of kmghthood m June 1681, when, as recorder of Bath, he presented the address of that corporation thanking Charles II, for his recent declaration. That Mng having raised him to the degree of the coif in January 1684, King James on his acces sion made Mm one of his seijeants, and on October 11, 1685, further promoted him to be a baron of the Exchequer. This seat he occupied only six months, being too honest to support the royal assumption of the ¦dispensing power. He accordingly received Ms quietus on April 21, 1686, and re mamed unemployed during the rest of the reign. But on the settlement of the courte by King WiUiam he was immediately re placed m his former position, and swoi-n m on March II, 1689. (2 Shower, 434; Luttrell, i, 97-509,) When interrogated by the parliament of 1689 he gave a detailed account of what took place previous to his discharge, (Pari. Hist V. 311,) In October 1691 Sir Edward was re moved from the Exchequer to the Court of Common Pleas, and on Kmg William's death was re-appointed to the same place by Queen Anne, under whom he sat for a little more than three years. He died at Hammersmith on August 8, 1705. He assisted in several of the state trials, and seems to have acted an honest and in dependent part on the bench. (State Trials, xi, and xii ; Luttrell, ii. 299, v. 680.) NE-WBALD, Geoeeeet db. Dugdale, by a misreading of the patent he quotes, states that on November 2, 1276, 4 Edward I., Geoffi'ey de Newbald was appointed one of the judges of the Common Pleas, the re cord plainly proving that he was merely constituted a justice to hold pleas in the liberties of the priory of Dunstable. He was soon removed "to a more important station, for on August 22, 1277, he was raised to the office of chancellor of the Exchequer, (Madox, U, 52, 62, 321.) He is recorded as attending the Court of Ex chequer as late as 9 Edward I. NE'WDIGATE, Richaed, was of a family of extreme antiquity, which derived its name from, or perhaps gave its name to, the town of Newdigate in Surrey, where its property was situated as early as the reign of Kmg John. The descendant of a younger branch was settled in the reign of EUzabeth at the manor of Arbuiy in Wai-- ¦ ne-w^digatE 479 wickshire, where Chief Justice Sir Edmund Anderson had erected a mansion, which thenceforward became the seat of the New- digates. The judge was the second son of Sir John Newdigate, and Anne, the daughter of Sir Edward Fitton, of Gaws- worth iu Cheshire, Bart., and on the death of his elder brother became inheritor of the estate. He was born on September 17, 1602, and after receiving his education at Trinity College, Oxford, was admitted a member of Gray's Inn. (Athen, Oxon. iv. 842,) He had considerable practice as an advocate in Chancery and on the circuits, and in 1644 was engaged by the state with Prynne and Bradshaw in the prosecution of Lord Mac guire and others for bemg concerned in the Irish massacres. In 1647 he was one of the counsel assigned for the defence of the eleven members against the charges made by General Fairfax and the army ( White loeke, 106, 269 ; State Trials, iv, 654, 868), which, however, having answered the pur pose for which they were brought, were dropped without trial. These employ ments, at least the former of them, Mr. Newdigate probably owed in some measm-e to his relationship to John Hampden, who was his second cousm, and to his connec tion vrith OUver Cromwell, whose aunt had married Hampden's father. Seven years after, on January 25, 1654, soon after Cromwell became protector, he was made a serjeant and sent the Home spring circmt, and on May 30 he accepted a seat on the Upper Bench. He is said to have been one of those lawyers who, when summoned before Cromwell and offered judgeships, declined to act under his com mission ; but on being answered by the protector, 'If you gentlemen of the long robe will not execute the law, my red coats shall,' they, dreading such an alterna tive, consented to serve, Newdigate soon showed that he would not be subservient to the ruling powers. On the trial of Colonel Halsey and others at York he directed the jury to acquit the prisoner, saying that though it was high treason to levy war against the king, no statute de clared it to be so for levymg war against the protector. This mode of interpreting the law was not Ukely to be satisfactory to Cromwell, and consequently Judge New digate was removed from the bench on May I, 1655, ' for not observing the pro tector's pleasure iu all Ms commands.' Godwin gives a somewhat different account. (Godioin, iv. 26, 179, 180; Wliitelocke, 691, 625.) By an entry in Biuton's Diary (U. 127) it appears that Newdigate resumed his practice at the bar, but the date of his restoration to the bench has been generally misrepresented. Because Whiteloeke does 480 NEWDIGATE not mention him again till May 1-5, 1659, it has been supposed tliat he was not re appointed till that time, the fact being for gotten that Richard Cromwell had just then been removed from the protectorship, and that the Long .ParUament had again seized the government. It thus became necessary to re-appoint the judges, whose commissions under Richard were of course void, and only one of the four then named by WMtelocke was a, new judge, while the other three had probably nothing more than new patents. With respect to New digate, it is certain that he was re-appointed before Michaelmas Term 1657, for his deci sions are recorded in Siderfin's Reports (ii. II) from that date to the restoration of the kino-, and, as these Reports commence with that term, he might have been replaced in his seat a long time before. Indeed, when Cromwell's reinvestiture in the office of protector took place on the 26th of the pre vious June, Newdigate attended the cere mony as one of the judges of the Upper Bench. ( Whiteloeke, 678 ; Burton, ii. 512.) It seems probable, therefore, that Crom weU's displeasure did not last long, and that, either from his family connections, or from his anxiety to supply the bench with respectable and independent judges, he allowed but a short time to elapse after Newdigate's removal before he restored him to his place. On the resignation of Chief Justice Glynne, the parliament advanced Newdi gate to the presidency of the Upper Bench on January 17, 1660. (WhUelocke, 629.) Siderfin reports (ii. 179) some of the cases that were heard before him as chief justice, and among them is that of Sir Robert Pye and another, who applied for their Habeas Corpus, having been imprisoned some time on suspicion of treason without prosecu tion. The court said they could not be denied bail, if the counsel for the common wealth would not proceed against them, ' for it is the birthright of every subject to be tryed accordmg to the law of the land.' In direct contradiction to this apparently authentic report, Ludlow (366) relates that Newdigate demanded of the counsel of the commonwealth what they had to say against the Habeas Corpus being granted, and on being answered that they had nothing to say against it, the judge, 'though no enemy to monarchy, yet ashamed to see them so unfaithful to their trust, repUed that if they had nothing to say, he had ; for that Sir Robert Pye being committed by an order of parliament, an inferior court could not discharge him.' A curious instance of the manner in which party prejudice will misrepresent a true narrative ! The Long ParUament being at last dis solved by its own act, preparations were NEWMAEEET made for the restoration of the monarchy, and the Convention Parliament was sum moned for AprU 26, 1660. Chief Justice Newdigate was returned for Tamworth — a plain proof of the sentiments he entertained, and that he felt that his judicial status no longer existed. Having only acted minis terially, and never having exhibited any political hostility, no sooner had Charles returned, than a writ w.is issued to the late chief justice to take upon him in a regular manner the degree of serjeant. (I Sider fin, 3.) Seventeen years after the Restoration, they who had known the Serjeant's worth and experienced his lenity were anxious that he should receive some further honour from the king m recognition of his loyalty. With that 'riew a baronetcy was conferred upon him on July 24, 1677, without fees ; but the good old man did not long enjoy the dignity, dying on October 14, 1678. He was buried under a splendid monument at Harefield m Middlesex, an ancient patri mony of the family. By his wife, Juliana, daughter of Sir Francis Leigh, of King's Newman, War wickshire, and sister of the Earl of CM chester, he had a large family. The male line failed in 1806 by the death of the celebrated Sir Roger Newdigate, the fifth baronet, without issue ; but the estetes devolved on the representatives of a female descendant, who adopted the family name, and they are now possessed by Charles Newdegate Newdegate, Esq., M.P. for North WarwickshU-e, (Wotton's Baronet. in. 618.) NE-WENHAM, Thomas de. There were two Newenhams who held office about the same time in the reign of Edward IH., being probably brothers. The one was John de Newenham, who was chamberlain of the Exchequer (Issue Roll, i. 255), and the other Thomas de Newenham, who was one of the senior clerks in the Chancery, The latter is mentioned in this character from 45 Edward IIL, 1871, to 15 Richard IL, 1891, during the whole of which period his name appears on the Parliament Rolls (ii. 308-iii. 284) as a receiver of petitions. On two occasions he was appointed with two others to hold the Great Seal during the absence of the chancellors in 1877 and 1.386. NE-WMAEKET, Adam de (Novo Mer- cato), held lands of the honor of TickhiU. He accompanied the king to Ireland in 12 John (Rot. de Prcestito, 187, &c.), but in 15 John he was imprisoned in Corff Castle, probably for implication with the barons, and gave his two sons, John and Adam, as hostages, who were released on the un dertaking of Saherus, Earl of Winchester, (Rot Pat 105.) That he succeeded in re- mo-vuig the suspicions against him may be NE-WTON presumed from his being in the next year appointed vrith three others and the sheriff of Yorkshire to take an assize of mort d'ancestor between two parties in that county. Under Henry HI, he was em ployed as a principal landed proprietor in collecting the quinzime in Yorkshire, and acted as a justice itinerant in 3, 9, 16, and 18 Henrv III. in various counties, (Rot, Claus. i. 203, 387, U. 77, 147,) NE-WTON, Richaed, the original name of whose family was Cradock, or Caradoc, is stated to have been the first to assume the name of Newton, His father was John Cradock, and his mother was Margaret, the daughter of Howell Moythe, of Castle Ordin and Fountam Gate ; or, as another pedigree says, Christiana Ley. He adopted the name of Newton before 3 Henry VL, 1424, as he was then summoned by that name to take the degree of serjeant-at-law. After that date he was apparently very fuUy em ployed, and in 1426 he acted as a justice errant in Pembrokeshire, (Rot, Pari. iv. 474.) On October 6, 1429, he was ap pointed one of the king's Serjeants, and having held that office, and filled the re sponsible position of recorder of Bristol, he was constituted a judge of the Common Pleas on November 8, 1438. He was raised to the head of that court on October 14, 1489, and he presided there for nearly nine years. The last fine acknowledged before him was iu November 1448, and Sir John Prisot was appointed in his place on June 16, 1449. (Dugdale's Orig. 46.) His death occurred between these two dates, and he was buried either in Bristol Cathedral or in the Wyke chapel of Yatton Church in Somersetshire. There are hand some monuments iu each, but neither has any arms or inscriptions left. Although the former, which has no effigy, has been' generally appropriated to the judge, the e-ridence in favour of the latter, which is ¦ adorned -with an effigy, seems the more weighty. The canopied altar-tomb in the cathedral of Bristol is in the style of the sixteenth century ; while that at Yatton, the figure on which undoubtedly represents a judge, and is peculiarly curious as exhi biting the first example of a collar of SS worn by a judge, is of the fifteenth, being the century in which Newton died. His vrife is represented with him ; and in the same church is a second monument of rather later date, -vrith the figures of another couple; and the tradition of the place is, that one is the tomb of Sir Richard Newton and his wife, and the other that of his son Sir John andhiswife. Anentrym the churchwardens' books tends to confirm this tradition. It acknowledges, under the date 1451, the receipt of 20s. 'de Domina de Wyke per manum J. Newton filii sui de legato Domini Ricardi Newton ad . ... NICHOLAS 481 campanae ;' and there is a further entry in the same year of the cost of re-casting and hanging the ' grete belle,' The Domina de 'Wyke is evidently the widow of Sir Richard, being so caUed from Uving at the manor-place of Wyke, which had been partly 'built by her husband, and was then and for some time afterwards m possession of the family. His decisions have no great weight in Westminster Hall, as he is reputed to have been a most unconscientious prerogative lawyer, his bias towards the rights of the crown rendering, wherever they are con cerned, a close examination of his judgments necessary. Different accounts are given of his matri monial connections. One says that he had two wives — the first being Emma, daughter of Sir Thomas Perrott, of Harleston and Yestlington ; and the second being Emmota, daughter of John Harvey, of London, (Nicholls's Leicestershire.) Another states that he had only one vrife, naming the first of the above two. Neither of these ac counts can be quite relied on, A pedigree in the British Museum gives him only one wife, Emmota, the daughter of John Her vey, of London. From him descended Sir John Newton (the last of the family), of Barr's Court, Bitton, Gloucestershire, who was advanced to the dignity of a baronet on August 16, 1660, a title which expired in 1743, (Wotton's Baronet, iii. 14-5, and ex inf of the Rev, H, T. EUacombe.) NICHOLAS, Robeet, is said by Anthony Wood to be of the same family with Sir Edward Nicholas, secretery of state to Charles I., and Dr. Matthew Nicholas, dean of St, Paul's, who were both bom at Winterbourn-Earles in Wiltehire. (Athen, Oxon, iii, 129.) He is described of All- canning in that county in his admission to the Inner Temple in I6I4. In 1640 he was elected member of the Long Parliament for the neighbouring borough of Devizes, and was an active manager of the impeach ment against Archbishop Laud. He treated the archbishop with most unseemly -riru- lence and insult, using such foul and gross language, and caUing him, among other opprobrious names, ' pandar to the whore of Babylon,' that the archbishop desired the Lords, ' if his crimes were such as he might not be used Uke au archbishop, yet that he might be used like a Christian ;' and they accordingly checked the member in his harangue. (State Trials, iv. 525, &c.) He gave another specimen of his harshness and intolerance in 1648 by stert- ing up when a member objected to Lord Goring being included among the delin quente, and saymg, ' What, Mr. Speaker, shall we spare the man who raised a second war more dangerous than the first, and cudgeUed us into aj treaty.? ' (Pari Hist II 482 NICHOLS iv. 1068.) Although Ms motion was nega tived, the Commons showed their liking to the man by making him a serjeant-at-law on October 30, 1648, and they very appro priately appointed him one of their assist ants on the king's trial. (Whiteloeke, 346, 366.) But, though his name is included in the act as one of the Mng's judges, he appears to have abstained from attending at the trial, (State Trials, iv. 1052.) On June I, 1649, he accepted the office of judge of the Upper Bench, and in April of the following year he and Chief Justice RoUe were much commended by the Com mons for settling the people's minds to the government by their charges to the grand jury on the Western Circuit. When Oliver Cromwell assumed the protectorate, Nicho las was removed from the Upper Bench into the Exchequer, and was sworn a baron in Hilary Term 1653-4, an appointment which he stiU held on the succession of Protector Richard in September 1658, when he was resworn. His next change was made by the Rump Parliament, who re stored him to his former place on the Upper Bench on January 17, 1659-60, ( White loeke, 405, 448, 693 ; !Exchequer Books.) Soon after the return of king Charles he obtained a pardon, but, being of the Rump Parliament, he was omitted from those Serjeants who were confirmed in their degree. (CaL State Papers [1660], 283.) NICHOLS, AuGtrsTiNE, of an old and re spectable Northamptonshire family, was the second son of Thomas Nichols, Esq., of Hard-wick in that county, and Anne, the daughter of John Pell, Esq., of Eltington, Born at Ecton in 1569, he entered as a student of the Middle Temple, in which he became reader in 1602. In ihe following January he received a writ summoning Mm to take the degree of the coif, which in consequence of the death of Queen Eliza beth was renewed by King James, by whom he was knighted. He was elected recorder of Leicester in 1603, and his argu ments in Westminster Hall are reported till, on November 26, I6I2, he was elevated to the bench as a judge of the Common Pleas, On being appointed chancellor to Charles Prince of Wales it became neces sary for Mm to have a renewal of his patent, in order that he might ' take fee and livery of the prince,' the usual oath prohibiting a judge from being paid by any but the Mng himself. (Dugdale's Orig. 219 ; Croke, Jac. Prom.) He died at Kendal in August 1616, while on the summer circuit: 'judex mortuus est, jura dans,' as Fuller describes him. He was buried there, and has fair monuments both in that church and in his own church at Foxton, both vrith the same epitaph. King James commonly called him ' the judge that would give no money ; ' and NIfJEL Fuller ( Worthies, ii, 163) speaks glowingly of his character. He married Mary, the widow of Edward Bagshaw, Esq. ; but, having no children by her, his estate at Foxton in Northampton shire devolved on his brother's son Francia, who was created a baronet in 1641, but the title failed in 1717, NIGEL (Bishop oe Ely) was the nephew of Roger, Bishop of Salisbury, the great j usticiary of Henry I, The influence of that prelate procured for him, flrst, the office of treasurer of England, and next, the bi shopric of Ely, to which see he was elected in May II33. On the death of King Henry, historians differ as to the part he took in the usurpa tion of Stephen. There is little doubt, however, that the Mng suspected Ms fide lity, and that, though for a short time at the beginning of that reign he was con tinued in the office of ti-easurer, his deten tion was intended when his uncle Roger, and his cousin Alexander, Bishop of Lin coln, were seized at the council of Oxford in IL39. His escape to the castle of Derizes, and his refusal to deUver it mto the Mng's hands until his uncle had been subjected to three days' fast, are related in the account of Roger, Bishop of Salisbury. Nigel's suspension or ejection from his bishopric for several years was the consequence of his resistance. With the accession of Henry H. his pros perity returned. He probably resumed the office of treasurer until he purchased it for his son Richard, whom Alexander Swere- ford describes as his successor. That at an early period he held a Mgh judicial posi tion appears from a -wi-it being directed in his name alone to the sheriff of Gloucester in which he is styled ' Baro de Scaccario,' (Madox, i. 209.) In 1165 Ms name stands the first of those before whom a chaiter or contract between the abbots of St. Alban's and Westminster was executed, in wMch they are described as ' assidentibus justiciis regis.' (Ibid. 44.) At this time Richard, . his reputed son, was treasurer, and is so called in the charter. This Richard, who was afterwards Bishop of Lincoln, is sup posed to have been the author of that valu able ' Dialogus de Scaccario ' which Madox has printed at the end of his 'History of the Exchequer.' In that work a high character- is given of Nigel, as most learned in his office, representing him as having an in comparable knowledge of the busmess of the Exchequer, and as restoring the science and renewing the forms which had been almost lost in the struggles of the preceding reign. It adds also that his suggestions for the raising of money were distinguished for their mildness, (Ibid. U, 387, 388.) Hardy introduces his name in his Cata logue of Chancellors immediately following NOEL that of Geofln-ey Plantagenet, This, how- ¦ever, could not be the case, as Nigel was dead before Geoffrey was chancellor, and it would seem that his mtroduction at all as chanceUor is founded on a mistake m transcribing the charter wMch is the only ¦authority brought forward. For three years before his death, which happened in May II69, he was afflicted with paralysis. His public cares are stated to nave rendered Mm inattentive to his pas toral duties ; but that he did not altogether ¦disregard them is proved by his foundation ¦of a hospital for regular canons at Cam bridge on the site where St. John's CoUege now stends. (Ibid. i. 56, 78 : AngL Sac i. 618 ; Godwin, 250, 840.) NOEL, William, was a descendant of the noble family of Noel, the ancestor of which came into England with the Con queror, and was amply rewarded. One of his representatives became Earl of Gains borough in 1682, a title which became ¦extinct in 1792 ; another was made a baronet in 1660; and the judge was the second son of Sir John Noel the fourth baronet, by his -wife Mary, daughter of Sir John Clobery, of Winchestead and Bridstope in Devon shire, knight. He was bom in 1696, and educated in the grammar school of Lichfield, Entering the Inner Temple, he took the degree of bar- a-ister in June 1721, and having been chosen recorder of Stamford, he was elected mem ber for that borough in 1722. In 1747 and 1764 he was retumed for the Cornish borough of West Looe. The ' Parliamentary History' gives no examples of his senatorial labours, and the Reports record very few of his forensic ones. He was nominated king's counsel in 1738, and on the trial of Lord Lovat m 1746 he was one of the managers for the House of Commons, and made a short speech in answer to some of the accused lord's objections. (State Trials, xviii, 817.) He received the post of chief j ustice of Chester in 1749, wMch he retained when he was appointed a judge in West minster Hall, The latter elevation he owed to the patronage of Lord Hardwicke, who, even after he had resigned the Great Seal, appUed to the king on his behalf, (Har ris's Life, iii. 111.) Mr. Noel was accord ingly constituted a judge of the Common Pleas in March 1757, and continued m that court till his death on December 8, 1762. Horace Walpole calls him ' a pompous man of little solidity;' aud the satirical author of the ' Causidicade ' seems to regard Mm in the same light. By Ms wife EUzabeth, daughter of Sir Thomas Trollope, Bart., he left only four daughters, (ColUns's Peerage,vi.211; Wot ton's Baronet, iii. 91.) NOEFOLK, Eael OF. -See Rogee Bigot. NOEMANDY, Dhke of. See Henet. NOETH 483 NOEMANNUS, or DE CANTILUPE, Simon, was a great favourite of Kmg Henry HL, who gave him the archdeaconry of Nor wich, and on the disgrace of Ralph de Ne-rille, the chancellor, in 1238, placed the Great Seal m Ms hands. He did not, how ever, retain its custody very long, for in the next year he was dismissed from Ms office and expelled the court. He was also re moved from aU of his prefermente, except the archdeaconry, and the corn of Ms church of Rossington was seized, but he was afterwards allowed to redeem it on finding security for fifty marks. (Excerpt e Rot. Fin. i. 350; Ahb. Rot Orig. i. 8, 9.) The cause of his disgrace is represented io have been his refusal to seal a patent, granting to Thomas Earl of Flanders a tax of four- pence upon every sack of wool that was transported from England into his do minions. He died in 1249, (Philipot's Catal 18.) NOEMANVILL,THOMASDE,was of aYork-, shire family, of whom Gerard and Margery his wife, who were, perhaps, his parents, paid for an assize in that county in 53 Henry III., 1269. (Excerpt c Rot Fin. U. 491.) He is called ' senescaUus regis ' in the kmg's grant to him, m 4 Edward L, of the custody of the castle of Bamburgh ; and the title is contmued in numerous instances till the tenth year, when he was appointed to the same duties under the designation of king's escheator beyond Trent, He retained the latter office till the twenty- third year, except that he exchanged it for a short time for the southern esoheatorship, (Abb. Rot Orig. i. 26-88.) It was probably in this official capacity that in II Edward L, 1283, he received the king's commands to remove the sheriff of Cumberland, his commission for which, and Ms letters to the barons of the Exchequer communicating his having obeyed the order, are mentioned in the Year Book of that reign (fo. 12). He was one of the justices itinerant for pleas of the forest only in 1286, but his name appears as a regular justice itinerant in 1292 and 1293. He died in 1296. ( CaL Inquis. p. m. i. 12L) NOETH, Francis (Loed GiriLPOED),was of a family long connected with the law. Edward, the first Lord North of Kirtling, was king's serjeant under Henry VIIL, and married the vridow of Lord Chief Baron Sir David Brooke. His eldest son Roger married a daughter of Lord Chancellor Rich, and his second son Sir Thomas was of Lincoln's Inn in the time of Queen Mary. His grandson married the daughter of Sir Valentine Dale, master of the requests in Elizabeth's reign ; and the lord keeper now to be noticed was the second son of the fourth Lord North, by Anne, daughter of Sir Charles Montagu. He was bom on October 22, 1637. Bemg ii2 484 NOETH nearly thirty years old when his grandfather died, and his father having fourteen chil dren to provide for, his introduction into the world was necessarUy accompanied by a very limited provision. How he rose to the eminence he attained, and how he acted tMoughout his career, has been pleasantly told by Roger North, whose biography of his illustrious brother is the foundation of aU succeeding memoirs. The early poUtics of his father as a mem ber of the Long Parliament, and his subse quent disgust at its proceedings (for he was secluded by Pride's Purge), sufficiently ac count for the changes in Francis's education. It was commenced under the tutelage of one Mr. WiUis, a rigid Presbyterian, who kept a school at Isleworth ; he next was sent to Bury School, where Dr. Stevens the master was a cavalier ; and lastly he was matriculated at St. John's College, Cam bridge, in June 1653, At each he was a diligent student, and Ms advances in all M-anches of learning are particularly re corded. On November 27, 1665, he was removed to the Middle Temple, occupying the moietj'" of a petit-chamber which his father bought for him. His uncle, Mr. ChaUoner Chute, who died shortly after as speaker of Protector Richard's parliament of 1659, was then treasurer of the inn, and swept the admission-fee into the new stu- den-t's hat, saymg, ' Let this be a beginning of your getting money here.' With bis limited aUowance he was obliged to avoid the expensive practicesthen prevalent among his fellows, his principal relaxation being music, in which he was a great proficient. He used to say that if he had not had his base or lyra viol to divert himself alone, he had never been a lawyer. Knowing that he should be dependent on his profession, he pm-sued his studies with unremitting assiduity, yet not neglecting those sciences without some knowledge of which no one can become great in the law. After ac quiring some experience by keeping the courts of Ms grandfather and of other rela tions, he -was called to the bar on June 28, 1661, and began his practice in a chamber in Elm Court, soon having a fair share of business, and being lucky enough to recover for his college an estate, for which it had long had an unsuccessful litigation. Sir Geoffrey Palmer, the attomey-general, was his greatest patron and friend, not only directing his reading while a student, but encouraging his practice as a barrister, by gi vinghim_ junior briefsin state prosecutions, and sometimes even employing him as his substitute. Among other duties, the attor ney-general engaged him to argue for the crown before the House of Lords on the writ of error brought by the five members who had been convicted of a breach of the peace m holding the Speaker Finch down NOETH in his chair. Although unsuccessful, he so- pleased by his manner and reasonmg that' he was immediately made king's counsel, and thereupon, after a little demur by the- benchers on account of his youth, which subjected them to a rebuke by the court, he was called to the bench of the Middle Temple on June 5, 1668. On the Norfolk Circuit his success was greatly aided by his being placed as chairman on the commission- for dividing the Fens, and being constituted by Bishop Lane judge of the Isle of Ely. He was a favourite -with Chief Justice Hyde' and many others of the judges; and Chief Justice Hale, though prejudiced agamst him, had so good an opinion of his talents that, seemg him pushmg through the crowd' to get into the court, he called out to the people to ' make way for the little gentle man,' adding, ' for he -wUl soon make way for himself.' In May I67I he was selected to fill the office of solicitor-general, when he received the honour of knighthood. He soon after- estabUshed himself in the Comt of Chancery, havmg previously practised prmcipaUy in the King's Bench. TMs change of court was probably mfiuenced m a great measm-e by the appointment of Sir Matthew Hale as^ the head of the latter ; for it appears plainly that each had such a -riolent disUke to the other as was likely to lead to frequent con tentions. In the autumn foUowing he be came reader to his inn, when he took the Statute of Fmes for his subject His brother Roger records that the expense of his feasfa was 1000/. at least, the extravagance of which and of some other recent ones de terred others from continuing the practice, and from that time pubUc readings ceased. In March 1672 he married Lady Frances - Pope, a daughter of Thomas, third Earl of Down, Soon after he was returned to par liament for the borough of Lynn, and when hewas made attorney-general on November 12, 167.3, he was aUowed to keep his seat, no notice being taken of the disquaUfication. which the possession of that office was for merly deemed to impose. On January 23, 1675, Sir Frauds joyfully accepted the office of chief justice of the' Common Pleas, being already tired of the bustle and turmoil of his former place, al though the profits of it greatly exceeded those of the cMef justice, Ms brother repre senting the former as amounting to 7000/. a- year, while the latter did not exceed 4000i One of the first attempte of the new chief justice was to restore the proper business of the Common Pleas, which had been almost entirely diverted from that court to the King's Bench, by means of the ac etiam in serted in the writ of Latitat, In this he succeeded by a similar introduction in the Common Pleas writ, thus equalising the business of the two courts, to the manifest: NORTH benefit of the smtors in each. Soon after lie was appomted the ridiculous scene called the Dumb-day was enacted, the result of which satisfied the rebelUous Serjeants that their new cMef would not allow the court to be msulted vrith impumty. His brother enlarges on Sir Francis's labours to improve .the rules and regulate the practice of his ¦court, and there is no doubt that the chief ¦ deserved the praise of an able and honest admimstrator of justice, acting with exem plary prudence in party cases, neither show ing any bias towards either side, nor affect ing to conceal the loyal principles which ..guided him. The only exception that can be suggested is Ms conduct on the trial of Stephen CoUedge, when he refused to re- .store the papers provided for the prisoner's defence which had been forcibly taken from him. The judge's friendly biographer at tempts a justification, but in a lame and unsatisfactory manner ; and Bumet (ii, 284) ¦cautiously says that if the judge ' had lived to .see an impeaching parliament he might have felt the ill effects of it,' (State Trials, vU, 661,) For four years he enjoyed the quiet of a judicial life unbroken by the anxieties of poUtics. But iu 1679 he was joined to the newly-formed council of thirty, by whom the government of the country was to be administered, bemg selected as one of the members to coimterbalance those of the country or opposition party at the same time introduced. When that council was ¦dissolved Sir Francis was admitted into the cabinet ; and for advising and assisting the Attorney-General Levmz in the pre paration of the proclamation agamst tumul tuous petitions, by which the addresses of the so-called abhorrers were encouraged, the new parUament, -without hearing him, ordered an impeachment against him on November 24, 1680. The committee ap pointed to prepare it, however, must have found it no easy task, as they failed to produce it before the dissolution on Ja nuary 18, (ParL Hist. iv. 1229.) Having acquired the entire confidence of the Mng, ie became one of his majesty's chief ad visers, and during the last years of the Ufe -of Lord Chancellor Nottingham, who enter teined for him a smcere friendship, he was •of great assistance to his lordship in his iUnesses, and frequentiy acted for him as speaker of the House of Lords. On that nobleman's death there was no doubt as to Ms successor, and accordingly Sir Francis was made lord keeper on December 20, 1682, at the same time a pension of 2000/. .a year being added, according to the prac- .tice which had previously been adopted. The king ou presenting the Great Seal to liim accompanied the gift with this pro phetic warnmg : ' Here, take it, my lord, you wiU.finditlieav3',' the truth of which NOETH 485 was afterwards acknowledged by the reci pient, who declared that smce he had had the Seal he had not enjoyed one easy or contented minute. He held it as long as King Charles Uved, and under Kmg James till his own death ; and in less than a year after his appointment he was called to the peerage by the title of Baron Gmlford, on September 27, 1683, While lord keeper he devoted himself, as far as his leisure would permit Mm, to the correction of some of the abuses for which the Com-t of Chancery was even then no torious. But the period of his presidency was too short, for one so cautious in making innovations, to effect all the improvements he contemplated. He succeeded however in restraining unnecessary motions, too com monly made for the purpose of delay, and introduced many wholesome regulations that rendered the proceedmgs less expen sive and oppressive to the suitors. To Roger North's encomium of the justice of his decisions no substantial objection is found by other -wiiters, though party spirit vented some frivolous strictures at the time. During the latter part of his career, as well under the reign of Charles II. as after the accession of James IL, Sir George Jef freys exerted the utmost art and cunnmg to supplant him, seizing everj' opportunity to insult and entrap him, and using language the most coarse and contemptuous. But the reliance which both Mngs placed on his wisdom and his honesty foiled all such underhand endeavours ; and though it is probable that the lord keeper's disinclina tion to support James's encroachments on the constitution would have eventually oc casioned his removal, such a consummation was prevented by his death seven months after the close of Charles's reign. For the greatest part of that short period he was afllicted by ilMess, which at last obliged him to retire to his seat at Wroxton, where, after several weeks of suffering, he died on September 5, 1685. Both Lord Guilford aud his wife, who died some years before him, were buried in the vault of the Earls of Down in Wroxton Church. She brought him three sons and two daughters. His grandson, the third lord, was created in 1752 Earl of Guilford, having also, by the death of his cousin the sixth Lord North without children in 1784, succeeded to that barony. Both titles were held together tUl the death of the third carl m 1802 with only three daughters, between whom the barony of North remained m abeyance tUl 1841, when, two of them havmg died, it devolved upon the third, the present ba roness. Two of the last earl's brothers enjoyed the earldom successively, and upon the death of the last of them it descended to his cousin Francis, the grandson of the first earl, and son of Brownlow North, 486 NORTHAMPTON Bishop of Winchester, whose grandson, a minor, is its present possessor. Of the life and character of the lord keeper there are two leading biographers, neither to be entirely depended on. The one is Roger North, his afl'ectionate brother and constant companion, who, detailing every incident of his Ufe and recording his inmost feelings and thoughts, cannot speak of his actions but in terms of praise. The other is Lord Campbell, who, writing nearly two centuries after his death, and using precisely the same materials, speaks of him with all the bitterness of party prejudice, lidiculmg his respectability, sneering at his caution, disparaging his law, and in general giving a jaundiced colouring to his most worthy acts, evidently grudging the faint praise which he sometimes is obliged to 'bestow. A much fairer, and abler, sum mary of his character is given by Henry Roscoe in his ' Lives of Eminent British I..awyers' (p. 110). NOETHAMPTON, Henet de, was the son of Peter de Northampton, and is some times called Henry Fitz-Peter. He held the church of St. Peter at Northampton (Rot. Claus. i. 520), and was a canon of St. Paul's (Dugdale's Oiig. 21), preferments which he had probably received as an officer in the Exchequer. He acted as a justice itinerant in I Ri chard I, (Pipe !Roll, 69, 194), after which his name does not appear in a judicial cha racter till 4 John, 1202, in which year, and 10 John, fines were levied before him as a justicier both at Westminster and in the counti-y. In 6, 7, and 8 John he was joined with Robert de la Saucey in the sheriffalty of Northamptonshire (Rot. Pat 54) ; but in the troubles at the end of the reign he either sided with the barons, or was sus pected of doing so, for in November 1215 his lands and houses in Northampton were given away by the king, and in the follow ing March he had letters of protection, (Ibid 169.) He founded a hospital -within the pre- cincte of the cathedral church of St. Paul. (Monast. vi. 767.) _ NOETHBTJEG, WiLLiAM DE, is only men tioned as one of the justices appointed in 3 Edward I., 1275, to take assizes beyond the Trent,_and m 6 and 7 Edward I. as a jus tice itinerant in several counties, and again in that character at Lancaster in 23 Edward I., but apparently in reference to a plea of earlier date. (Abh. Rot. Orig. i. 02.) NOETHBTJEGH, RoGEE de (Bishop of Lichfield and Coventet), was early employed in the service o-f Edward IL, whom he accompanied to Scotland in 1314 as keeper of the royal sig-net (custos tar- gias), and -was taken prisoner with that in his possession at the bloody battle of Ban- I NORTH'WOLD nockburn, (Cent, of Trivet's Annals, u. 14;) In April I3I6 he was keeper of the ward robe, and in 1820 he was employed on a mission to Carlisle, to treat for a truce with the Scots. (Archeeologia, _ xxvi. 384.) On April 16, 1321, the Mng, in consequence of the chancellor's illness, delivered the Great Seal into his custody, as keeper of the wardrobe. It would appear that write were then sealed in his presence and that of two of the clerks iu Chancery, after which the Seal was replaced in the wardrobe, where it remained at that and a subsequent period. (ParL Writs, U. p. U, 731, 1231,) In 1317 the king presented him with the archdeaconry of Richmond, and sub sequently procured his election to the bishopric of Lichfield and Coventry on April 12, 1822. Over that see he presided for nearly thirty-eight years, with nothing to distinguish the remainder of his Ufe, except that he held the office of treasurer for two short periods in the second and fom-- teenth years of the reign of Edward IH. He died in 1369, and is commemorated among the chancellors and benefactors of Cam bridge. (Godivin, 320 ; Le Neve, 124, 824.) NOETHINGTON, Eael of. See E. Henlet. NOETHWELL, William de, was in holy orders, and held the office of clerk of the kitchen in the household of Edward H. (Pari Writs, ii. p. U. 82.) He was gra dually advanced m Ms position, and in 11 Edward III. he was clerk or keeper of the wardrobe. He is so called as late as March 2, 1840 (N. Fcedera, U. 1116), and doubtless still held the office when he was constituted a baron of the Exchequer on Jime 21 in the same year. He did not remain there long, as certain biUs dated in August, September, and November 1840 are mentioned as being under his seal as treasurer of the Mng's household (Kal. Exch. i. 165), and there is no doubt that on receiving this last appointment he re tired from his seat as baron. NOETH-WOLD, Hugh de (Bishop of Elt), was a justicier in 12 Henry IH., 1228. (Dugdale's Orig. 42.) He wiis elected abbot of yt. Edmund'.-^, having been pre viously a monk there, in 1214. [Rot Pat. 124, 140, 142.) In January 1229 he was nominated Bishop of Ely, being only a few months after he had acted as a judge. He held the see till his death, on August 9, 1254. His charity, his hospitality, his munificent ex penditure in the erection of his church, and his splendid entertainment to the king and the nobles on its dedication in 1252, are the admiration of his contemporaries ; and Matthew Paris, in speaking of his decease, says 'flos magistrorum obiit et monacho- rum, quia sicut abbas abbatum in Anglia extiterat, ita et episcopus episcoporum. NOETH'WOOD coruscavit.' (God'win,255; B. Willis's Mi tred Abbeys.) NOETH'WOOD, Rogee DB,of Northwood- Chasteners, a manor near Milton in Kent, granted in the reign of King John to Stephen, the son of Jordan de Shepey, who built a mansion there and assumed its name, was the son of Roger de North wood, who was with King Richard in the Holy Land, by Bona Fitzbernard his wife. In 42 Henry III. he accounted for the pro ceeds of the sheriffalty of Kent as one of the executors of Reginald de Cobbeham, and was possessed, besides the above manor, of a variety of other property in the same county. In 41 Henry HI. he procured the tenure of his lands to be changed from gavel- Mud to knight's service, (Hasted's Kent) He was a baron of the Exchequer in 2 Edward I., and in 5 Edward I, he was excused from his service in the army agamst Wales on account of his residence in the Exchequer, and there is sufficient proof of his continuing in the office till his death, which occurred in the thirteenth year, (Madox, i. 726, ii. 20-320; Cal Inquis. p. m, i, 86.) His son John was summoned to pai'liament, as were his successors, till 49 Edward III. The male line failing in 1416, the barony fell into abeyance among the representatives of his sisters. (Baron age, ii, 70.) NOETON, Richaed, was the son of Adam Conyers, seated in the bishopric of Dur ham, who adopted the name of Norton from his wife, the heiress of Norton in Yorkshire. He appears as an advocate in the Year Book from 1 Henry IV., 1399, and his first public appointment was that of justice of assize for Durham in 1406, when it is most probable that he was a serjeant-at-law, although his writ of summons is not re corded, his name occurring in 1408 among several known to be of that degree, as lending the king 100/. to meet the emer gencies of the state. (Acts Privy Council, i. 208.) He was made one of the king's Serjeants m 1408. (Dugdale's Orig. 46.) Within three months after the accession of Henry V. he was appointed chief justice of the Common Pleas, on June 26, 141.3, and remained in his seat till his death on December 20, 1420, (Rot Pari iv, 35- 123.) By his wife Elizabeth, daughter of Sir John Tempest of Studley, he left a family behind him, two of whose descen dants were attainted for treason — Richard Norton, some time governor of Norham Castie, in 1569, who died in exUe ; and Thomas Norton, executed at Tyburn in 1670. (Surtees' Durham, i. Ivii. clx.) NOE'WICH, Ralph DE, is called 'clericum nosti-um' in a safe-conduct granted to him m 18 John, when he was sent to Ireland. There he was employed in matters relating NOE'WICH 487 to the Exchequer, frequently going tMther during the first six years of the foUowing reign, and being united with the chief j ustice there and the Archbishop of Dublin in assessing the aid in 4 Henry HI. While in England he had the management of the duty on wool ; and the lands of Eustace de Vesci, of Robert de Berkeley, and of the Earl of Hereford were successively com mitted to his charge. In 8 Henry HI. he had the church of Acle m Buckingham shire, and in the next year was parson of that of BrehuU in Oxfordshire. After acting vrith Elyas de Sunnmg as justice of the Jews, he was constituted one of the 'king's justices of the Bench' on April 29, 1230, and flues were levied before him tUl Hilary 1234. (Dugdale's Orig. 48 ; Rot Pat 186 ; Rot Claus. i. 187, &c., U, 47, 62.) NOEWICH, Waliee de, the sou of Geoffrey de Norwich, was possessed of very large estates in NorfoUt, Suffolk, Lincoln, and Hertford, over which he obtamed a charter of free warren, together vrith a fair at Ling in Norfolk. No mention is made of the commencement of his career in the Exchequer ; but he was remem brancer in 35 Edward I. In this office he acted in the first years of the next reign, and was raised to the bench as a baron of the Exchequer on August 29, I81I, 5 Ed ward II. On October 28 he was appointed locum tenens of the treasurer of the Ex chequer, and on March 3, 1812, was again named baron. As he still continued to act as treasurer's Ueutenant, we can no otherwise account for these two nominations as baron than by supposing that Boger de Scotre his prede cessor, though not so described in his paten-t, held the highest place in the court, and that Walter de Norwich's second patent advanced him to fill it. The sugges tion derives support from the fact that only five days afterwards John Abel was made a baron in the place of Walter de Nor\rich, who is described in that patent as ' nunc capitalis baro,' which is the first occasion on which that title is used. The interval between this and the eighth year of the reign was devoted to the per formance of the double duties of baron and of treasurer's lieutenant ; but in the latter year, on being raised to the office of treasurer on September 26, 1314, he vacated his seat on the bench. He retained the treasurership till May 30, 1317, when he was relieved from the office on account of illness, and not only received the honourable appointment of chief baron, but was also commanded to assist at the privy councils of his sovereign whenever he was able. He is called by this title in 13 Edward IL, as present on the delivery of the Great Seal. He was 488 NOE'WICH immediately re-appointed chief baron on the accession of Edward IIL, and kept his seat in the court till his death in the third year of that reign. By his wife, Margaret, he had three sons, John, Roger, and Thomas ; the elder of whom was summoned as a baron to parUa ment, but the title became extinct before the end of the reign by failure of his issue, (Madox, i. 75, ii. 49, S4 ; Baronage, ii. 90 ; N. Faidera, U. 428 ; Blomefield's !Sorwich, i. 76; Norfolk, i. 749.) NOE'WICH, Rogee, was admitted a mem ber of Lincoln's Inn on February 3, 1503, and attained the rank of reader in 1618 ; and again in 1521, on his being called to the degree of the coif, which he assumed in the following Trinity Term, and was appointed kmg's serjeant on July 11, 1623, On No vember 22, 1530, although there was then no vacancy in the court, he was raised to the bench as a puisne judge of the Common Pleas, but evidently as the designated successor of Chief Justice Sir Robert Brudenell, who was a very old man, and on whose death in the following January Robert Nor-wich was immediately promoted to his place. His presidency lasted till the beginningof 1536. (Dugdale's Orig. 47,251.) NOTTINGHAM, Eael op. /See H. Finch. NOTTINGHAM, RoBEET DB, had fines acknowledged before him from Hilary to Midsummer, 29 Henry III, 1245, (Dug dale's Orig. 43.) It is probable that he then died, as no further mention occurs re lative to him, and no records have been discovered by which his personal history can be traced. NOTTINGHAM, William de, is recorded twice as a justice itinerant into the northern counties, in 46 and 54 Henry III., 1262, 1270 ; but both confined to subjects relating to forest matters. He was sheriff or under-sheriff' of Lincolnshire in 49 Henry III. NOTTINGHAM, Robeet de, possibly the son of William de Nottingham, who acted for the king in the Exchequer in 5 Edward ll.(Madox, i. 732), was , appointed remembrancer of the Exchequer on June 21, 1322, 15 Edward II. ; and on October 16, 1327, 1 Edward IIL, was raised to the office of second baron of that court ; but, ODO on April 16, 1329, Robert de Wodehouse was made second baron. Whether this arose from the death or retirement of Robert de Nottingham does not appear, (ParL Writs, ii. p. u. 194.) NOTTINGHAM, William, was probably a native of Gloucestershire, as he possessed there, at the time of his death, several ' manors, besides many other lands in the county. (Cal. Inquis. p. m. iv. 417,) He was appointed the king's attorney on June 30, 1462, 30 Henry VI. , which office he filled tiU the end of that reign. In 7 and 13 Edward IV. he is styed 'oone of our counseillours ; ' and on April 3, 1479, he was appointed lord chief baron. He en joyed the place for little more than four years, surviving his roj'al master about two months, a new chief baron being named on June 15, 1483. NOTTON, William db, was of a York shfre family, and probably a native of the place of that name. He became an ad vocate of considerable emmence, to judge from the frequent recurrence of his argu ments in the Year Books. In 20 Edward in. he had a confirmation from the Mng of a messuage and above 200 acres of land, part of the manor of FisMake m YorksMre, by the service of one rose. In the same year he was one of the kmg's Serjeants, and on October 12, 1355, he was constituted a judge of the King's Bench. He was sub jected in 1358 to excommunication for neglecting to appear to the pope's citetion to answer for the sentence he had pro nounced against the Bishop of Ely, for harbouring the man who had slam one of Lady Wake's servants. His period of service in the King's Bench was termmated in 85 Edward IH., when he was constituted chief justice of the Com mon Pleas in Ireland ; and t'svo years after wards he is noticed as one of the councU of the king's son, Lionel Earl of Ulster, then lieutenant of that county. He and his wife Isabella were benefactors to the priory of Bretton in Yorkshfre, and of Royston in Hertfordshire. (Cal. Rot Pat 153, 174; N. Fwdei-a, Ui. 101, 297, 622 ; Abb. Rot Orig. 212 ; Rot Pari ii. 465; Barnes's Edward III. 551; Cal. In quis. p, m, ii, IGS, 190,) o ODO (Bishop of Batetjx and Eael of liENl) was a younger son of Arlotta, the mother of William the Conqueror, by Her luin de Conteville, whom she married after her connection with Robert Duke of Nor mandy. Herluin was in but moderate cir cumstances till William succeeded to the dukedom, after which the confiscated es tates of the rebellious nobles enabled the duke to enrich his uterine brothers. The elder of them, Robert Earl of Moreton, is afterwards noticed, Odo, the younger, oh- ODO tained the earldom of Eu on the banishment of WUliam, its former earl, who had oppo sed the duke's succession: to which was .added, in 1049, the valuable bishopric of Bayeux. His disposition, however, exhibit- mg more of the soldier than the priest, he was employed to lead part of his brother's forces against the Kmg of France, to whose defeat he is said to have greatly contributed. In WiUiam's enterprise against England, also, he not only accompanied Mm, but .contributed a supply of forty ships. Forbidden by his clerical character from bearmg offensive arms, he is represented in the tapestry of Bayeux on horseback and in complete armour, but without any sword. He bears a staff only ; and the superscrip tion, 'Hie Odo Eps baculum tenens con- fortat,' is meant to intimate that his peculiar duty was to encourage the soldiers. After the battle the castle of Dover and the whole county of Kent were committed to Ms care. Early m 1067 King WilUam, returmng to his Norman dominions, left Odo and WiUiam Fitz-Osberne regents and justi ciaries of England ; Kent, of which he was .then created earl, being particularly placed under Odo's care. The conduct of the vice roys was harsh and rapacious, occasioning many insurrections, which were quickly suppressed. After Fitz-Osberne's death Odo wasstill continued regent, or, as Malmesbury calls Mm, 'vice dominus,' on another visit of the king to Normandy, in 1078 ; and his ¦energy .and address were exhibited in assist ing Richard de Benefacta and William de Warenne, the chief j usticiaries, in crushing ¦the conspiracy of Roger Fitz-Osberne, Earl of Hereford (the son of his former coadjutor in the government), and Ralph de Guader, Eari of SuffoUi and Norfolk. The king, with his accustomed muni ficence, not only rewarded Odo's services -with the honours already mentioned, which raised him to the second rank in the king dom, but by more substantial gifte enabled him splendidly to support it. His share iu the distribution of crown lands amounted to 184 lordships in Kent alone, with above 260 in other counties. With the immense riches thus amassed, he aspired to a still Mgher dignity, and conceived the mad pro ject of purchasing the papacy. He bought a magnificent palace at Rome, and engaging many of the English nobles in the enterprise, he prepared a number of ships for the con veyance of them and his treasures there, to await the death of the reigning pope, Gre gory VII. Taking advantage of the king's absence in Normandy in 1079, he had col lected his friends, and was ready to sail from the Isle of Wight, when, adverse winds de laying the expedition, the king received inteUigence of his project, and, hastening to the scene, ordered the ambitious prelate to ODO 489 be arrested. The fear, however, of incur ring ecclesiastical censure, by laying violent hands on a bishop, restrained his officers from obeying the royal commands, so that the kmg was reduced to the necessity of being his own officer, and made the arrest himself Odo claimed the privilege of his order, and appealed to the pope ; but William was too determined in his purpose to desist, and on the suggestion of Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, answered, ' I do not arrest the clergyman or the bishop, but my own earl, whom by my own will I made govei-nor of my kingdom, and from whom I require an account of his stewardship.' Odo was accordingly committed to safe cus tody m the castle of Rouen, where he re mained a prisoner till the end of his brother's reign, and all his property was confiscated to the king's use. Even on Ms death-bed WilUam could scarcely conquer his resentment agamst his ungrateful brother, and in the first instance excepted him from the general liberation which he then commanded of all persons in confinement. By the importunity of his nobles, however, he was at last induced, reluctantly, to consent to his enlargement ; but not without expressing surprise at their intercession, and prophesying that new troubles would arise from the release of so restless a disturber. On the Conqueror's death, in September 1087, Odo returned to England, and was restored to his earldom of Kent and the vast possessions which he had forfeited. He was present at the court which William Rufus held at the following Christmas, on which occasion he is described as 'justi ciarius et princeps totius Anglife.' Whatever friendship the king might pro fess for him at this time, it is probable that it did not last long. Odo soon found that he no longer possessed the infiuence he had formerly exercised, and that the counsels of Lanfranc prevailed. Instigated by disap- pomtment and jealousy, he excited the Norman barons to join in raising Robert, the king's elder brother, to the English throne. A conspiracy was formed, and by the foUowing Easter the standard of rebel lion was raised in various counties. WiUiam, however, wisely attacked Odo, the prmcipal insurgent, at Pevensey, where he had re tired to await the arrival of Robert, and after seven weeks' siege compeUed him to surrender, gi'anting him his life and Uberty on condition that he would deUver up tbe castle of Rochester and leave England for ever. On being taken to Rochester for this purpose, Eustace Earl of Boulogne, to whom he had entrusted his command, pre tended he was a traitor, and took him and his guard prisoners; whereupon WUliam, justly indignant, made a -rigorous attack ou the castle, which, after an obstinate defence, 490 ODYHAM he took ; and, though the Uves of the gar rison were spared, Odo was compelled to evacuate the place amid the taunts of the conquerors. In the vexation of the moment he could not restrain his threats of revenge; but no opportunity was afforded him of carrying them into execution. Retiring to Normandy, he assisted Robert in the management of his dukedom, and, according to some writers, accompanied him m Ms expedition to Jerusalem, and was killed at the siege of Antioch. According to others, he died and was buried at Palermo, in his way to Rome. If the event, as it is generally allowed, occurred in the year 1096, the latter account is most pro bable, as the siege of Antioch did not begin tiU October 1097, His career affords the best evidence that the Church was not the profession he should have selected. His talents and his tenden cies were of a military character, and he was formed to shine in the active duties of the field. Energetic in counsel, he was daring and prompt in the execution of his conceptions. Although ambitious and worldly, and making riches and power the principal objects of his pursuit, he was at the same time bountiful to the poor, and an encourager of learning. He expended his .splendid revenue -with a Uberal hand ; spent large sums in the erection of his cathedral, and in beautifying his episcopal city. Even in the contradictory accounts of the histo rians, some of whom were his contem poraries, enough is shown to prove that, if he had some vices, there were many virtues to counterbalance them. (Dugdale's Orig. 20 ; Baronage, i. 22; Madox, i. 8; Hutchins's Dorsetsh. i. 11 ; Will Malmesb. 456, &c. ; Roger de Wendover, ii. 20, &o. ; Rapin ; Daniel; Turner ; Lingard ; &c,) ODYHAM, Waltee db, was on July 25, 1284, entrusted with the Great Seal in conjunction with Hugh de Kendal, during the absence of Bishop Burnel, the chancellor. On this account they are placed in Sir T. D. Hardy's catalogue among the keepers of the Seal, Both of them, however, were simply clerks in Chancery. (Madox, ii. 257.) OFFOED, Andeew db, was the brother of the undermentioned John de Offord, and, like him, was employed in diplomatic missions. From 17 to 2i) Edward III. he is named on embassies to Rome, Castile, Por tugal, Flanders, and France, (N. Fcedera, il. 1224, iii. 808.) It was probably during the chancellorship of his brother that he was made aclerkorma.sterof the Chancery, although he is not distinctly named among those officers till a later period. On August 4, 1353, when the chaucellor, John de Thoresby, went to York, he left the Seal in the hands of David de Wollore, M.R., Thomas de Brayton, and Andrew de Ofi'ord, but how long he remained absent does not OFFOED appear. Offord was a receiver of petition^ in the parliaments of 28 and 29 Edward HL (Rot ParL ii, 254, 264), and died in 1368, He was at first described as juris civilis, professor, afterwards as canon of York, and lastly as archdeacon of Middlesex, to which he was admitted in 1349. (Le Neve, 193.) OFFOED, John de (Aechbishop of Oan- ieebuky), is sometimes calledUfford,andit is the fashion to call him one of the sons of Robert de Ufford, the first Eari of SuffoUr, It is doubtful, however, whether he was in any way connected with that family, as he is not mentioned in the earl's wiU. There was, however, a John de Ufford, who was, contemporary -with the chancellor. He was the son of Ralph de Ufford, the brother of Robert, the first earl, but he is m every way distinguished from the chanceUor. He is always caUed a Imight, and was sum moned to parUament as a haron in 1360, eleven years after the death of the chan ceUor, and his own death occurred in the folio-wing year. The discrepancies in these dates appear to settle the question, but if any doubt remained it would seem to be extinguished by the followmg fact. The first earl's grandfather, whose name was Robert, assumed the name of Ufford, fi-om a place in Suffolk. There is evidence to prove that the chancellor's family derived its name from the manor of Offord m Hun tingdonshire, and that he is apparently the j'ounger son of John de Offord, who had property at Off'ord-Dameys in tliat county, and that in 5 Edwai-d IH., 1331, he had the custody of that manor during the minority of his nephew, the infant heir. (Baronage, U. 47 ; Abh. Placit 266 ; Abh. Rot Orig. U. 50.) In the early part of the reign of Edward III. John de Otford was dean of the Arches (Newcome's St Albans, 229), and from the eighth to the eighteenth years he was con tinually engaged in important foreign em bassies to tbe courts of France, Scotland, and Avignon. At first he is described as juris civilis professor aud as canon of St Paul's, in 12 Edwiu-d IH. as archdeacon of Ely, and on August 3, 1344, as dean of Lincoln, From October 4, 1342, he is mentioned as keeper of the privy seal, and on one occasion as the king's secretary, (N. Fa-dera, ii. 880, 1239, iU. 18, 176,) In, these negotiations he exhibited so much wisdom and tact as to pomt him out as a fit recipient of the honours with which he was afterwards invested. On October 26, 1345, he was appointed chancellor, and held the Seal till his death, being the third chanceUor during this reign who died in office. In September 1848 he was raised to the archbishopric of Canter bury, Pope Clement VI. and the EngUsh king unitmg to set aside tbe monks' election of Thomas Bradwardin ; but he was fated OGER never to obtain full possession of his dignity. Before his installation he was seized with the mortal disease which for several months had devastated England, and was one of the last of its victims, dymg at Tottenham on May 20, 1349. He was buried privately at Canterbury. (Godwin, III ; AngL Sac i. 42, 875, 794.) OGEE was one of the dapifers of the household, of whom so many are noticed among the justiciers of the reign of Henry II. The office is believed to be the same as seneschal or steward, and, as there were several at the same time, some perhaps were of England and others of Normandy, In 14 Henry II, the honor of Eye was committed to his charge. He was then sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, and held that office for several years. His name appears in II70-I as one of the justices itinerant in those counties -with Guy the dean ; probably only as sheriff, as was common at that time, for the purpose of assisting in settling the assessments to the tallages and aids then imposed, (Ma dox, i. 144, 145, 573.) He was the father of the before-mentioned Oger Fitz-Oger. OKETON, John de, was a justice itine rant mto various counties from 52 to 56 Henry III,, and from the very numerous entries on the Fine Roll up to October 29, 1 272, 57 Henry IIL, of payments made for assizes to be held before him, there can be little doubt that he was a regular justicier. (Excerpt e Rot Fin. U. 490-588.) He held the office of sheriff of Yorkshire in 44 Henry IIL, and for several subsequent years ; and there is an entry in 52 Henry III, that he could not levy the ferm for the county, 'propter turbationem regni.' (Ma dox, U. 160.) OEHAM, John de, was joined in the com mission with the escheator ultra Trentam to take into the king's hands the property of Anthony, Patriarch of Jerusalem and Bi shop of Dm-ham, on his death in 4 Edward II. (Abb. Rot Orig. i. 175.) During the four following years he was clerk to luge- lard de Warlee, keeper of the wardrobe (Rot ParL n. 437), and held the office of cofferer of that department. (Cal. Rot Pat 74.) On June 18, 1317, he was con stituted one of the barons of the Exchequer, and is not named in that character beyond 1322. He became custos of the deanery of the free chapel of St. Martin, London, in 19 Edward III. (Abb. Rot Orig. i. 290.) OLI-yEE, JoEDAN, was one of the knights of Somersetshire and Dorsetshire who were summoned before the barons of the Ex chequer in 14 John for not keeping the flne which they had made with the king for having the' sheriffs of those counties from among themselves, (Rot. aaus. i. 131.) This tine was made -with WiUiam Malet on ORMESBY 491 the Mng's part, and, as he continued sheriff for four years, the knights probably thought that, as "there were no symptoms of any of them obtaining the appomtment, they were not called upon to perform their part. Cer tainly none of them enjoyed the office at that period, although Jordan Oliver, twenty- eight years afterwards, in 24 Henry HI., held it for one year. In 5 Henry III. he- was one of the king's escheators for the county of Devon, From the ninth year to the twenty-second he was appointed a jus tice itmerant m that and several other counties, (Rot Claus. i. 473, U. 76, 206, 206 ; Excerpt e Rot Fin. i. 289, 288.) OEMESBY, William db, was appointed a judge of the King's Bench in 24 Edward I., 1296, He had, however, acted pre viously as a justice itinerant into the northem counties in 20 and 21 Edward I, On the reduction of Scotland in 1296 he was constituted justiciary of that country, and by the rigour vrith which he extorted the penalties imposed by King Edward on those who refused to take the oath of fealty to him he naturally excited the deep and general odium of that people. Wallace, m the following yeai', surprised him while holding his court at Scone, and, his followers being dispersed, he himself barely escaped. ( Triveti Annales, 356 ; Tytler's Scotland, i. 128, 128.) On his retum to England he resumed his duties in the Kmg's Bench, in which he is mentioned tiU the end of the reign, and also as chief of the justices of trailbaston assigned for the comities of Norfolk and Suffolk in 1305. (Abh. Placit 242, 259, 294; Rot ParL i, 166, 198; ParL Writs, i. 407-8,) Some doubt may arise as to his ha-ring been re-appointed to his seat in the King's Bench on the accession of Edward H., as no such writ was directed to him to take the oaths as was addressed to his fellows on September 6, 1307 ; and his name does not judicially appear in the Abbreviatio Placi- torum after the death of Edward I, It is true that he was summoned to attend the flrst parliament, and stands in his proper place in the list, but this was by a previous writ, dated August 26 ; and though he is summoned to all the subsequent parliaments up to II Edward IL, he is generally placed in that part of the list appropriated to the justices itinerant. That he acted in the latter capacity during the remainder of his life there can be no question ; and it is not unlikely that he was aUowed, at the com mencement of the new reign, to retfre from the heavier duties of the King's Bench to his estates in Norfolk and Suffolk, in which counties he was principally employed as a justice of assize during the whole period. (ParL Writs, i, 766, ii. 1246.) He died about 1317, and was buried at the abbey of 492 OSBEET St. Benet's, at Hulme m Norfolk, to which he was a benefactor, (Taylor's Index Monast. 2.) In the pleas of 2 Edward IL he is spoken of as the husband of Sibilla, late the wife of Roger Loveday, a justice itinerant in the previous reign (Abh. Placit 307) ; and among the escheats or inquisitions post mortem of 7 Edward II. (i. 264) occurs the name of Elena, the wife of William de Ormesby. This may perhaps be explained by supposing that there might be two Wil liams de Ormesby, both of Norfolk ; a sus picion which receives some probability from the fact that while the judge was sum moned with his fellows to the parliament at Carlisle in 35 Edward I., a burgess of the same name was returned to the same par liament for Yarmouth in Norfolk. They might, however, be still the same person, for there is no proof that judges, or at all events justices itinerant, were then pre cluded f'l'om sitting among the Commons. OSBEET (? Bishop of Exeiee) has not hitherto been introduced among the chan cellors, and is now inserted on the autho rity of a charter granted by King Wil liam I, to the monastery of St, Augustine at Canterbury, among the signatures to which appears ' Signum Osberti CanceUarii.' Two other signatures are those of Scotland the Abbot, and William, Bishop of London; and as the former was appointed in 1070 and the latter died in 1075, the date of the charter must have been between those two years, or in one of them. (Monast. i. 144.) If, as is most probable, he were the Os bert who was made Bishop of Exeter in 1074, the period within which he held the chancellorship is reduced even to a shorter -compass. The bishop was a Norman by birth, son of Osbern de Crespon, and is described by Malmesbury as 'frater Gu- Uelmi pre-excellentissimi comitis,' the Earl of Hereford, and brought up in the court of King Edward. He ruled the see for nearly thirty years, and died in II08. He sometimes is called Osbern, under which name he attested the charter to St. Martin's in London, in 1068, as chaplain, and he used both names indiscriminately as bishop. (Ibid iii. 141, iv. 16, 17, 20, vi. 1325 ; Le Neve, 80; Godwin, 401.) OSGODBY, Adam de, was appointed keeper of the Rolls of Chancery on Octo ber 1, 1295, 28 Edward I. He no doubt had been previously one of the clerks of the Chancery, and from several entries re lating to the deposit of the Seal during the temporary absence of the chancellor, it is plain that he was still considered as the chief of them. He remained uninter ruptedly in the office till 10 Edward II,, I3I6, a period of nearly twenty-one years. In both reigns he frequently performed the functions of the chanceUor when absent. OSMUND sometimes alone, and sometimes m connec tion with two or three of the other clerks. In that of Edward I, he held it three times under the seals of three clerks, during the vacancy or absence of the chanceUors, and from the third to the eighth year of Edward II. the Seal was frequently de posited with Osgodby in the same manner. At flrst it was merely in the absence of the chancellor, but between the resignation of Walter Reginald, Bishop of Worcester, as chancellor, and his appointment as keeper of the Seal — viz., between December 9, 1311, and October 6, 1312 — Adam de Osgodby, Robert de Bardelby, and WilUam de Ayre mynne are distinctly described as keepers of the Seal (Rot ParL i. 337), and trans acted all the business connected with it. While Reginald continued keeper the Great Seal was always secured by the seals of these tMee, (Pari. Writs, u, p, U, 1249,) At the parliament held at Carlisle in January 1307, 85 Edward I., he acted as proctor for the dean and chapter of York, being then a canon of that cathedral, (Rot ParL i. 190.) Like all his brethren in the Chancery, he was an ecclesiastic, and held the U'ving of Gargrave in Yorkshire. On November 7, 1807, I Edward 11., the Mng granted to Mm the office of custos of the House of Converts in Chancery Lane during plea sure, but by a patent in the seventh year secured it to Mm for Ufe. It was not, however, till the year 1877 that this office was permanently annexed to that of keeper of the Rolls, His death occun-ed m August 1316, leaving property in Yorkshire, to which Walter de Osgodby, probably his brother, succeeded. (Cal. Inquis. p. m. i. 194, 279.) OSMUND (Eael op Doeset, Bishop of Salisbitex) is described as the nephew of WUUam the Conqueror, bemg son of his sister Isabella, the wife of Henry, Count of Seez in Normandy. To this title he suc ceeded, and came over as a layman in the retinue of his uncle, who is said to have created him Earl of Dorset, and to have selected him for his superior judgment as one of his principal advisers, and placed him in the office of chancellor. The date of his appointment is uncertain, but it is evidently not so early as is usuaUy assigned. Arfastus was chancellor in 1068, if not before, and Osbert somewhere be tween 1070 nnd 1074. WiUiam's charter of confirmation to the cathedral church of St, Paul (Dugdale's St PauVs, 51), to which the name ' Osmund the ChanceUor ' is attached as one of the witnesses, must have been granted after 1070, masmuch as Lanfranc the archbishop is another witness) and he was not consecrated till that year, Osmund probably succeeded on Osbert's OVERTON elevation to the prelacy about 1075, one of the dates given by Thynne and PhiUpot ; and there is every reason to presume that he retained the Seal till his own appoint ment as Bishop of SaUsbury in 1078, as no other chancellor occurs in the intervemng period. There is another charter with his name as chancellor, confirming the land of Stan- mg in Sussex to the abbey of Fescamp in Normandy (Monast vi. 1082), but it affords no evidence of having been granted either at an earUer or a later date. On the death of Herman, Bishop of Salis bury, Osmund, havmg become an eccle siastic, was appointed his successor. His flrst efforte were devoted to the completion of the cathedral commenced by Herman, which he effected in the year 1092, found ing a deanery and thirty-six canonries in it, and nobly endovring it with various churches and towns. He died in December 1099, and was bmied in the cathedral he erected, but Ms remains were removed in 1457 to the new cathedral. The title of Osmund the Good, which he acquired in his life, is the best illustration of his character ; he was a prelate of the severest manners and strictest moderation, fiUing his office with dignity and reputa tion, the patron of learned men, and an impartial assertor of the rights of his see. He was canonised by Pope Calixtus in 1467, above 860 years after his death. To bring into some uniformity the ser vices of the Church, he compiled the bre viary, missal, and ritual which, under the name of ' The Use of Sarum,' was after wards generally adopted, and continued to be employed till the Reformation, He is also stated to have -written the life of St, Aldhelm, first Bishop of Sherborne. (God- irin, 336 ; Hidchins's Dorset, i. 10, &o. ; Le Neve, 266 ; Biog. Brit. Literaria, ii, 23,) OVEETON, Thomas, is another of the barons of the Exchequer of whom there is no distinct information, except that, accord mg to a list kept in the Exchequer, he was admitted to that office in Hilary 1402, 3 Henry IV,, and that his place was vacant in the nmth year, (Libei-. 9 Heni-y IV.) O'WEN, Thomas, was born at Condover in Shropshfre, the seat of his father, Ri chard Owen, a merchant of the neighbour ing town of Shrewsbury, who, according to the pedigrees of the family, could trace his descent from the ancient Kings of Wales, His mother was Mary, one of the daughters of Thomas Ottley, Esq., of that town. He received his education at the university of Oxford, but Wood is uncertam whether at Broadgate's Hall (now Pembroke College) or Christ Church, After taking his degree he was removed to Lincoln's Inn, where he was called to the bar in 1570, and became OXFORD 493 readerm 1583. Six years afterwards he was raised to the degree of the coif, and on January 26, 1593, was made queen's ser jeant. On January 21, 1594, he was pro moted to the bench as a judge of the Common Pleas, where he sat till Ms death on December 21, 1698, (Dugdale's Orig. 46, 283.) Wood describes him as a learned man, and a great lover of those who pro fessed" learning ; and the Reporte which he collected in the King's Bench and Com mon Pleas, and which were printed with some additional cases m 1660, manifest his legal erudition and his industry both before and after he was raised to the bench. He was buried in Westminster Abbey under a noble monument. His 'first wife was Sarah, daughter of Humphrey Baskerville, by whom he had five sons and flve daughters. His second -wife was AUce, the widow of WilUam Elkins, mercer and alderman of London. She survived him, and erected and en dowed a hospital at Islington for ten poor women, and a school for thirty boys, in grateful remembrance of her escape from death m her childhood, when an arrow, shot at random while she was sporting in the flelds, pierced the hat that she wore. (Stoiv's London, 110.) The judge's son was SirRogerOwen, who^ distinguished himself among the literary men of the day, and was an active member of parUament, Both he and several of his successors fllled the office of sheriff, and the estate of Condover still remains vrith the family, (Athen. Oxon. i. 672 ; Dart^s Westminster Abbey, ii. 83.) OXFOED, CoNSTANTiHS DB, a justice itinerant appointed by the writ of Richard de Luci, in conjunction with Alard Banastre, the sheriff, to assess the tallage on the county of Oxford in 20 Henry II. , II74 (Madox, i. 124), wiis probably a priest, or • other ecclesiastical person of Oxford ; for the religious orders very commonly cast off their family names, and adopted either that of the monastery to which they belonged, or the locality in which their clerical duties were exercised. OXFOED, Eael of. See R, de Veee, OXFOED, John of (Bishop of Noe wich), was so called from the place of Ms birth, being son of a burgess of that city named Henry. Educated for the ecclesias tical profession, he was appointed one of the Mng's chaplains, in which office he must soon have distmguished himseU, since, though holdmg no higher dignity, he presided at the famous council of Cla rendon in January 1164, and was after wards sent -with Geoffrey Ridel to the pope to obtain his confirmation of the ancient customs of the realm as they were there propounded. In this embassy they of course faUed; 494 OXFORD but in the following year he was again despatched with another associate, and in their way to Rome they attended a diet at Wurzburgh, which had been assembled for the acknowledgment of the opposition pope, Pascal UI, They are charged with havmg undertaken that the Mng should support this pope, a charge which, though they denied it, was made the pretence by Becket, in 1166, for excommunicating John of Oxford, and for excluding him from the deanery of Salisbury, to which he had been just previously admitted, John, however, being again sent to Rome iu the same year, succeeded so weU in exculpating himself that the pope reinstated him in his deanery, and absolved him from Becket's sentence. The negotiation for his sovereign also he conducted with equal ability and success, obtaining from the pontiff the appointment of two cardinals as legates a latere to hear and determine the dispute -with Becket, which was in fact a suspension of the legatine power previously granted to him ; and bringing home, m addition, the pope's dispensation for Prince Geoffrey to marry his third cousm, the heiress of Bretagne. So high was his credit -with Henry that in 1167 he was entrusted with a confidential embassy to the Empress Maud, the Mng's mother, to counteract the efforts which Becket was theu maMng to induce her to interfere in his quarrel, efforts which were rendered of no avail by her death towards the end of the year. In 1170 he was again employed in another embassy to the papal court, then at Beneventum, in reference to Becket's affair ; and when the agreement between the king and that prelate was at last effected, he was, to the great annoyance of the latter, appointed to accompany him to England. This duty he performed in good faith, and prevented the interruption to his landing at Sand-wich threatened by Gervase de Comhill, the sheriff of Kent. On December 14, 1176, he received the reward of his services by being consecrated Bishop of Norwich, and in the next year was sent to accompany the king's daughter, Jane, to her intended husband, the Kmg of Sicily. In 1179 he vrith three other English bishops attended the Lateran council held against schismatics. On his return he was one of the three prelates to whom, on the retreat of Richard de Luci to the .abbey of Lesnes, the execution of the office of chief justiciary was entrusted, the other two OXFOED being Richard Tocliffe, Bishop of Win chester, and Geoffrey Ridel, Bishop of Ely. They were at the same time placed at the head of three of the four divisions (Dug dale's Orig. 20) in which England was then arranged for the administration of justice. It is curious that this appointment was m direct opposition to one of the canons of the Lateran council, from which John of Oxford had just returned, and naturally produced a remonstrance from the pope, which led to a justification by the Archbishop of Canterbury of their ac ceptance of the office. Whatever may have been the cause, however, it is certam that the bishops were soon removed from the presidency of the court, wMch, m the course of the following year was conferred on Ranulph de Glan-rille, one of their lay associates. That John of Oxford continued to perform judicial duties after this event is evident from the roU of Richard L, which proves that he acted either m that or the preceding year as a justice itinerant in several counties, (Pipe Roll, 27, 60, 211, 238.) Seized with the mama of the age, he devoted Mmself to the crusade in 1189, but, bemg attacked by robbers on his way to the Holy Land, and despoiled of aU his property, he turned his steps to Rome, where, representing the inadequacy of Ms means to support the expense of the under taking, he procured an absolution fi'om his vow. The remamder of his life was devoted to his episcopal duties, and to the restoration of his church, which had been injured by a fire. Many houses also wMch had been destroyed at the same time he caused to be rebuUt, and to his other benefactions to the poor he added the erection of a hospitel. He died on June 2, 1200, and was buried in his o-wn cathedral. The Mstory of his life supports the character he ac qmred of being an able negotiator, a grace ful orator, and a man of soimd judgment and quick discernment. To his other occu pations he added that of an author, baring -written a history of aU the Irings of Britain, besides some occasional works, among which were a book ' Pro Rege Henrico contra S, Thomam Cantuariensum,' an account of his journey into Sicily, and some orations and epistles to Richard, Archbishop of Canterbury. (Godioin, 428 ; Weever, 789 ; Angl. Sac. i. 409 ; Lord Lyttelton, ii. 862, 416, &c,, iv, 100 ; Ric Devizes, 12,) 495 PAGE, Francis, was the son of the Rev. Nficholas Page, the vicar of Bloxham in 'Oxfordshire, and was born about 1661, Admitted at the Inner Temple, he was called to the bar in 1690, and was raised to the bench of that society in 1717. He varied his legal studies by entering into the political controversies of the time, takmg the whig view of the subjecte in discus- ¦sion, and adding some pamphlete to those wMch then almost daily issued from the press. In 1705 he appeared as one of the counsel for the electors of Aylesbury who liad been committed by the House of ¦Commons for proceeding at law against the returning officers, who had illegally refused their votes. The Commons, having then resolved that the counsel had thereby been guilty of a breach of privilege, ordered their committal to the custody of the ¦serjeant-at-arms. Page evaded the arrest, and Queen Anne was obUged to dissolve the parUament in order to prevent a collision Between the two houses on the question. He was member for Huntingdon in the two parliaments of 1708 and 1710, and soon after the accession of George I. he received the honour of knighthood, and was not only made a serjeant, but also Mng's seijeant, in I7I5, An early oppor tunity was taken of promoting Mm to the bench, and on May 15, 1718, he took his seat as a baron of the Exchequer. He purchased an estate and built a mansion at Steeple Aston in Oxfordshire, not many miles from Banbury, with the elections of which borough he interfered so much that he was charged in the House of Commons, in February 1722, with corrupting the cor poration by bribery, and the evidence was so nearly balanced that he was only ac quitted by a close majority of four votes, On November 4, 1726, he was removed from the Exchequer to the Common Pleas, and m the middle of September 1727, three months after the accession of George IL, he was again translated to the King's Bench. Though then sixty-six years of age, he remained on the bench fourteen years more, dying on October 81, 1741. He was buried at Steeple Aston under a monumental pile ¦with full-length figures of himself and his second wife by the emment sculptor Schee- macker. TMs he caused to be erected during his life, and in order to its construc tion he destroyed the ancient monuments in the church. He has left behind him a most unenviable reputation. Without the abiUties of Judge Jefireys, he was deemed as cruel and as coarse. The few reported cases in the State Trials at which he presided do not indeed appear to warrant this character, nor does his learned judgment in Ratcliffe's case, reported m I Strange (269) ; but he could not have been known among his contem poraries by the sobriquet of the ' hanging judge,' nor have obtained the inglorious distinction of being stigmatised by some of the best writers of the age, unless there had been pregnant grounds for the imputa tion. Pope, in his Imitation of the First Satire of the Second Book of Horace, thus mtroduces Mm : — Slander or poison dread from Delia's rage. Hard "words or hanging if your judge be Page. Long before Page's death Pope had gibbeted him in the ' Dunciad ' (book iv. lines 26- 80) :— Morality, by her false guardians dra-wn. Chicane in furs, and Casuistry in la-wn, Gasps, as they straighten at each end the cord, And dies, -when Dukiess gives her [Page] the -word, — leaving blank the name in the last Une. If it were not vouched by Dr. Johnson in his Life of Pope, it would be scarcely credible that the conscious judge had the folly to fit the cap on Mmself, and to send a complaint to the poet by his clerk, who told the poet that the judge said that no other word would_ make sense of the passage. The name is now inserted at fuU length. Dr. Johnson also enlarges in his Life of Savage on the vulgar and exasperating language by which Judge Page obtained the conviction of the unfortunate poet for the murder of Mr. Sinclair. No wonder that Savage, after he was pardoned, re venged himself by penning a most bitter ' character ' of the judge, who escapes no better under Fieldmg's lash, in 'Tom Jones' (book vui. c. xi.). When Crowle the punning barrister was on the circmt with Page, on some one askmg him if the judge was just behind, he replied, 'I don't know, but I am sure he never was just before! When old and decrepit, the judge perpe trated an unconscious joke on himself. As he was commg out of court one' day, shuffiing along, an acquamtance enquired' after his health, ' My dear sir,' he ans-wered, ' you see I keep hanging on, hanging on! Tie was vei-y desirous of foimdino- a family, but though he was twice married he left no issue. The name of his first wife, who was buried at Bloxham, has not been preserved; that of his second was 496 PAGE Frances, daughter of Sir Thomas Wheate, of Glympton, Bart, He left his estates to Francis Bourne, on condition that he took the name of Francis Page only; but his object of perpetuating his name -was frus trated by his devisee dying unmarried, and his property passing away to strangers. (Noble's Granger, in.' 203 ; Notes and Que ries, 3rd S. i. 153.) PAGE, John or William, is called by Dugdale WilUam, and by Rymer John, but there is no account of him before he is inserted in the 'Chronica Series' as being appomted a baron of the Exchequer on October 29, 1688. That he was a cursitor baron there is no doubt, for he is never mentioned in the judicial proceedings of the court, and his name as baron appears in a commission at a distance of five from the regular barons. He only held his office for fom years, dying suddenly on November 9, 1642. (Rymer, xx. 409, 433 ; Peck's Desid. Cur. b. xiv. 19.) PAGITT, James, belonged to the branch of the Pagittfamily which wassettled in North amptonshire, where his greategrandfather, Thomas, is described of Barton-Segrave, and his grandfather, Richard, of Cranford. His father was Thomas Pagitt, an eminent lawyer, t-wice reader at the Middle Temple, and treasurer there in 1599. His mother, Barbara Bradbury, died in 1583, and was buried in S t. Botolph' s, Aldersgate, (Mait land's London, 1076.) He was bom about 1681, and, receiving his legal education at the same inn of court as Ms father, was called to the bar in 1602. Apparently placed at an early age in the Exchequer, he is de scribed as comptroller of the Pipe in 1618, and on October 24, 1631, he was raised to the office of a baron of the court, (Rymer, xix. 347.) It is manifest, however, that this office was not that of one of the judicial barons. There was no vacancy among them at the time of his nomination ; and during the whole of his career he neither took part in the busmess of the court, nor is ever men tioned in the conferences of the judges. An thony Wood (iv. 354) calls him 'puisne baron of the Exchequer,' the precise title given to Sir Thomas Csesar, -with the addi tion, ' commonly called the baron cursitor.' (Dugdale's Orig. 149.) He died on Sep- temijer 3, 1638, at Tottenham, iu the church of which parish is a monument to his memory. He married three wives, but hadissue only by the first. She was Katherine, daughter of Dr, William Lewin, dean of the Arches, The second was Bridget, daughter of An thony Bowyer, of Coventry, draper, and widow of — Moyse, of London. The third was Mazaretta, daughter of Robert Harris, of Reading and Lincoln's Inn, who had previously had two husbands, as he had PARK had two -wives, viz., Richard Vaughan an(J. Zephaniah Sayers, both of London, (Old- field's and Dyson's Tottenham, 48 ; Ashmole's- Berks, iii. 88; Wotton's Baronet, ii, 33.) PANTULF, HiTGH, was the second son of Hugh, the grandson of WilUam Pantulf, a renowned Norman knight, who, besides, large possessions in Normandy, is recorded in Domesday Book as holding twenty-nine lordships in Shropshire, of which Wemme was the chief. This Hugh held the sheriff alty of that county from 26 Henry IL, 1180 to 1 Richard I., 1189-00 ; and in the latter year he travelled the counties of Salop,, Gloucester, and St.afford as one of the jus tices itinerant. (Pi-pe Roll, 91, 96, 168,248.) He must have lived to a good old age, since it was not tiU 9 Henry IIL, 1224-5, that his son WiUiam, being charged -with 100/. relief as a baron for the land which his father held of the Mng in capite, was ex cused, and his fine reduced to 25/, (Madox, i. 818.) PAEDISHOWE, Thomas de, had the cus tody of the Great Seal when Sir Robert Bourchier the chancellor left London on. February 14, 184I, under the seals of Thomas de Evesham, the master of the RoUs, and Thomas de Brayton. It is clear from the terms of the record that the two latter only were appointed to execute the functions of the office, which they did till Ms return on March 8, Pardishowe is caUed a clerk m the Chancery, but there is no other entry of his name. PAEE, James Alan, was the son of James Park, Esq., a respectable surgeon m Edinbm-gh, and was born m that city on April 6, 1763, When very young he came to England, and was admitted mto the so ciety of the Middle Temple, by wMch he was called to the bar m ,Tune"l784. He was fortunate enough to gain the friendship and patronage of his noble countryman Lord Mansfield, under whose encourage ment he pubUshed in 1787 a work on the ' Law of Marine Insurances,' comprehend ing the decisions and dicta of the chief justice, who had been almost the creator of the system. This work was found to be so useful to mercantile and legal men that it passed through many editions, with im provements by ite author, and at once brought him into professional notice. Joining the Northern Circuit, he was successful in obtaining a considerable practice, which before long increased tiU he became one of the leaders of that bar. In Westminster Hall also he acqmred much business, as weU from that nume rous body engaged in maritime affairs and msurance cases, as from other clients who were observant of the extreme interest he took in his causes, and the clearness and earnest simplicity of his advocacy. He gleaned much learning and experience from PARK his mtimacy -with Lord Mansfield, to whom, after his lordship's retfrement, he was in the habit of taking an account of the daUy proceedings in court, and profiting by the observations made by the legal Nestor upon the different points decided. In 1791, before the death of Lord Mansfleld, Mr, Park was appointed -rice- chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, and in 1795 recorder of Preston, In 1799 he received a silk go-wn as Mng's counsel, and in 1802 he was elected recorder of Dmham. On the retirement from the circuit of Mr. Law (afterwards Lord EUenborough) when he became attomey-general, he succeeded to the undisputed lead, which he retained for more than a dozen years, dividing that m London with Sir Vicary Gibbs and Sir WilUam Gan-ow ; and in I81I he was made attomey-general of Lancaster, A sincere and zealous churchman, he was by the religious classes of the com munity looked up to with great esteem. Among his intimates was WUliam Stevens, the modest and benevolent treasurer of Queen Anne's bounty, vrith whom he formed a committee in support of the Scotch episcopal clergy, and succeeded in obtaining the repeal of the penal stetutes then in force against them. He was one of the original members of 'Nobody's Club,' so called from the nom de plume of Mr, Stevens, m whose honour it was founded, and which, lasting till the present day, has numbered among its members some of the most eminent men in the Church and in science, law, and literature. At Mr, Ste vens's death Mr. Park published a memoir of him, which has been lately reprinted. He was also the author in 1804 of 'A Layman's Eamest Exhortation to a Fre quent Reception of the Lord's Supper,' Without any pretensions to eloquence, his advocacy was effective from the extreme anxiety he displayed for his client ; and he gained his verdicts by the apparent confl dence and sincerity -with which he im pressed the jury with the injustice of vrithholding them, as much as by the merits of the causes themselves. After thirty years' successful practice at the bar, he succeeded Sir Alan Chambers as a judge of the Common Pleas on Ja nuary 22, 1816, and was knighted. He sat in that court till his death on Decem ber 8, 1838, a period of nearly twenty- three years, during which he served under four sovereigns, 'With no particular emi nence as a lawyer, he proved himself by his good sense and strict impartiality, as well as by the respectabiUty of his character, a most useful admmistrator of justice ; the only drawback from the general respect which he commanded was a certain irrita bility about trifles, which too frequently excited the jocularity of the bar. PARKE 497 PAEKE, James (Loed Wensleydale). His elevation to the peerage on retirmg from the Court of Exchequer gave rise to the important constitutional question whe ther the patent wMch created him Baron Wensleydale of Wensleydale for the ' term of his natural life ' entitled him to sit and vote in parliament. After a long and able discussion, the committee of pri'rileges de cided it in the negative, and a new patent was accordingly issued in the usual form with the title of Baron Wensleydale of Walton. He was the youngest son of Thomas Parke, Esq., a merchant at Liverpool, re siding at Highfield, near that to'wn, by the daughter of WilUam Preston, Esq., and was born there in 1782. He was educated at the free grammar school at Maccles field, and at Trmity College, Cambridge. Elected university scholar in his] first term, 1799, and a scholar of Ms college m 1800, he took his degree of B.A. in 1803, vrith the honourable position of fifth wrangler and senior chanceUor's medaUist. He gained a fellowship m the followmg year, and proceeded M.A. m 1806. It was not till seven years after the latter date that he was called to the bar by the society of the Inner Temple (to which he had removed from Lincoln's Inn), in Easter Term I8IS, having practised previously for some years as a special pleader, and shown that pro ficiency in legal science which led to his rapid success as an advocate, both on the Northem Circuit and in Westminster HaU. Within four years he was enabled to resign his feUowship, on Ms marriage in 1817 with CeciUa, daughter of Samuel F. Barlow, Esq., of Middlethorpe in Yorkshire, Only seven years after Ms call to the bar he was selected to assist the crown officers in conducting the memorable case agamst Queen Caroline in the House of Lords ; and so high was his reputation for legal know ledge that, without ever having had a silk gown, and without the suspicion of any parliamentary or poUtical interest, he was chosen on Novemoer 2§, 1828, to supply the place of that excellent judge Sir George Holroyd, and thus to continue the acknow ledged efficiency of the Court of King's Bench, On that occasion he was, as usual, kmghted. Here he remained for nearly six years, till on April 29, 1834, he and Mr, Justice Alderson, to strengthen the staff of the Exchequer bench, were removed mto that court. For the additional two-and- twenty years that he remained on the bench he admimstered justice there and on the circuits with that weight and ex perience, and with that temper and con sideration, which commanded the respect of the bar, and secured the acquiescence of litigante. He was a zealous labourer for the removal of all useless formalities in legal proceedings, and one of the principal 498 PARKER amendment acte passed in the reign of WilUam IV. was his work. In 1833 he was called to the privy council, and became a most efficient mem ber of its judicial committee, and m 1835 he received the degree of LL.D. at Ms university. After twenty-eight years of judicial service, during the whole of which he never flagged in his duties, his age (7-4) warned him to retire. He resigned his seat at the end of December 1855; but the government were so conscious of his judicial powers, and so desirous to secure his assist ance in the hearmg of appeals in the House of Lords, thfit he was raised to a peerage for Ufe on the 10th of the followmg January as Lord Wensleydale. The subsequent change in Ms patent took place for the reason before given, and without any desire on his part, as he had no male heir to suc ceed to the title, his only surviving cMld being a daughter. He survived till the age of eighty-flve, -with his intellects unimpaired, giving his valuable assistance in the last court of appeal till his death in February 1868. PAEEEE, James, held the office of vice- chancellor only for ten short months, but durmg that time he afforded such evidence of intellectual power, promising a most brilliant judicial career, that his sudden death was almost as great a grief to the legal world as it must necessarily have been to his family and private friends. He was only in his forty-nmth year when he died, having been born in Glasgow in 1808, He was the son of Charles Steuart Parker, Esq., of Blockaim, near that city, in the grammar school and coUege of wMch he received his early instruction. He then proceeded to Trinity College, Cambridge, where he graduated as B.A. in 1825, gain ing the seventh wrangler's place, and as M.A. in 1829. On Fe'bruary 6 in the same year he was called to the bar by the society of Lincoln's Inn, and, practising in the equity courts, his merits were soon acknow ledged. By his indefatigable industry and clearness of intellect the difficulties of the science were quicMy mastered, and in ad- vocatmg the cases entrusted to his care there was an exhibition of leaming and shrewdness that secured to Mm numerous retainers. He was made queen's counsel in July 1844, and his reputation was so high that . he was named on the Chancery Commission, in the investigations of which he took a very prominent part. At the election iu 1847 he stood for Leicester on the con servative side, but was defeated after a close contest. Notwithstanding his avowed poU tical principles, his character as a lawyer was so weU established, and the necessity of a reform in Chancery, of which he was a zealous advocate, was so urgent, that the PAEKEE whig ministry selected him, although their opponent, to flU the office of vice-chanceUor on October 20, 1861, when he was kmghted. Short as was his presidency of his court, it was long enough to prove him a most excellent judge. Patient in hearing, care ful in deciding, courteous to aU, his judg ments manifested his full comprehension of the facts, and satisfled the understanding by the acute and sagacious appUcation of the law to them, fie survived the last sittings before his flrst long vacation only a few days, dying of an attack of angina pectoris on August 13, 1852, at Rothley Temple in Leicestershire, where he was buried. He married Mai-y, daughter of Thomas Babington, Esq., of Rothley Temple, M.P. for Leicester, by whom he left several children. PAEEEE, John, in his admission to Gray's Inu in 1611, is described of Weylond Underwood in Buckinghamshire. He was called to the bar on June 26, 1617, became an ancient m 1638, a bencher m 1640, and m 1642 arrived at the post of reader. In March 1647 he was appointed ajudge of one of the Welsh circuite, and in the next year was sent by the Commons vrith others to try the rioters in that countoy. The parliament included him in the seq'eante they made on October 30, 1648, and on the death of the Mng confirmed him in his office of Welsh judge. He was sent on the summer circuit of 166-3, either as a serj eant or a j udge ; for there is some doubt as to the precise" date of his being placed on the bench of the Exchequer ; Hardres' Reports, which record his judgmente as a baron, not commencing tUl Trinity Term 1655, He kept Ms seat tUl the Restoration, through all the changes occasioned by the accession of the Protector Richard and the retm-n of the Long ParUament, In the parUaments of 1654 and 1656 he represented Rochester ; and when CromweU composed an upper house, he -with the other judges was summoned as an assistant. (Godwin, ii. 235, Ui. 527 ; Whiteloeke, 305-693 ; Pari Hist iU. 1480, 1480, 1519,) Anthony Wood says that he was one of the assistant committee men in Northamp tonshire ; that he was of the High Court of Justice which tiled Lord Capell, the Earl of Holland, and the Duke of Hamilton, in 1649 ; that in the next year he pubUshed a remarkable book, called ' The Government of the People of England, Precedent and Present,' &c. ; and that on June 22, 1655, he was swom serjeant-at-law, being a mem ber of the Temple. (iv.226.) The leamed author seems, however, to have confounded two individuals ; for, besides the difference of the inn of com-t, it appears manifest that the John Parker who, according to White loeke, was made a seijeant in 1648 was the PARKER 'Same man who by Hardres' Reports is proved to have been a baron m 1655, At the Restoration he of course was re moved from his place ; but, mstead of bemg subjected to any enquiry into his previous conduct, he was summoned to take the degree of serieant-a1>-law : Anthony Wood says, ' by the endeavours of Lord ChanceUor Hyde,' The same author describes him as father of Dr, Samuel Parker, made Bishop of Oxford by James II,, and placed by that Mng as president of Magdalen CoUege in opposition to the lawful elevation of Dr, Hough, fl Siderfin, 4.) PAEEEE, Thomas (Eael of Maccles field), belonged to a branch of a respect able family long seated at Norton Lees in DerbysMre. His father, Thomas Parker, a younger son of George Parker, of Park HaU in Stefl'ordshire, high sheriff of that county in the reign of Charles I., was an attorney practising in the neighbouring town of Leek ; and his mother was Anne, daughter and coheir ofRobert Venables, of Wincham in Derbyshire. He was bom at Leek, aud his birthday, July 23, 1666, was commemorated in a subsequent year by the poet John Hughes, to whom both he and Lord Cowper had been munificent benefac tors, m the foUo-wing eulogistic Imes : — Not fair July, tho' Plenty clothe his fields, Tho' golden suns make all his mornings smile. Can boast of aught that such a triumph yields. As that he gave a Pai-ker to our isle. Hail, happy month ! secure of lasting fame ! Doubly distinguish'd thro' the circling year : — In Eome a hero gave thee first thy name, A patriot's birth makes thee to Britain dear. After recei-ring the rudiments of his edu cation at Newport in Shropshire, and at Derby, he was sent to Trmity College, Cam'bridge, on October 9, 1685, having already 'been admitted a student at the Inner Temple in February 168-3-4. It is not impossible, though very unlikely, that he might have been articled to his father at the time he became a member of the Inner Temple ; but his subsequent entry at Cambridge, and still more his call to the bar on May 21, 1691, seem completely to negative the story mentioned by Lysons iDerhysh, III), and asserted as a fact by jord Campbell (iv, 503), that he was placed on the roU of the junior branch of the pro fession, or practised as an attomey at Derby ' at the foot of the bridge next the Three Cro-wns.' He attended the Midland Cir cuit, and probably acted as a prorincial counsel in the to-wn of Derby, of which he was soon elected recorder. The statement that he was designated the 'sUver-tongued ¦ counsel' is merely a second edition of the title given forty years before to Heneage Fmch, afterwards Earl of Nottmgham. The town of Derby retiu-ned him as one PARKER 499 of its representatives in 1705, and again m the two following parliaments ; but though he sat as a member for the flve years he contmued at the bar, there is no record of any speech he delivered in the house, nor of any part he took, except in the proceed ings against Dr, Sacheverell. In June 1705 he was not only raised to the degree of the coif, but immediately made one of the queen's Serjeants and knighted. Attached to the whig party, he was naturally ap pointed one of the managers in the unpo pular impeachment of Dr. SachevereU in 1710, when his speeches were so effective, and his denunciations against the vain and factious doctor were so strong, that in his retum to his chambers he with difficulty escaped from the mob, which since the commencement of the trial had been furi ously excited against the prosecution. His exertions were soon rewarded and his fright quickly compensated by the appointment of chief justice of the Queen's Bench on March 13, Within a month he was called upon to preside at the trial of Dammaree, WUlis, and Purchase, who had been engaged m the riots arising out of Sacheverell's trial, and were charged with puUing down dis senting meeting-houses; and, though he summed up for the conviction, and they were found guilty of high treason, he mter- ceded for them and procured their pardon. During the eight years of his presidency he fully justifled the wisdom of the choice; for though immediately foUo-wing so re nowned a la'wyer as Sir John Holt, he escaped any injurious comparison, and con ducted the busmess of his court -with dis crimination and leaming. Two years after the accession of George L, on March 10, 1716, he was raised to the peerage by the title of Baron Parker of Macclesfleld, and at the same time he re ceived the grant of a pension for Ufe of 1200/. a year. TMs is a sufficient proof of the estimation with which he was regarded by the Mng, whose favour was two years after flrmly esteblished by the opinion which the chief justice gave, that Ms ma jesty had the sole control over the edu cation and marriages of his grandchildren (State Trials, xv, 1222) ; an opinion which, though subsequently conflrmed, insured the enmity of the Prince of Wales, The fruite of the kmg's favour were immediate ; the effect of the prince's animosity was for some time concealed. The Great Seal was presented to Lord Parker on May 12, 1718, -with the title of lord chancellor, accompanied by the extra ordmary present of 14,000/, from the king. To his son also a yearly pension of 1200/. was at the same time granted till he ob tained the place of teUer of the Exchequer, to which he was appointed in the foUo-wing 500 PAEKEE year. Lord Parker held the Seal for nearly seven years, and proved himself as able in eqmty as he had shown himself in law, his decisions being regarded to this day with as much respect as those of any of his pre decessors. On November 5, 1721, he was created Viscount Parker of Ewelme, and Earl of Macclesfield, with a remainder, faU- mg his issue male, to his daughter Eliza beth, the wife of WiUiam Heathcote, Esq., and her issue male. This uncommon limi tation may have been caused bif his son's absence abroad and the uncertainty of the father as to his existence. The earl had been already made lord Ueutenant of the counties of Warwick and Oxford, in the latter of which he had purchased Sherbum Castle, near WatUngton. In September 1724 he was chosen lord high steward of the borough of Stafford. Yet -with these and other proofs of the king's countenance and favour, -with the reputation of an able dispenser of justice, in the full possession of his faculties, and vrithout any change or any dissension in the ministry, he sud denly resigned the Great Seal on January 4, 1725. His Mgh position for the last four years in which he filled it had been anything but a bed of roses. In the latter end of 1720 Mr, Dormer, one of the masters m Chan cery, had a'bsconded in consequence of the failure of a Mr. Wilson, his goldsmith or banker, in whose hands he had deposited a large amount of the suitors' cash. The deficiency this occasioned, added to his o-wn losses by speculating -with the same cash in the South Sea "bubble, which at that time burst, amounted to nearly 100,000/., which it was impossible for him to meet from his own private means. Those means were applied as far as they would go, and various palliatives were adopted by the chancellor to satisfy the incoming claims, such as by applying for that purpose the price given by the successor for the master ship, by obtaining a contribution of 600/, fi-om each of the other masters except one, and by some payments out of his o-wn pocket. But these were not nearly suffi cient, and the refusal of the masters to make any further contribution, with the urgency of unsatisfied applicants, deter mined the chancellor to put an end to his anxiety by resigning the Seal. Then did he experience the effect of the prince's displeasure. He had not resigned three weeks before petitions were presented to the House of Commons by his royal highness's friends from parties complaining of non-payment of the moneys they were entitled to ; addresses to the king were voted, commissions of enquiry granted, and reports made, which resulted iu the earl's impeachment for corruption on February 12. The charges were not like those against PAEKEE Lord ChanceUor Bacon for taking bribes of the suitors, but the twenty-one articles were confined to his selling offices contrary to law, and for taking extortionate sums for them, -with the knowledge that the payment was defrayed out of the suitors money, 'The trial lasted thirteen days, from the 5th to the 27th of May, and the report occupies' no less than 682 columns of the 'State Trials ' (vol, xvi. 767 et seq.). The pro ceedings were most tiresome, and the repe titions and the quibblings do no credit either to the managers for the Commons or to the accused earl. The Lords unanimously found him guilty and fined him 80,000/. This sum the kmg, though he was obliged to strike his name from the pri-vy council, mtimated to him that he would pay out of his privy purse as fast as he could spare the money, and actuaUy gave him 1000/. towards it in the flrst year, and m the second dfrected 2000/, more to be given to him ; but before the earl applied for it the kmg died, and Sir- Robert Walpole evaded the paymentj pro bably from Ms fear of offendmg the implac able successor. This prosecution was attended with im portant results. Though many -wUl consider that the earl was treated harshly and made to suffer for irregularities introduced by his- predecessors, all must rejoice in the exposure and removal ofthem wMch the mvestigation produced, A vicious system had prevaUed for a long series of years, not only m the Court of Chancery, but m the other courte also, of disposing of the various offices in the gift of the chiefs to any person who would offer what was caUed ' a present ' to the bestower. In the Court of Chancery not only the executive and honorary officers who were entitied to fees were expected to- contribute to the pm-se of the chanceUor, but the system extended to the masters in Chancery, who were the chanceUor's ju dicial assistants, and moreover were en trusted -with the care of the moneys, the- right to which was disputed, or the appli cation of which was to be determmed, in the various causes that came within the juris diction of the court. The practice had been notoriously acted upon for many years by the chancellor's predecessors, and, though the equaUy objectionable custom of receiving new year's gifts had been abrogated by those whom he immediately succeeded,. Lords Co-wper and Harcourt, yet even they had not hesitated to receive payment fi'om those masters whom they had appointed. Bad as the system was, the blot would not have been removed but for the accident of Mr. Dormer's insolvency ; andeven with that discovery Lord Macclesfield would probably have escaped censure had he confined him self to the former practice, which had been . in some sort recognised by the legislature — inasmuch as at the revolution a clause pro- PARKER Mbiting the sale of the office of master of Chancery, which had been proposed to be inserted m a bill then before the house, had been negatived by the Lords. Either his acquittal or his condemnation would have equaUy resulted m the abolition of that practice, and in a more safe investment of the smtors' money. But, unfortunately for the accused earl, the investigation proved that he had not been content vrith the ac customed honorarium, but had increased the price so enormously that it became next to impossible for the appointees to refund themselves, or even to pay the amount, without either extorting unnecessary fees by delaying causes before them, or using the money deposited 'with them to defray the sum demanded. That he employed an agent to bargam for him and to higgle about the price there is no doubt, and that he was aware of the improper use that was made of the suitors' money, and took means to conceal the losses that occasionally occurred, there is too much evidence. Though there fore his friends might assert that he was made to suffer for a system of which he was not the author, and which had been know- mgly practised by his predecessors with impunity, it is impossible to acquit him en tirely of the charge of carrying that system to an exorbitant extent, and of corruptly recognising, if not encouraging, practices dangerous to the public credit, and destruc tive of that confidence which should always exist in the judicature of the country. The contradictions sometimes found in human nature are extraordinary, for while the dis closures of the trial tend to exhibit an ava ricious disposition in the earl, the evidence he produced, -with questionable delicacy, satisfactorily proves that he was at the same time extremely Uberal, dispensing with an almost extravagant hand large sums in the promotion of learning and in aid and en couragement of poor scholars and distressed clergymen. That the price paid by the masters for their places was considered a legitimate part of the profit of the chan cellor, received a curious confirmation in the grant to Lord Macclesfield's immediate successor. Lord King, of a considerable ad dition to his salary, as a compensation for the loss occasioned by the annihilation of the practice consequent upon this mvesti gation. Lord Macclesfield lived seven years after wards, but mixed no more in public affairs. He spent his time between Sherbum Castle, his seat in Oxfordshire, and London, where at the time of his death he was building a house in St, James's Square, afterwards in habited by his son. He died on April 28, 1732, and was buried at Sherburn, His wife, Janet, daughter and coheir of Charles Carrier, of Wirksworth m Derby shire, Esq,, brought him two children only. P.iRKER 501 a son and a daughter. The son, who suc ceeded to the earldom, was renowned as a phUosopher, and had a principal share in preparing the act of parliament for the alteration of the style. The present earl is the sixth who has borne the title, PAEKEE, Thomas, was a near relation of his namesake. Lord Chancellor Maccles field, George Parker, of Park Hall iu Staf fordshire, being the grandfather of the chancellor, and the great-grandfather of the judge, whose father, George, succeeded to the estate of Park Hall. Thomas Parker was born about 1695, and received his education at the grammar school of Lichfield, from whence he was removed to the office of Mr. Salkeld, a so licitor in Brook Street, Holbom, where three other eminent lawyers and judges were at nearly the same time initiated into the mysteries of the science. These were Lord Jocelyn, lord chancellor of Ireland; Sir John Strange, master of the Rolls; and Lord Hardwicke, lord chancellor of Eng land, With the latter he contracted a lasting intimacy, and when he was called to the bar at the Inner Temple iu June 1724 Lord Hardwicke was attomey-general. This was less than a year before his noble rela tive's disgrace, of whose patronage though he was thus deprived, he found an ample compensation in the friendship of Lord Hardwicke, who never forgot what he owed to the early encouragement ofthe persecuted peer, in gratitude to whom he took every opportunity of promoting Parker's advance ment. Thus in June 1786, when Parker had been a barrister only twelve years, he was raised to the dignity of the coif, and made king's seijeant at the same time ; and in two years after, on July 7, 1738, he was raised to the bench as a baron of the Ex chequer, From this court he was removed in April 1740 to the Common Pleas, where he remamed till November 29, 1742, when, having been previously knighted, he was advanced to the head of the Court of Ex chequer as lord chief baron. All these pro motions he owed to Lord Hard-wicke, who in a letter to the Duke of Somerset said that ' Parker was in every way deserving, and has gained a very high character for ability and integrity since his advancement to the bench.' (Harris's Lord Hardwicke, U. 26.) Lord Hardwicke, even when out of power, did not neglect him, but endeavoured on the death of Sir John WUles to procure for him the chief justiceship ofthe Common Pleas, and to the last showed his regard by naming him as a trustee under his -will. (Ibid. iii. 269, 894.) Sir Thomas presided in the Exchequer for thirty years, when, baring arrived at the age of seventy-seven, he resigned in the summer vacation 1772, being gratified with 502 PAENING a pension of 2400/., and being sworn a pri-vy councillor, a post not then usually given to the chief "barons while in office. He lived for twelve years after his retire ment, durmg which he published a volume of Reports of Revenue Cases in the Ex chequer from 1743 to 1767, which display considerable acuteness. A judgment may also be formed of the manner in which he had executed his judicial functions by the remark of Lord Mansfield, who, on the frequent absence of his successor Sir Sidney Stafford Smythe from infirmity, observed, 'The new chief baron should resign in favour of Ms predecessor.' (Lord Campbell, Ch. Justices, ii. 571.) He died on December 29, 1784, and was buried in tbe family vault at Park Hall. He was t-wice married — first to Anne, daughter of James Whitehall, of Pipe- Ridware in Staffordshire ; and secondly to Martha, daughter of Edward Strong, of Greenwich, by each of whom he left issue. The estate of Park Hall is stiU in possession of his descendante. PAENING, Robeet, was possessed of considerable property in Cumberland, and was retumed to parliament in the last year of the reign of Edward IL, as one of the representatives of that county. He took the degree of a serjeant-at-law in 3 Edward III. (Coke, 4th Inst. 79), and is mentioned as a king's serjeant in the eighth year. From this time till he was called to the bench he frequently acted as a judge of assize. On May 23, 1340, he became a justice of the Common Pleas, but only remained in that court for two mouths, being raised on July 24 to the office of chief justice of the King's Bench. His presidency there, how ever, did not continue longer than the I5th of the foUo-wing December, when he changed the office of chief justice for that of treasurer. Being distinguished, as Coke says, for his profound and excellent know ledge of the laws, his elevation to the bench can be well understood; but the cause of his early removal from a sphere in which he was so fitted to shine is not so readily apparent. It arose, probably, from the king having as high an opinion of his integ rity as of his legal attainments. He held his new position for little more than ten months ; for on October 27, 1341, the Great Seal was placed in his hands. He continued chancellor till his death, anditis remarkable that, though there is no imputation against him for neglecting his duties, he was still in the habit of attendmg the Court of Common Pleas to hear arguments there, and sometimes to take part in them. Instances of this occur in Hilary, 17 Edward IIL, and in the two foUovring terms. He died on August 26, 1348, leaving by PASTON his wife, Isabella, a son named Adam, who- succeeded to eight manors and other property , in the oounties of Cumberland and North umberland, {Abb. Rot Orig, U. 202; CaL Inquis. p. m, ii. 110.) PASSEIE-WE, Simon, of Norman origin, was probably brother of Robert, deputy treasurer to Henry III. He was a justice of the Jews in 1237, and in 62 Henry IH. his name appears as a baron of the Ex chequer. (Madox, ii. 819, 320, 727.) In 1268 he is mentioned as applymg to the abbey of St Albans for a loan to the Mng. (Newcome's St. Albans. 171.) PASSELE, or PASSELEWE, Edmdnd de, as several members of his family did before him, held office in the Exchequer. He was probably the son of Robert de Passelewe, who was knight of the shire for Sussex in 24 and 28 Henry IIL, as he himseU had considerable estates in that county, part of which he devoted to pious uses. In 16 Ed ward I. he was appomted one of the com missioners to enqufre as to the damage done by the overflowmg of the sea m the Isle of Thanet (Lewis's Thanet, 77) ; and m 3 Ed ward n. he was specially employed by the king and the council to attend to the king's pleas, and is designated by Dugdale a ser jeant. From that till the sixteenth year he was frequently engaged as a justice of assize, or otherwise, and as such was com manded to bring Ms proceedings mto the Ex chequer to be estreated, and received the cus tomary summons to attend the parliamente. On September 20, 1323, 17 Edward H., he was constituted a baron of the Exche quer, the duties of which he continued to perform tUl the end of the reign. He died in 1 Edward IIL, lea-ring a -widow and two sons. (Abb. Rot Orig. i. 132, 207; Pori. Writs,ii. 1201; Abb. Placit 325.) PASTON, William, wasadescendantfrom Wolstan, a knight who came from France with Henry I., and recei-ring a grant of lands at Paston in Norfolk, adopted the name of that place. His parents were Cle ment Paston, and Beatiice, the daughter of John de Somerton. He was bom in 1378, and, being brought up to the law, was in 1413 made steward of all the courte and leets belonging to Ri chard Courtney, Bishop of Noi-wich. (Blome field's Norfolk, vi. 479.) He was caUed to the degree of seijeant in Hilary, 8 Henry V., 1421, and soon after was selected as one of the king's serjeante. He was raised to the- bench as a justice of the Common Pleas on October 15, 1429, 8 Henry VL, and reteined) his seat durmg the remainder of his life. (Acts Privy Council, iv. 4, 6; DugdaWs Orig. 46.) Although his judicial character was so high as to acquire for him the title of the Good Judge, it did not prevent an accusa tion being brought against Mm m the par- PASTON liament of 1434. This was contained in a petition from one WiUiam Dalling, in which he charged the judge that he ' taketh divers fees and rewards of divers persons withm the shires of Norfolk and Suffolk, and is vrithhold with every matter in the said counties;' and then he names nine cases, two being towns, one an abbot, four priors, and two individuals, with sums varying from Is, to 40s., except the last, which is e-ridently the origin of the complaint, and is thus steted : — 'And of Katherine Shelton X marks, against the king for to be- of her counsel for to destroy the right of the king and of his ward, that is for to say, Ralph, son and heir of John Shelton.' (Paston Letters [Knight's ed,], Introd. xxiv.) The petition was rejected, and is endorsed ' FalsaBilla; ' but it exposes practices which, even if some of them were old annuities granted while he was an advocate for past or future services, and not withdrawn when he rose to the bench, might well make his impartiaUty suspected when these parties were engaged before Mm. He was too ill to ride the Home Circuit in .lanuary 1444, as was then the practice ; and it is curious to find, from a letter ad dressed to him, that no other conveyance was then thought of except that by water ; and that so his colleague, Chief Justice Hody, arranged for them to go, (Ibid. 5.) On the I4th of the foUo-wing August he died, and was buried in Norwich Cathedral, to which he had been a benefactor. (Index Monast 6.) He married Agnes, daughter of Sir Ed mund Berrye, of Harlingbury Hall, Herts, who after her husband's death was pro ceeded against by one John Hauteyn to re cover the manor of Oxnead ; and it affords a strong proof of the respect paid to the memory of the judge that Hauteyn was obUged to petition the chancellor to assign certain persons to be of counsel for him in the process, because no men of court would act in his behalf, (Paston Letters, 8.) From Ms eldest son, John, descended Sir William Paston, distinguished as an anti quary, who was made a baronet of Oxnead, Norfolk, in 1641 ; and whose son, Sir Robert, was created Baron Paston of Pas ton, and Viscount Yarmouth, by Charles IL, to which an earldom of Yarmouth was added m 1679 ; but all these titles became extinct m 1732 on the death of his son WUUam, the second earl, (Morant's Essex, ii. 316 ; Genealogy of the Paston Family, hy F, Worship, Esq.) The collection of letters written by or to the members of this family during the reigns of Henry VL, Edward IV., Richard IIL, and Henry VIL, published originally by Sir John Fenn, and reprinted by Charles Knight in 1840 under the name of the PATESHULL 503 ' Paston Letters,' contains a most mterest ing record of the domestic maimers and habits of the fifteenth century. PATESHULL, Simon de, is first men tioned when he appears on the judicial bench in 5 Richard I., II93, from which time till the end of John's reign his name is frequently recorded on fines, and as per forming the various duties of a justicier, besides actmg as a justice of the Jews. (Madox, i. 235, ii, 315.) His position during the prmcipal part of the latter reign was evidently very high, and from the fact that many of the mandates in causes be fore the court, from 7 John, are addressed ' Rex Sim. de PateshuU et sociis suis, jus ticiis suis,' an inference may perhaps be drawn that he was at the head of that division of the Curia Regis in which ' com mon pleas ' were tried. In John he and James de Potema appear to have been fined in one hundred marks each for grantmg a term in a cause before them -without the king's Ucence, but they were afterwards excused, (Rot Claus. i, 61, &c,, 113, 114,) Numerous entries show his continued attendance on King John, from whom he received many marks of favour. (Rot, Chart 52, 131, 184.) He held the sheriff alties of Northampton from 6 Richard I, to 5 John, and of Essex and Hertford m 6 Richard I. In the wars between King John and the barons he was more than suspected of a defection from his sovereign; iDut in May I2I5 the Mng granted him a safe-conduct, with an mtimation expressed in it that ' if it is so as the abbot of Wobum tells us on your part, we vrill relax all the anger and indignation we had against you,' (Rot. Pat. 94.) He succeeded in clearing him self vrith the king, and his lands, which had been seized, were restored to him in December, (Rot Claus. i. 200, 244,) The time of his death is uncertain ; but as the roUs give only one other instance, in the foUo'wing March, of his performance of judicial duties (Ibid. 270), and as his son Hugh's subsequent connection -with the barons' party is shown by the restora tion of his lands to him in 2 Henry IH., it is more than probable that Simon died before that date. Dugdale, however, in his ' Chronica Series,' inserts him as chief justiciary in 17 Henry HL, from an apparent misappre hension of a parenthetical sentence in a passage m Matthew Paris, speaMng of the riext-mentioned Hugh de PateshuU, who, he says, was son of Simon the justiciary, ' qui quandoque habenas moderabatm totius regni.' Whether such an obiter dictum is a sufficient authority for describing him at all as chief justiciary or not, it clearly does not pretend to make him so at that time or in any part of that reign. 504 PATESHULL PATESHUIL, Hugh de (Bishop of Lichfield and Coventey). Although Dugdale introduces him as chief justiciary in 18 Henry III., 1234, when Stephen de Segrave was disgraced, the authority of the passage in Matthew Paris which he quotes does not appear to authorise any such statement That passage goes no further than to show that he was then nominated treasurer in the place of Peter de Rivallis, an appointment which is proved to have been made by a patent of the same date. (Madox, i. 35.) He was the son of the last-mentioned Simon de PateshuU, and in his early life, pro- bablyjust after his father's death, hejoined the popular cry against King John, and lost his lands accordingly, which were, how ever, restored after the accession of Henry HI., when he retumed to Ms allegiance. (Rot. aaus. i, 340.) He obtained, no doubt from his father's connection with the court, a place in the Exchequer, and united, as was then common, the clerical profession -vrith the performance of his offi cial duties. In the former department he became a canon of St. Paul's (Angl. Sac. i. 489), and in the latter he was gradually advanced to that position in which he had the custody of the seal of the Exchequer, and the receipt of the revenue accounted for by the sheriffs, a post which, if not at that time, was shortly afterwards distin guished by the title of chancellor of the Exchequer, The date of the patent appointmg him treasurer is June 1, 1284, and there are entries to show that he still continued to perform the duties in 22 Henry HI. (Madox, ii. 35, 255, 317) ; and there is no notice of any successor being appointed till 24 Henry IIL, 1240, on July 1 in which year he was consecrated Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, His short presidency over this diocese was terminated by his death, while yet comparatively a young man, on De cember 7, 1241, (Godwin, 81.7; Baronage, U, 143,) PATESHULL, Maeiin de, is stated by one authority to be a native of Northamp tonshire (Fuller, ii. 166), and by another of Staffordshire (Gent Mag. Aug. 1813), and there is a village of his name in both these counties. During the reign of John he probably held some office in the court, with the titie of ' clerk ' added to his name (Rot Chart. 180), and iu 17 John he had letters of safe- conduct to come to the king (Rot. Pat, 142), then in the midst of his troubles. Very soon after the accession of Henry III, he was raised to the bench, for his name appears iu 1217, not only at West minster, when a fine was levied there, but also as a justice itinerant in York and Northumberland, and in other counties. PATTESON From this time until the end of Ms life he was actively engaged in judicial duties, scarcely a year occurring in which he was not sent on various itinera. In 1224 he was one of the justices itinerant at Dun stable whom Faukes de Breaute endeavoured to capture ; but he was fortunate enough to escape, (R. de Wendover, iv. 94.) From the next year, when he stands the first of those who were appointed, he is in every subsequent commission mentioned in the same prominent position. Even if the diri- sion of the courts had then taken place, which is very doubtful, there is no other evidence that he was at the head of either branch. The Fourth Report of the PubUc Records {App. ii, 161) gives an amusing testimony ¦to his activity iu performmg Ms legal func tions, In a letter to the authorities, a brother justicier appointed to go the York Circuit with him prays to be excused from the duty, 'for,' says he, 'the said Martin is strong, and in his labour so sedulous and practised that aU his feUows, especiaUy W, de Ralegh and the -writer ' (whose name does not appear), ' are overpowered by the labour of PateshuU, who works every day from sunrise untU mght,' The -writer therefore prays to be ea.sed of Ms office, and aUowed to go qmetiy to Ms church in the county of York, to which he had been lately presented. Martin de PateshuU was appomted arch deacon of Norfolk m 1226, and two years after he was raised to the deanery of St. Paul's, London, of which he had preriously been a canon, but did not long enjoy his dignity, as he died on November 14, 1229. (Le Neve, 182, 219.) Fuller quotes fU, 166) fi-om FlorUegus this character of him : ' Vfr mirse prudentiae, et legum regni peritissimus.' PATESHULL, Walter de, resided in Bedfordshire, and the only notice that occurs of him in a judicial character is in 8 Henry III,, -when he was one of the justices itinerant for that and the neigh bouring counties. On the disgrace of Faukes de Breaute he was appointed sheriff of Bedfordshfre and BucMnghamshire, and under the direction of him and Hem-y de Braybroc, the captured judge, the castie of Bedford was demoUshed, He retained the sheriffalty for four years, and died in August 1232. (Rot Claus. i, 581, 632; Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. i. 225.) PATTESON, John, was the son of the Rev. Henry Patteson, of Drinkstone in Suffolk, by Sophia, the daughter of Richard Ayton Lee, Esq., a banker iu London, He was bom ou February 11, 1790, at Norwich, of which city his uncle, John Patteson, Esq,, was the representative iu parliament for some years. Educated at Eton, he was elected on the PATTESON foundation, and succeeded to King's College, Cambridge, in .1809, as a scholar, where in 1812 he became a fellow, having in the meantime been the flrst to vrin the Davies Umversity ScholarsMp, Entering the Middle Temple, he placed Mmself successivelyunder the mstructions of two amongthe most eminent special pleaders of the day, Mr, Godfrey Sykes and Mr. (afterwards Justice) Littledale, and, having gained by their guidance sufficient know ledge of the then abstruse science, com menced the practice of it on his own ac count. Here great success attended him, and soon his reputation was so weU esta blished that many pupils resorted to his chambers to share in the beneflt of his teaching. When in I82I he was caUed to the bar and joined the Northem Circuit, his name as an accurate and subtle pleader soon secured him a prominent place among his compeers; and Mr. Littledale, who then acted as counsel for the Treasury, showed Ms confidence in him by securing his assis tance m the business of the crown. At the closeof one of his arguments, ' RenneU v. The Dishop of Lincoln,' Mr. Justice Bayley is said to have thrown do-wn to him from the bench a note with these words : ' Dear P. Lord Tenterden, C.J, An admirable argu ment; shows him fit to be an early judge.' The implied prophecy was speedily ac complished. When three new judges were to be appointed, Lord ChanceUor Lyndhurst selected Mr, Patteson as the most eUgible person to take the additional place in the Kmg's Bench, He received his promotion cn November 12, 1830, -without a murmur among his colleagues, though no other in stance had ever occurred of one who after only mne years' practice at the bar had been raised to the bench ; so unreservedly were his merits acknowledged. He of course then received the honour of knighthood. The choice proved a most .successful one. For rather more than one-and-twenty years, under three chiefs (Lord Tenterden, Lord Denman, and Lord Campbell),he contributed greatly, by his high judicial faculty, to the efficiency of the court, as was frequently and publicly acknowledged. No one was more soundly versed m the principles of the common law, or more firm in his enunci ation of them; no one was more lucid m his reasoning's, or less liable to be misled by the sophistiies of counsel ; and, what is of the greatest importence, no one was more courteous and kmd to all appUcants, whether in court or in chambers. As a criminal judge he was mflexiblyjust, and, where he could be, most merciful; and m every branch of his duties he established a cha racter inspiring so much respect and con fidence that there have been few judges whose retirement was more regretted. PATTESON 505 But he was visited with an inflrnuty, that of deafness, which, though at first moderated by the use of ingemous instru ments, at last increased to such an extent that he felt that he could not adequately fulfil the duties which devolved upon him, and, most unwillingly, he tendered his resignation. The scene on his last appear ance in court, February 9, 1852, was a most affecting one ; and no better evidence can be produced of the bar's appreciation of him than is afforded by the foUo-wing pas sage in the address of the present chief justice of that court, Sfr Alexander Cock- bum, then attomey-general : — 'As we are now about to lose you, it may not be entirely unbecoming in me to offer, nor whoUy unwelcome to you to receive, the assurance of the universal sense of the whole profession that the high and sacred duties of the judicial office were never more honestly or ably discharged than by 3'ou during your whole judicial life. Though we lose you, your memory will yet remain to us, assuming its proper position among those revered names which dignify this place and this hall, and will be cherished by us not more for that vast and varied leaming by which aU have proflted and which all have admired, than for that untiring love of justice and truth, and that hatred of oppression and -wrong, that unflinching integrity of purpose, that simplicity and singleness of heart, and that benevolent kindness of nature, which leave us m doubt whether we should more revere the judge or love the man. You will carry into your retirement the respect and vener ation, and the enduring attachment, of every member of the profession. We re joice to hope that, though the sense of one inflrmity, and the apprehension lest that should interfere -with the perfect discharge of your duty, have made you -vrithdraw from your office in the vigour of your powers, you will long remain in unimpaired health, and long enjoy all the pleasm-es of life.' He was immediately swom of the privy council, and for flve- years assisted in the adjudication of the difdcult cases that come before ite judicial committee. His failing health then compelled him to desist from all mental labour, and for the short re mainder of his life he devoted himself to the enjoymente of domestic society and to the friendly assistance of his neighbours. He expired on June 28, 1861, at Feniton Com-t, near Honiton, an estate he had pur chased at a short distance from the residence of his brother-m-law and colleague Sir John Taylor Coleridge, with whom he kept up the most affectionate intimacy, and who has feelingly recorded his worth on the brass Ms admirers put up to his memory in Eton College chapel. 506 PAULET He was twice married — first to EUzabeth, daughter of George Lee, Esq., of Dickie- borough, Norfolk; and secondly to Frances Duke, sister of Mr. Justice Coleridge, whom he survived. One of his two sons is the missionary bishop to the western isles of the South Pacific Ocean, and the other a revising barrister on the Northern Circuit. PAULET, William (Maeouis of Win- chestee), was the son of Sir John Paulet, an emment soldier, created a knight of the Bath at the marriage of Prince Arthur in 1601, and of EUzabeth, daughter of Sir WilUam Paulet, of Hinton St. George, He was born about 1476, if it be true that he lived to his ninety-seventh year. Though he appears to have been sheriff of Hampshire in I6I8, the Mstory of Ms early life is limited to the fact that he was a leamed and accomplished man, and that he received the honour of knighthood before he was made comptroller of the household by Henry VIIL, in 1532, when, according to the above account, he must have been fifty-seven years of age. Five years afterwards he became treasurer, and on March 9, 1589, was advanced to the baronage by the title of Lord St. John of Basmg, On the establishment of the new Court of Wards, in 32 Henry VIIL, he was the first master appointed, and in the thfrty-flfth year he was installed .a knight of the Garter. He next became great master of the king's household, and the last service he performed to Henry VIII. was in accompanying him on the expedi tion to France, when he was present at the taking of Boulog-ne. Of that king's will he was the third named of the sixteen executors, and under its provisions one of the privy council of his infant successor. Of this council he was appointed presi dent when Somerset became protector, and within a few weeks after the accession of Edward VL the Great Seal was placed m his hands on March 6, 1547, with the title of lord keeper. It is evident that this was not meant to be a permanent appointment, from the time during which he was to hold it being limited in the first instance to fourteen days, and on two subsequent occasions to defined periods. The protector, however, was so uncertain as to the person with whom he should ultimately entrust it that Lord St. John retained the possession for more than seven months, when Richard Lord Rich was constituted lord chancellor on October 28. As soon as the power of the protector seemed to be slipping away from his grasp. Lord St John is found on the side of Ms opponents and assisting in his do-wnfall. The reward of this suppleness was the earldom of Wiltshire and the office of lord treasurer, both of which were granted in the beginning of 1650, To the former PAUNTON title that of Marquis of Winchester was, added in October of the followmg year, and in little more than a month he presided as lord steward at the trial of the late Pro tector Somerset, He was one of the twenty- four subscribers to the document prepared by the Duke of Northumberland, under taking to support the succession of the kingdom on Lady Jane Gre}^ ; but on the death of King Edward, though, acting as lord treasurer, he presented the crown to that unfortunate lady, he had the vrit very soon to see his dangerous position, and contrived to be one of those lords who met at Baynard's Castle, and caused Queen Mary to be proclaimed. This secured to him a continuance m his office of treasurer for the whole of that reign, durmg which he is said to have been active in the persecutions- which disgraced it. His patent, however, was renewed when Queen Elizabeth suc ceeded. He lived for nearly thfrteen years after that event, and died on March 10, 1572,. and was buried at Basmg m HampsMre. It is not supposed that a man so old as he was could interfere much m politics in the last two reigns ; but it is apparent that he must have possessed a wonderfully accommodating spirit to have remamed un scathed in such perilous times under four sovereigns, professing alternately different systems of religion. His own solution of the difficulty seems to be the right one.. When he was asked how he had attained so great an age, he pleasantly answered, — Late supping I forbear, "Wine and -women I forswear ; My neck and feet I keep from cold ; No marvel then that I am old. / am a willow, not an oak ; 1 chide, but never hurt -with stroke. He married two -wives. The first was EUzabeth, daughter of Sfr WiUiam Capel ; the second, Winifr-ed, daughter of Sfr John Bruges, and widow of Sfr WiUiam Sack ville, chancellor of the Exchequer. Etis titles descended in regular succession till the sixth marquis m 1689 was created Duke of Bolton, The sixth duke dying without male issue m 1794, the dukedom became extinct, but the marqmsate de volved on the descendant of a younger son of the fourth marquis, whose grandson. now enjoys the title, (Baronage, i. 876; CoUins's Peerage, ii. 867 ; Hayward; Rapin; Lingard, &c.) PAUNTON, James de, was settied in Lincolnshire, his father, WiUiam, being sheriff there in 50 and 61 Henry HL, and he himself in the four foUowing years. _ He was constituted a justice of the King's. Bench in 1270, and died almost im mediately after Ms appomtment; for in I Edward I., Philip de Paimton, probably his son by Isabella his wife, o"btamed ani extent in aid against those who owed PAUPER James money, to pay his debts to the crown. (Madox, 173, 194 ; Abb. Placit 199, 233,312.) PAUPEE, RodEE, was the son of Roger, Bishop of Salisbury, the great minister of Hemy I., and of MatUda of Ramsbury, whom some authors call his wife, and some his concubine. The charitable presumption is, that he had been legally united to her, and that he had refused to obey the canons wMch were then attempted to be enforced, enjommg married prieste to put away their -wives. There are three documents provmg that Roger Pauper was chancellor in the first year of Stephen's reign — one dated in 1135 (Monast ii. 482); another granted at the general council held at Westminster in the followmg Easter (Madox, i. 13); and a third, being the Charter of Liberties, dated near the same time at Oxford (App. to Re ports, Rec Commis.) ; to all of which the attestation of his father, the bishop, is also attached. In July II39 he was still chancellor, when he and his father were seized by Stephen at Oxford, The manner in which he was carried in fetters before the castle of Devizes, and threatened -with instant death unless it was surrendered to the king, is more fuUy related in the subsequent Ufe of Bishop Roger. Although the bishop was released when the castle was taken, the Mng kept the chanceUor in confinement, and for a long time refused to give him his liberty unless he would join the court party, an offer wMch he invariably rejected. At last, ho-yvever, he procured his freedom, on con dition that he retfred from the kingdom. His exile continued dming the remainder of his Ufe, and history is silent as to its close, (Madov, i. 14 ; Godwin, 841 ; Wen dover, ii, 226.) PAUPEE, Heebbet (Bishop of Salis buey), enjoyed the archdeaconry of Can terbury m 1175, and in 1186 and the following years was one of the custodes of the see of Salisbury during its vacancy (Madox, i, 81 1, 634), which lasted tiU II88. To this bishopric he was afterwards elected in May 1194, 5 Richard I. From that time he acted regiUarly as a justicier in the Cm'ia Regis, his name appearing to several fines from the sixth to the ninth year of the rei^mclusive. (Hunter's Preface.) He died on May 9, I2I7, and was bmied at Wilton. (Godwin, 842; Le Neve, 11, 257.) PEC, Richaed db, was among the jus tices itmerant selected by the king when the councU of Windsor, in 1179, 25 Hemy IL, divided the kingdom into four circuits. (Madox, i, 187.) In 27 Henry H, he was sent vrith the constable of Chester to L-e land, to take away the government from Hugh de Lacy, who had offended the king PEMBERTON 507 by marrying a daughter of Roderick, King- of Connaught, (Loi-d Lyttelton, iii, 351,) In 3 Richard I, he had the custody of the castle of Bolsover (Madox, ii, 220) ; and in 1195 he appears again as a justice itinerant, fixing the taUage in Gloucestershire, He married Matilda, the -widow of the before-mentioned Robert Grimbald, (Ihid. i, 704.) PEMBEETON, Feancis. Chauncy, the historian of Hertfordshire, is the only author who speaks of his contemporary Sir Francis Pemberton -with unmixed commendation. His other biographers, with whatever party they are connected, almost invariably qua lify the encomiums they are compelled to utter with some expressions of deprecia tion. One says that he was a great lawyer, but that he had so towering an opinion of his own sense and wisdom that he made more law than he declared. Another, while acknowledging that he was an excellent judge, asserts that his passion for prefer ment led him sometimes to do wrong. The various incidents of his career are so tinted by the different prejudices of the writers, whether whig or tory, that, not receiving the entire approbation of either party, the natural inference to an unprejudiced mind is, that he acted independently of both. That he was ' damned -with faint praise ' receives its explanation in Burnet's admis sion that ' he was not wholly for the court.' The family of Pemberton came originally from a town of that name m Lancashire ; but a branch of it settled at St, Albans in Herts, and gave many sheriffs to that county. Ralph Pemberton, who was tvrice mayor of the borough in the reign of. Charles I., was the father of the judge, who was bom there in 1625, and, after receiving the rudiments of his education' in one of its private seminaries, was removed in August 1640 to Emmanuel CoUege, Cambridge,. under the tuition of the learned Dr. Which cote, whose niece he afterwards married. He remamed at the university till February 1644, having taken the degree of B.A., and, entering the Inner Temple, was called to the bar in November 1654. Chauncy omits any mention of his youtMul follies, probably considering that he redeemed them by his future Ufe; but both Roger North and Burnet, the courtier and the whig, agree in describmg his beginnmgs as very de bauched, and leading him into such extra vagance that he soon wasted his patrimony, and mvolved himself in such debt that he lay many years in gaol, WMle there he is represented by both to have made up for lost time, foUowing his studies so closely that accordmg to one he came out a sharper at the law, and according to the other he became one of the ablest men of his profession. He no doubt had plenty of exercise for legal subtleties in the cases- 508 PEMBERTON of his fellow prisoners, to aid whom his necessities obliged him to apply himself. How or when he obtained his release is not related, except by Lord CampbeU, who ¦enters into minute details, for which he has not given any authority. His brother lawyer ¦Serjeant Chauncy says that he was made •one of the counsel of the Marshalsea Court, an arena in which his prison experience would stand Mm in good stead. But soon .after the return of Charles II. he is men tioned in the courts at Westminster, and evidently got into considerable practice. Pepys (iii. 371) consulted him on prize business, and mentions the heaps of gold upon his table ; and in 1668 he was em ployed by the crown in the prosecution of the apprentices tried for high treason in tumultuously assembling under colour of pulling do-wn disorderly houses, (State Trials, vi. 880.) In 1671 he was caUed to the bench of his inn, and became Lent reader in 1674, on which occasion Chauncy -says he kept a 'noble teble' there. It is thus apparent that he soon outlived his early reputation ; and that he was held in high estimation in his profession is proved Uy his bemg appointed Mng's serjeant in August 1675, not seven months after his being summoned to assume the coif. In the interval he became the innocent victim of an absurd quarrel about privilege be tween the two houses of Parliament, An appeal in a suit, wherein a member of the lower house was a defendant, having been made to the House of Lords in its judicial capacity, the Commons pertinaciously con tended that their members were privileged from appearing before that assembly. The <;ounsel appointed by the Lords to plead in the cause were ordered mto custody by the Commons for their compliance, and on being released by the Lords were again seized, and committed to the Tower. The journals of the two houses (Ihid. vi, 1146) give a very amusing account of this ridicu lous farce ; and ' so high at last the contest rose ' that the king was obUged to put an end to it by prorogumg and afterwards dis- -solving the parUament, Serjeant Pember ton was one of these counsel, and after being released by the Lords was retaken by the speaker (Seymour) himself in the middle .of Westminster Hall. His imprisonment of course ended with the session. On being made king's serjeant he re ceived the honour of knighthood ; and in 'less than four years— viz., onMay 1, 1679— he was constituted a judge of the King's Bench, At this time, as the trials arising out of the pretended Popish Plot were pro ceeding, he of necessity took part in several of them; and from the questions that he put it is very evident that, though he had some belief in the plot, he had not much con fidence in the witnesses. Before he had PEMBEETON sat a twelvemonth, Scroggs, who was then chief justice, intrigued for his removal, and he received his discharge on February 16, 1680, three weeks after the trial and acquittal of Sir Thomas Gascoigne, He immediately retumed to his practice at the bar, and at the end of another year he was selected to displace Scroggs in the higher office of chief justice of the King's Bench, his patent being dated April II, I68I, From this court he was removed to preside m the Common Pleas on January 22, 1683. Sir T. Raymond says in his Reporte (p. 478) that this change was made by his o-wn desire, for that the latter was a place, though not so honourable, yet of more ease and profit. And so no doubt it was given out ; but both Bumet (vol. i. 536) and North (p. 233) agree that the proceed ings against the city of London then coming on for argument, Pemberton, who was not considered sufficiently favourable to the views of the cro-wn, was made to give way to Sir Edmund Saunders, who had advised on all the pleadings. Sir Francis was at the same time sworn a privy counseUor. He however kept neither honour very long, bemg dismissed from his office of judge on September 7 foUo-wing, and removed from the privy counsel in the next month, TMs second dismissal is attributed by Burnet to the judge's showing ' so little eagerness against Lord RusseU,' whose trial had taken place in the prerious July. Whether that was the real cause or not, his removal from the privy councU shows that he was tm-ned out for political purposes. He is said to have boasted that 'while he was a judge ' — a period of only three years and a half — ' he had for his own share made more law than King, Lords, and Commons, smce he was born. (Lord Campbell's Chanc. iU, 394,) He then a second time retm-ned to the bar, and practised with great success as a serjeant for the next fourteen years, tiU hi*i death in 9 WUUam III. Though m 1688 he was the leading counsel who defended the seven bishops, and, by obtaimng thefr ac quittal, produced the revolution, yet in the very next year the Convention Parliament called him to accomit for a judgment by which six years before he had overruled a plea of Topham the serjeant-at-arms to the jurisdiction ofthe coui-t. Both he and Sfr Thomas Jones, who had joined in the judg ment, were committed to prison, though they gave very sufficient reasons for their decision. They remained in dm-ance from July 19 till August 20, when the parUa ment was adjourned, or October 21, when it was prorogued, (State Trials, xii, 822-834.) He died at his house at Highgate on June 10, 1697, aud was buried in the chapel there, upon the pulling do^wn of which his monument was removed to the church of Trumpington, near Cambridge, in the neigh- PEMBEOKE bourhood of which some of his family have property. By his wife, Anne, daughter of Sir Jeremy Whichcote, Bart, he had eleven children, of whom seven survived him — three sons and four daughters, Sfr Francis Pemberton is reputed to have been a generous and charitable man, and to have been endowed with a ready wit and quick apprehension. At the same time his notions are described as curious, and his distmctions nice ; and certainly his phraseology was peculiar, for he was in the nabit of commencing his addresses to coun sel, jury, and prisoner with Captain Fluel- len's expression, 'Look you,' Roger North's account of him (p. 222-3) is a very preju diced one, because he was in some sort a rival of the author's brother. Lord Guil ford ; and while he is obUged to acknow ledge his excellence as a lawyer, he imputes to him, without the slightest e-ridence, misconduct both as counsel and as judge. Bumet describes him as one of the ablest men of his profession, and allows that he summed up against Lord RusseU ' at first very fairly ; ' yet he evidently regards him -with a somewhat jaundiced eye. Though he accounte for his removals by saying 'he was not wholly for the court,' he was not quite satisfied with him because he was not wholly a whig. The best proof that the family of Bedford did not impute to him any injustice or cruelty is that the old . earl advised with him whether the attainder would prevent Lord Russell's son from succeeding to the earldom. The opinion that he gave remains among the archives of Wobum. Serjeant Chauncy also de scribes his general conduct while presiding m the most fiattering terms, an opinion m which all must concur who read the trials of the period. His career was curiously marked by vicissitudes. After a youth of dissipation he became a profound lawyer ; he was raised to the bench tvrice, and was twice dismissed by the Mng as being too lenient to those who opposed the court, and was twice imprisoned by the House of Commons — once at least, as act ing arbitrarily and unjustly on the bench; after filling the highest judicial offices he twice resumed his place at the bar ; and, notvrithstanding all his reverses, and in spite of the condemnation of party writers on both sides, his memory is regarded with that respect which always accompanies moderation and independence, (Lord Mac aulay's England, iii. 380.) PEMBEOKE, Eael or. See W. Maees- CHALL, PENEOESTEE, Stephen de. Although Dugdale introduces him in his list of judges of the Common Pleas, quoting the ' Com- munia' of Trinity Term, 12 Edwai-d I., there is considerable doubt whether he ever held that office or sat at aU on the PENGELLY 50& bench at Westminster, He certainly was often employed in a judicial character, but it seems to have been in his capacity of warden of the Cinque Porte, The manor of Penshurst in Kent belonged' to him, together vrith the manor of West Leigh and the castle of Allington in the^ same county. He was sheriff of Kent in 58 Henry HI, and the two folio-wing years, and was then appointed constable of Dover Castle and warden of the Cinque Porte, posts which he retained as late as 33 Ed ward I, (Excerpt e Rot Fin. ii, 662 ; Madox, i, 613; Ahb. Rot Orig, i, 47,) There are several instances of his being assigned to- ti-y malefactors and to decide rights vrithin his jurisdiction (Rot Pari i, 3, 18, 98, 126 ; Abb. Placit 203), but none that show him to have been one ofthe regular judges. His first -wife -was Roese de BeseviUe ; and his second was Margaret, daughter of John de Burgh, the grandson of Hubert de Burgh, and widow of Robert de Orreby, He largely endowed the free chapel of his manor of Penshurst, and lies buried in the church there under an altar tomb, on which he is represented in armour, and not in judicialrobes, (Hasted, i, 182, iii, 75, &c,, iv, 450, vi. 84; Abb, Rot Orig. i. 162, 164,) PENGELLY, Thomas, is said by tradition to owe his origin to an illicit amour of the Protector Richard Cromwell, This story seems principally to be foimded on the fact that Pengelly showed uncommon zeal in a suit between Richard and his daughters, and that the protector died in Pengelly's house at Cheshunt. That this parentage was credited in his own times appears pro bable from the sly answer given by a wit ness to his question, how long a certain way through Wmdsor Park had been so used — ' As far back as the time of Richard Cromwell' The register states his birth to have taken place in Moorfields on May 16, 1675, and records him as the son of Thomas Pengelly, who in the son's admis sion to the Inner Temple is described of Finchley, Middlesex ; but who this father was is nowhere explained. He was called to the bar in November 1700, and was dig nified vrith the coif in 1710. Elected member for Cockermouth in both the par liamente of George I., he was in the latter one of the managers on the impeachment of the Earl of Macclesfleld, and undertook the duty of replying to that nobleman's defence. In a long and laboured harangue he vrith great abiUty and force answered all the legal pointe raised by the earl, and with more harshness than was requisite aggravated the offences vrith which he was charged. At this time he was the Mng's prime serjeant, to which he had been ap pointed on June 24, I7I9, having been knighted in the pre-rious month, and m this character he, -with the other law officers of 510 PBNROS the cro-wn, had the conduct of the indict ment of Christopher Layer for Mgh treason in conspiring against the Mng in 1722, ¦very ably and efficiently performing his duty on that important trial. On October 1 6, 1726, he was appointed chief baron of the Exchequer. (Lord Raymond, 1309, 1410; State Trials, xvi. 140, 1380.) He presided in that court for four years aud a half, and during that time he exhibited that patience and flrmness, as well as legal knowledge and discrimination, by which a good judge is distinguished. He fell a victim to the cruel and disgusting manner in which prisoners were treated in that age. TravelUng the Western Circuit, some culprits were brought before him from Ilchester for trial at Taunton, the stench from whom was so bad that an infection was spread which caused the death of some hundreds of persons. Among them was the lord chief baron, who died at Blandford on April 14, 1730, (State Trials, xvU, 219-250; Gent Mag. xx. 235.) He was considered when at the bar a florid speaker and bold advocate, though perhaps at times too vehement, Steele's quibble on his name — ' As Pen is the Welsh term for head, guelt is the Dutch for money, which -with the EngUsh syUable Iy, taken together, expresses one who turns Ms head to lye for money ' — must be wholly disre garded, as it was prompted by anger at liaving the licence of his theatre taken away. As a judge he held a high reputation for his learning and his equal distribution of justice ; and in his private character he was esteemed for his probity and cheerfuMess, His charity was not confined to Ms life, for by his vrill he left a considerable sum for the discharge of prisoners confined for debt, (Noble's Cromwell, i, 175 ; Cont. of Granger, Ui, 194.) PENEOS, John, was of a Cornish family. He was raised to the office of a judge of the King's Bench in Ireland on February 27, 1885, 8 Richard H. (CaL Rot Pat 211.) From this position he was removed to the English bench on January 15, 1391, in the fourteenth year ; but to which of the two courts seems imcertain. Although Dugdale places him in the Common Pleas, the words in the patent seem rather to express the King's Bench (Ibid. 221) ; and no fines ap pear, from Dugdale's account, to have been levied before him. In the following year he was made justice of South Wales ; and the last time we find him mentioned is as a trier of petitions in the parliament of 17 Richard II. (Ibid 223; Rot ParL 810,) PENZANCE, Loed. See J. P. Wilde, PEPYS, Richaed, was the second son of John Pepys, of Cottenham in Cambridge shire, and the nephew of Talbot Pepys, who was a reader at the Middle Temple in 1628. His mother was Elizabeth, daughter of John PEPYS Bendish, of Steeple Bumpstead in Essex. He studied at the Middle Temple, and, arriving at the post of reader in 1640, was elected treasm-er of the society in 1643. In January 1664 he was caUed serjeant, immediately after which he was named on the commission for the spring circuit tMough the midland counties ; and on May 30, 1666, he was made a baron of the Exchequer. (Dugdale's Orig. 220-222; Whiteloeke, 591,) Within a year he was removed to the chief justicesMp of the Upper Bench in Ireland; and on June 14, 1655, he was placed m that character as chief com missioner of the Great Seal of that countiy, in which he continued till August 20, 1656. At the time of his death, in January 1668, he was the sole judge of his court; and it is much to his credit that m times like those in which he flourished no touch of calumny sullies his name. (Smyth's Law Off, Ireland, 31, 90.) The grandson of Richard, the judge's eldest son, was the father of two baronete — Sir Lucas Pepys, physician to George HI., created m 1784; and Sfr WiUiam WeUer Pepys,' a master in Chancery, created in I80I, The latter title devolved m 1846 on the next-noticed Charles CMistopher Pepys, _ Not-withstanding all these honours attach ing to the famUy, the name of Pepys -wiU be longer remembered through the Uterary reputation of Samuel Pepys, the descendant of a younger branch, who was secretary of the Admfralty m the reigns of Charles TL, and .lames Tl. PEPYS, Chaeles Cheistophee (Eael OF Cottenham), was dfrectly descended from the above-noticed Richard Pepys, bemg the second son of Sir WiUiam WeUer Pepys, who held the office of master m Chancery from 1776 tiU 1807, and obtamed his baronetcy in I80I by his wife, EUza beth, eldest daughter of the Right Honour able WilUam Dowdeswell, chanceUor of the Exchequer m 1765, He was nephew also to Sir Lucas Pepys, Bart., physician to George IH, Both the baronetcies centred in him by the decease of his brother m 1845, and' his cousin in 1849, and are now merged in the eai-ldoni he afterwards attained. His younger brother Henry held the bishopric of Worcester from 1841 to 1861. He was born on AprU 29, 1781, and was educated at Harrow, from whence he pro ceeded to Trinity College, Cambridge, where he took his degree of Bachelor of Laws m 1803. Havmg previously entered himsell as a member of Lincoln's Inn, he availed himself of the instructions of the two most eminent men in common law and eqmty, Mr. Tidd and Sir Samuel Romilly, tUl he was called to the bar in November 1804. He attached Mmself to the Comt of Chan cery, but, though esteemed a skilful drafts- PEPYS man, his progress was not rapid. He did not ¦obtain a silk gown till 1826 ; but afterwards he had no reason to complam. Soon after the accession of William IV. lie was appointed, in November 1880, soli citor-general to the queen; and in July 1831 he entered parliament, first as the representative of Earl FitzwilUam's borough ¦of Malton, and afterwards of Higham Fer rers. In the senate he supported the whig party, to which he was always attached; and was raised by that party in February 1834 to the post of solicitor-general to the Mug, on which occasion he was knighted. He had fiUed that office for little more than six months when the mastership of the Rolls became vacant, to which post, passingoverthe Attomey-General Campbell, Sir Christopher was appomted on Septem ber 29, 1884. In the interval between that month and AprU 1886 there had been two ¦changes of mmistry; and on the second change, when the liberal party resumed power, the Great Seal was put mto commis sion, at the head of which the new master of the Rolls was placed. At the end of nine months, on January 16, 1836, the Seal was • deUvered to Sir Christopher alone as lord chanceUor, and four days afterwards he was ¦created Baron Cottenham. For nearly the six following years he performed the functions of his high office in a most satisfactory manner ; but on Sep tember 3, 1841, on the restoration of the conservative party, he retired, and remained ¦out of office while that mimsti-y retained power, but assisted in hearing appeals to the House of Lords and the privy council. When the conservatives were in their turn obliged to quit the govemment he resumed his seat on the woolsack, on July 4, 1846, being the only whig chancellor, except Lord Cranworth, who during the present century has been restored to his place. Towards the end of four years Lord Cot tenham's health began to succumb under the labours of his position, and his suffer ings at last interfered much -with his duties. In the prospect of his retirement, her majesty, or rather perhaps the party to which he was attached, showed the value placed on his services by raising him two steps in the peerage. He was on June I, 1850, created Viscount Crowhurst and Earl of Cottenham ; and on the 19th of the same month, under the pressure of severe illness, he resigned the Seal, baring held it as chanceUor nearly ten years. With the hope of restormg his health, he travelled on the continent, but, as in the case of Lord Langdale, his relaxation came_ too late. Within nine months he died at Pietra Santa in the duchy of Lucca on April 19, I85I, Lord Cottenham, though he attained no great eminence as an advocate, proved himself a most exceUent judge. In the PERCY 511 former capacity he was a sound and prac tical adviser, and an accurate and logical reasoner, but without that ready eloquence which is often the principal attraction. But these very qualities rendered his deci sions in the latter character of the greater value, enabling him at once to see the real merits of the pomt m dispute, and to dis card from his consideration useless techni- caUties and irrelevant arguments. As a senator, both in and out of office, he sup ported and sometimes originated several amendments of the law, and m his own court he introduced some regulations for the simplification and more satisfactory conduct of its proceedings. It speaks highly in Ms favour that his judicial merits were not praised by his own friends only, but fully acknowledged by the opposite party also. He waspeculiarly cold and sedate in his manner, and extremely tenacious of his opinions, and though he was a staunch ad herent to the whig party, he was not consi dered of any use to it as a politician. In 1821 Lord Cottenham married Caro line, daughter of WilUam Wmgfield, Esq,, the master in Chancery, by Lady Charlotte Maria, daughter of the first Earl of Digby, By her he had twelve children. PEECEHAY, or PEECY, Henet de, may have been a younger branch of the noble house of Percy, but was probably the son of WiUiam and Isabella Percehay, the posses sors of Lewesham and other manors in York shire and Lincolnshire. From 89 Edward in. he received a fee as one of the king's serjeante, after which he was occasionally employed as a justice of assize. He was raised to the bench at Westminster on October 5, 1875, being then constituted a baron of -the Exchequer, in which office he remained during the rest of that and the first five months of the following reign. He was then, on November 26, 1377, re moved to the Court of Common Pleas, in which fines are recorded as levied before him till Midsummer 1380, 4 Richard H. (Dugdale's Orig. 45.) PEECY, Robeet de, was one of the jus ticiers before whom fines were taken in 10 John. (Hunter's Preface.) They were acknowledged in the country, and he is mentioned in that character in no previous or subsequent year. He was the third son of Josceline of Lovame (son of Godfrey Duke of Brabant and brother of Adelicia, the second wife of Henry L), who assumed the name of Percy for himself and his descendants on his mar riage with Agnes, one of the daughters and coheirs of Lord WilUam de Percy the third baron, on whose death the male branch became extinct. He accompanied the king to Leland in 1210, and in the foUowmg year had various aUowances for the expenses of the Spanish 512 PERCY ambassadors and their knights, and for conducting them to Dover, (Rot. de Prce stito, 180-236,) In 14 John the sheriffalty of Yorkshire was committed to him, but he subsequently appears to have joined -with the barons, as his lands were given to Brian de Insula; but they were restored on Ms submission soon after the accession of Henry III, (Rot Claus. i, 245, 324, 373.) In the tenth year of that reign he is mentioned as one of the justices assigned to hold a special assize of last presentation to a church in Yorkshire. (Ibid, ii, 138,) He is said to have assumed the name of Sutton, which was borne by his posterity, (Baronage, i. 271; Co//ms's Peero^e, U. 232,) PEECY, William de, was also named in Mr, Hunter's Ust of justiciers before whom fines were acknowledged in 8 John, 1206, but none of the fines in which he is so in troduced have yet been published. He seems to have been nephew of the above-mentioned Robert de Percy, and the son of Hem-y de Percy, Robert's elder brother, by Isabel, daughter of Adam de Brus, lord of Skelton. He was employed by King John, a man date being recorded for a secure ship_ for him to pass over in the king's serrice mto Poictou vrith horses and arms. (Rot de Fin, 647.) Under Henry III. he received various grants of land, and obtained a weekly market for his manor of Spofforth in Yorkshire, and m 26 Henry HI. he paid one hundred marks to be exempted from attendance on the king in Gascony. He died in 1245, and was buried in the abbey of Sallay, His first vrife was Joan, one of the daughters of the before-noticed WilUam Briwer, His second vrife was EUen, daughter of Ingelram de Bailiol, By both he had issue. The thirteenth baron was in 1377 created Earl of Northumberland, a title which stiU exists, notwithstanding various forfeitures, in the present Duke of Northumberland, who is the lineal descendant, sometimes through female heirs, of this WilUam de Percy. The dukedom was added by George III. on October 18, 1766. (Barmiage, i. 271 ; CoUins, U. 233.) PEECY, Peiee de, was probably a branch of the same noble family, and was certainly a native of the North, From the numerous entries in the Rotu lus de Fimbus (E.vcerpt U. 263-388) of paymente made for assizes before him, it is apparent that he was a regular justicier. They extend from 41 to 47 Henry IH,, 1257-1268. After that date there is no further mention of him until 1267, when his son Robert does homage for the lands his father held in capite, (Ibid. 456,) PEEEOT, Geoege, was the son of the Rev, 'Thomas Perrot, rector of Welbmy and Martin-cum-Gregory in York, and a PEEYAM prebendary of Ripon, by 'Anastasia, daughter of George Plaxton, Esq., of Berwick. He was born in 1710, and was initiated in th& study of the law at the Inner Temple, ob taining his grade of barrister in 1732, and of bencher m May 1767. Two years after he was made a king's counsel, and in 1760 he opened the indictment agamst Lord Ferrers when he was tried for murder by the House of Lords. In January 1763 he obtained a seat on the bench as a baron of the Exchequer, but was never knighted. His power of discrimination may be esti mated by his summing up on a trial at Exeter as to the right to a certam stream of water, which he concluded thus : ' Gentle men, there are fifteen -witnesses who swear that the watercourse used to flow m a ditch on the north side of the hedge. On the other hand, gentlemen, there are nine vrit- nesses who swear that the watercourse used to flow on the south side of the hedge. Now, gentlemen, if you subtract nme from flfteen, there remam six -witnesses wholly uncontradicted; and I recommend you to give your verdict accordmgly for the party who called those six vritnesses.' His judicial Ufe extended to twelve years, and was termmated by a flt of the palsy, -with which he was seized at Maidstone durmg the Lent assizes m 1775, which induced him to resign in the foUow ing May, receivmg a grant of 1200/. a year as a retirmg pension. He was buried at Laleham. He married Mary, the daughter of William Bower, of Bridlmgton m York shire, and the -widow of Peter Whitton, who in 1728 was lord mayor of York, but left no issue. (State Trials, xix. 894.) PEEEYN, Richaed, the son of Benjamin Peri-yn, Esq., of Flmt, commenced his study of the law at LincoM's Inn, but was caUed to the bar in July 1747 by the society of the Inner Temple, to which he had trans ferred himself, and became a bencher in April I77I. Choosing the Court of Chan cery for his legal arena, he soon acqmred such a reputation there as to be employed m almos-t every cause. After a long ap prenticeship, he obtained a silk gown m l77I, and received the appointment of vice-chamberlain of Chester. It is msi- nuated by a contemporai-y that he owed his success more to chance than to merit, and that his professional coUeagues had no ver}' high opinion of his legal acqufremente. On April 5, 1776, he was promoted to a barony in the Court of Exchequer, and knighted. After a respecteble career of three-and-twenty years as a judge, he re signed in the summer vacation of 1799, (8 Term Reports, 421 ; Strictures on Law yers, 176,) He died in 1803, PEEYAM, William, was the eldest of the two sons of John Peryam, an opulent PETEE citizen and twice mayor of Exeter ; and of Margaret, one of the daughters and coheirs of Robert Hone, Esq., of Ottery St, Mary. The other son, John, was an alderman of Exeter and a knight, and was a consider able benefactor to Exeter CoUege, Oxford (Chalmers' Oxford, 68), where WUUam, who was bom at Exeter in 1634, is said to have been educated. His arms are placed in one of the windows of Middle Temple Hall, Receiving the Serjeant's coif in Mi chaelmas Term 1679, he was constituted a judge of the Common Pleas on February 18, 1581, 23 Eliz, (Dugdale's Orig. 225.) For the twelve years dm-ing which he retamed his seat the reputation he enjoyed may be estimated as well by his being named as one of the commissioners to hear causes in Chancery on the death of Sir Christopher Hatton, as by the number of commissions into which his name was in troduced for the trial of state offenders. Among these were Mary Queen of Scots, the Earls of Arundel and Essex, Sir John Perrot, and others of less note. (App. 4 Report Pub. Rec 272-296 ; State Trials, i. I1G7, 1251, 1315, 1333.) In January 1693 he was promoted to the office of chief baron of the Exchequer, and was knighted. He continued to preside in that court during the ten remaining years of Elizabeth's reign, and for eighteen months under King James I. (Dugdale's Orig. 48.) After a judicial life of nearly twenty -four years, he , died on October 9, 1604, at Ms mansion at' Little Fulford, near Crediton, in the church of which he was buried under a stately monument. He married three wives. The first was Margery, daughter of John Holcot, of Berkshire, Esq. ; the second was Anne, the daughter of John Parker, of North Molton, Devon, Esq. ; and the third was EUzabeth, one of Sir Nicholas Bacon the lord keeper's daughters, to whom he was also the third husband, she having been previously mar ried to Sir Robert d'Oyly and Sir Henry Nevill. He left four daughters. (Prince's Worthies ; Diary of WaUer Yonge, 8.) PETEE, as abbot of Tewkesbm-y (elected in 1216), is added to the list of justices itinerant for the county of Gloucester in 9 Henry IIL, 1225, His name does not again appear in a judicial character, and he died in 1232, (Rot Claus. i. 271, u. 76 ; Rot Pat. 184 ; Mitred Abbeys, i. 185,) PETIT, John, was a member of Gray's Inn, and filled the post of reader there in 1518, and again in 1526. He was in the commission of the peace for Kent from 1514. He became a baron of the Exchequer in Michaelmas 1527, but Dugdale is some what confused in respect to whether he was second or third baron. (Dugdale's Orig. 292 ; CaL State Papei-s [1609-14], 723,) PE'VEEELL, Hd&h, is named on a fine of PHELIPPS 513 6RichardI.,lI94, as oneof the jiisticiersbe- fore whom it was levied at Westminster, and in 8 Richard I, was at the head of the justices itinerant who fixed the taUage in the coun ties of Essex andHertford, (Madox, i. 704.) That he held a distmct official appoint ment in the Exchequer appears from seve ral entries on the rolls, (Ibid, ii, 274-5,) He was probably a scion of the noble house of PevereU, which commenced in the person of Ranulph PevereU, who married a concubine of William the Conqueror, and was perhaps that Hugh PevereU who in John's reign was seated at Sanford in Devonshire ; or the Hugh PevereU, of Er- mington in the same county, whose lands were forfeited for his adherence to the barons, but afterwards restored on his sub mission to King Henry IH. (Rot Claus. i. 200, 283, 307) ; or more probably the father of one of them. PHELIPPS, or PHILLIPS, Edwaed, was descended from an ancient Welsh family, which migrated into the county of Somerset, where they long resided at Barrington, a few miles from Montacute. He was the fourth son of Thomas PheUpps, Esq., of that place, by Elizabeth, the daughter of — Smith, Esq., whose second son was father of Sir Thomas PheUpps, raised to a baronetcy in 1620, which became extinct in 1690, It is not improbable that Edward studied at Broadgate's Hall (now Pembroke Col lege), Oxford, as Wood notices one of his name taking the degree of B.A. in 1579, and of M.A. in 1582. He kept his legal terms at the Middle Temple, and attained to the rank of reader in autumn 1596. (Dugdale's Orig. 218.) He was called Ser jeant at the end of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, but did not assume the degree, on account of her death intervening, till the beginning of King James's. He was appointed king's serjeant on the 18th of May following, and was knighted. In No vember he assisted in the trial of Sir Walter Raleigh, but took no part in the brutal manner with which Sir Edward Coke conducted the prosecution. In July 1604 he was made justice of the Common Pleas in the county palatine of Lancaster. (CaL State Papers [1603-10], 133.) In January 1606 he opened the indict ment against Guy Fawkes and the other conspirators in the Gunpowder Plot, and his speech on the occasion is a curious spe cimen of oratory. - (State Trials, ii. 164.) In the first parUament of King James, which met on March 19, 1604, he was re tumed for his native county, and elected speaker. His address to the king is in his usual ponderous style, and he apparently vied with his majesty which should most fatigue the audience by the length of their orations. The reporter, however, was out of patience and leaves his harangue un- 514 PHELIPPS finished. On the close of the session in July his speech is fuU of the most fulsome absurdities, beginning with solemn pom posity, 'History, most high and mighty sovereign, is truly approved to be the trea sure of times past ; the light of truth ; the memory of life ; the guide and image of man's present estate ; pattern of things to come, and the true work-mistress of ex perience, the mother of knowledge,' &c. (Pari Hist i. 969, 1046.) This pariia ment continued till February 1611, during which period there were four more ses sions, in aU of which Sir Edward acted as speaker, having in the interim been re warded for his flattery by the reversion of the office of master of the Rolls, granted to him on December 2, 1608, to which he succeeded on the death of Lord Bruce of Kinloss, on January 14, 1611, He was also made chancellor to Henry Prmce of Wales, Of Sir Edward's proceedings in Chancery little more is known than appears inci dentally in the report of Wraynham's case, against whom proceedings were instituted for slandering Lord Bacon. A cause in which Wraynham was concerned had been referred to the master of the Rolls, who had made a report adverse to his interests, on which Lord Chancellor Bacon had after wards founded his decree, and Wraynham had thereupon conveyed the slander in a petition to the king. On the hearing of the charge, the character of Sir Edward PheUpps (then dead) is given by three eminent lawyers his contemporaries, Yel verton, the attorney-general, caUs him ' a man of great understanding, great pains, great experience, great dexterity, and great integrity,' Sir Edward Coke says, 'As for this master of the Rolls, never man in Eng land was more excellent in Chancery than that man ; and for aught I heard (that had reason to hear something of him) I never heard Mm taxed with corruption, being a man of excellent dexterity, diligent, early m the morning, ready to do justice,' Chief Justice Montagu, however, lets us into a little bit of his real character as ajudge, for, after declaring that ' whoever knew that man knows him to be a true reporter and a j udioious collector of proofs as ever was,' he adds, ' I will not dissemble what others thought a fault in him, to be over swift in judging, but this was the error of his greater experience and riper judgment than others had.' (State TriaU, U, 1062, 107.3, 1079.) He had left the scene long before this trial took place, having died on September II, 1614. He built the large imd noble mansion still standing at Montacute, He married first Margaret, daughter of — Newdigate, Esq, ; and secondly EUzabeth, daughter of Thomas Pigott, Esq., of Bucks. His representatives still enjoy the paternal estate. PICHEFOED PHESANT, Petee, was of a family esta bUshed at Tottenham in Middlesex, and the son of Peter Phesant, of Bletchworth in the county of Lincoln, an eminent lawyer and reader of Gray's Inn in 1682, and Queen EUzabeth's attorney 'in partibus boreaUbus.' A student at Gray's Inn, he became a barrister in 1608, and was chosen reader in 1624. In May 1640 he was honoured -with the degree of the coif, and having been one of the common pleaders of the city of London, was elected recorder -f on May 2, 1643, but resigned the office on the 30th of the same month, on the plea of iU-health, but probably in order to make room for John Glynne, the favourite of the fi parUament. Under the same plea he had in the previous year excused himself from appearing in defence of Sir Edward Her bert, the attorney-general, on Ms impeach ment. (ParL Hist. ii. 1125, 1127.) In February 1648 the parUament pro- ; posed him to the king as one of the judges • of the Common Pleas (Clarendon, iii. 407), and, ou their assumption of the government, voted him into that place on September 80, ' 1646, On the Mng's death, in January 1649, he consented to act m Ms judicial capacity under ' the keepers of the liberties of England ; ' but in the foUo'wing June he was allowed to stay at home from the cfr cuit, ' being sickly ' ( Whiteloeke, 174, 378, 409) ; and dying three months after, on October I, 1649, at Cpwood in Hunting donshire, he was buried m the church there. The mscription. on his monument describes him as having been t'wice the ¦ only judge of his court. By his wife, Mary, of the family of Bruges, of GloucestersMre, he had several cMldren. (Hatfield s Hunts.) PHILIP is mentioned as the successor of Roger Pauper, -who was removed from the office of chancellor in 1139 ; and a charter to the monastery of St. Frides-wide (Christ church), Oxford, one of the witnesses to which is ' P. the chancellor,' seems to cor roborate this account, as it must have been dated before 1148, and perhaps before 1144. {3Ionast ii. 146 ; Philipot) The author of the ' Lives of the Chan cellors ' (1708) is evidently nustaken m saying that he held it till Becket was appointed, in the next reign, as Robert de Gant was certamly chanceUor during part of the interval. PICHEFOED, Geoffeey de, the son of Ralph de Picheford, was constable of the castle and forest of Windsor in 1 Edward I. (Abb, Rot. Orig. i. 21), and was a justice itinerant of the forests from the sixth to the eighteenth yeai-. He was afterwards Queen Eleanor's bailiff at Langley. (Rot. ParL i. 4, 59, ii. 81.) The last time any record of his name appears is as constable of Windsor Castle, in 26 Edward I. (Madox, ii. 224.) PIGOTT PIGOTT, GiLLEET, is one of the present ibarons of the Exchequer, His family is traced from a knight who accotnpanied William the Conqueror on his invasion of England, and its members have held pos- , sessions in various counties ever since. He is the fourth son of Paynton Pigott, Esq,, of Archer Lodge in Hampshire, and of Ban bury in Oxfordshire (who assumed iu 1836 the additional names of Stainsby Conanc), .and of Maria Lucy, daughter of Richard Drosse Gough, Esq., of Loudern in the latter county. He was born at Oxford in 1813, his Christian name being given him tfrom his great-grandmother, the daughter of Colonel Cillery; and he received his ¦education at a private school at Putney. A member of the Middle Temple, he was •caUed to the bar by that society in May 1839; and joining the Oxford Circuit, and attending the sessions of that and the neigh bouring county of Gloucester, he gained a -considerable practice. In a few years he was elected recorder of Hereford, His next promotion was to the degree of the coif m 1866, to which was added in the foUovring jeai- a patent of precedence. In October i860 he was elected representative for Reading, and, professing liberal opinions, he .¦supported Lord Palmerston's admmistration. But his senatorial career was soon inter rupted by his elevation to the bench of the Kxchequer on October 8, 1868, when he received the honour of kmghthood. He married Frances, only daughter of Thomas Duke, Esq., of Ashday Hall, near Halifax. PIKENOT, RoEEET, is the last named of the eighteen justices itinerant to whose judicial superintendence the six divisions into which the kingdom was apportioned in '22 Henry IL, 1176, was submitted, the northem counties being allotted to him and two others, (Madox, i. 128.) PILBOEOU&H, John, was admitted a member of Lincoln's Inn in 1616, and be came reader there in 1635, and again in 1548. He was appointed a baron of the Exchequer on November 28, 1645, 87 Henry VIII. ; and within a week after the death of that monarch, being stiU a governor of Lincoln's Inn, he delivered ' an ornate oration ' to two new-made Serjeants of that society. His death occurred in the follow ing year, (Dugdale's Orig. 119, 251, 252.) He married Elizabeth, daughter of John Roper, attorney-general to Henry VIIL, and Jane, daughter of Lord Chief Justice Fmeux ; and was thus the brother-in-law to Chief Justice Sir Edward Montagu, who mai-ried Eleanor, another daughter, (Col lins' Peerage, -rii. 80,) PINCEENA, Alexander, See Boielee, PINKENI, GiLBEET DE, or PINCHENI, was abaron whose property layinNorthamp- .tonshire and Berkshire, Having succeeded PLANTAGENET 515 his father Ralph, he held the sheriffalty of Berkshire in 4 Henry II, and two foUovring years. His appearance in this catalogue arises solely from Ms being one of the twelve named by Dugdale as justices itinerant in 1170, but whose real office was to enquire into the abuses of the sheriffs, and had nothing to do with the ordinary legal pro ceedings. He died about the end of that king's reign, leaving a son named Henry, who succeeded to his possessions. The ninth baron, Henry de Pinkney, was summoned to parliament by Edward L, as Dominus de Wedou, but the barony became extinct on his death without issue. (Baronage, i, 566 ; Pipe RoUs, 128 ; Nicolas.) PIPAED, GiLBEET, in 14 Henry II. , and for the three following years, held the sheriffalty of GloucestersMre, succeeding William Pipard, probably his father, who had been sheriff for the four previous years. At the distribution of England, in 1176, among the eighteen justices itinerant ap pointed by the council of Northampton, he was the last of the three to whom the counties of Wilts, Dorset, Somerset, Devon, and Cornwall were appropriated. In the subsequent arrangement also, made by the council of Windsor in II79, when England was divided into four parts, he was se lected to administer justice in one of them. (Madox, i. 128-187.) Three other counties, in addition to that of Gloucester, were entrusted to his super intendence as sheriff (Ibid. 205) ; and in 1180 he was employed in Normandy, being the custos of the castle of Exmes and ter mor of the VicomtS, in which year he accounts for the issues of the forests of Moulin-la-Marche and Bonmoulins. (Rot. Scacc Norm. i. 60, 103, 104.) PLANTAGENET, Geoeeeet (Aechbi shop OF Yoek), was the younger of the two sous of Henry II. by Fair Rosamond, one of the daughters of "Walter de Clifford, a baron of Herefordshire, The date of his birth, like the whole of his mother's his tory, is involved in some doubt. If, when he was elected Bishop of Lincoln in 1178, he had, as is said by Giraldus Cambrensis, scarcely completed his fourth lustre, he must have been born about 1163. This might have been the case had he been the elder son, as his father was in England in this year. But as the other son, WilUam Longsword, afterwards Earl of Salisbury, was his senior, the period of Geoffrey's birth must have been later, unless Henry's connection with Fair Rosamond had com menced in his flrst -risit to England in 1149, when he was only sixteen years of age, which was not a very Ukely occurrence. The date of 1168 or II59, which other writers give of his birth, seems more pro- ll2 516 PLANTAGENET bable, especially as on his seal, attached. after his election as bishop, to a grant of certain churches to the priory of Burling ton in Lincolnshire, an impression from which is pubUshed in the 'Archseologia' (vol. xxi. p. 31), he is represented as a boy, which he would scarcely have permitted had he attamed his twentieth year. Not'withstanding his youth and the irre gularity of Ms birth, Henry easily obtained the confirmation of the English bishops, and contrived also to procure a dispensa tion from the pope from those impediments. Although, previously to his election to the bishopric, he had held an archdeaconry in the same cathedral, he was not of course admitted into priest's orders ; so that he could not yet be consecrated nor enter on Ms pastoral duties. It is stated that his father sent him to Tours to prepare him self in the schools there for undertaking his episcopal charge. This was probably at a somewhat later period, because he took an active part in 1174 in aiding his father, when his sons raised the standard of rebellion against him. With this view he had applied to, and obtamed from, the gentry and people of his diocese, a considerable sum of money as a free contribution ; but on bemg apprised that it was deemed an exaction, he at once returned the whole. By this popular act he found himself at the head of a large body of volunteers, with whom, throwing off his ecclesiastical character, he surprised and levelled to the grouud the castle of Ki- nardsferry, a strong fortress in the Isle of Axholme, belonging to Roger de Mowbray. He then, at the request of Ranulph de GlanviUe, the sherift" of Yorkshire, raised another fine army, and, marching into that county, took and demolished the castle of Malepart, or Malesart, which Roger de Mowbray had built, about twenty miles from York. On joining his father shortly afterwards at Huntingdon, the king wel comed him with affection, and declared that his other children were bastards, and he alone had shown Mmself his true and legitimate son. The tendency of his inclinations being thus exhibited towards a military rather thau a clerical career, it is not surprising, vvhen the pope, in 1181, insisted that he should either take priest's orders, and be consecrated, or renounce the see of Lin coln, the profits of which he had received -without performing ite duties, that he shoiild voluntarily resign his bishopric. In Ms letter of resignation he calls him self chancellor, to -which office the kino- had previously appointed him. This office he continued to hold during the remainder of Ms father's reign (Dugdale's Monast v. 688,, VI. 938), and he is said to have acted m it, notwithstandmg his youth, with ex- PLANTAGENET traordinary equity and discretion. The affec tion of his father for him may be seen as well in the charters as in his -will, in all of which' he is called ' my son and chancellor.' In 1187 his native talents as a military commander were again called into exercise- by the king's placing him at the head of one of the divisions of the army he had raised in Normandy ; and his affectionate- adherence to his father in all his troubles- was strongly evidenced in the last war in which the king was engaged, PhiUp Au gustus of France had attacked Mans, the capital of Maine, into which Hem-y, -with Geoffrey, had thro-wn himself. On the to-wn taking fire, Geoffrey in vam aided the at tempts to exting-uish the flames ; but was obUged to fly -with the Mng, and takmg refuge in the castle of Fresnelles, he offered to remain -without, as a guard agamst the expected attacks of the pursuers, Henry, however, not -wUling that, exhausted -with the fatigues he had undergone, he should expose himself further, insisted on Ms en tering the castle and sharing Ms o'wn bed. He distinguished himself greatly during the short remainder of the war ; and when the peace was concluded on June 28, 1189, and the mgratitude of Prince John, which was then exposed, had so severely stung his fa ther's heart as to produce the fever from which he never recovered, he contmued -with him in the last ti'ying momente, and soothed him with that affection and respect which his other sons had never sho-wn him. Among the last wishes expressed by the Mng was- his desire that Geofirey should resume Ms clerical character, and obtam either the bishopric of Winchester or the archbishop ric of York, and, gi-vmg Mm two rings of great value as a mark of his love, he died at Chinon on July 6. The roll of tlie flrst year of Richai-d's reign mentions Geoffrey as chancellor ; but, as part of the accounts in that roU neces sarily refer to the last year of Henry's Ufe,. it affords no proof that he continued in the office after his father's decease. Richai-d' was at that time abroad, aud there is evi dence that both before and immediately after- his coronation William de Longchamp was acting as his chancellor. King- Richard, however, ti-eated Geoffrey with the kmdness he deserved, and in com- pUance with Henry's wish nominated him to the vacant archbishopric of York, even before his arrival in England, requiring, however, from him at the same time a con tribution of three thousand marks towards the expenses of the crusade. Takmg up his residence at the priory of St, Martin atDover,thesheriff of the county, by order ofthe chanceUor, WiUiam de Long champ, now Bishop of Ely, to whom Ri chard had entrusted the government of the - kingdom during his absence m the Holy PLATT Land, kept Mm in siege for several days, and then obtaming entrance, on September 19, 1191, had him violently dragged from the altar iteelf, and on his refusal to return to Flanders, carried him to the castle prison, and detained him in custody there for eight days. On the Bishop of London's inter ference, and marks of public indignation appearing, the chancellor thought proper to order his liberation. The precise cause of this outrage is uncertain ; but it possibly arose from a dispute which seems to have occurred between the king and the arch bishop as to the appointment of certain offi cers of his church. Be this as it may, the king was soon after compelled, for this and other causes, to consent to the removal of the chancellor. Geoffrey's reception by the clergy aud people after his imprisonment was a triumph both in London and York ; and for some years he appears to have quietly employed himself in the affairs of his province, and to have refrained from interfering in politics. Soon after the death of Richard, Geoffrey fell under the displeasure of Kmg John, the ^irincipal cause of which was his refusal to permit the carucage, which had been gene raUy granted to the king throughout the rest of England, to be collected in Ms pro vince. The immediate effect of this was the seizure of all his manors and other pos sessions ; and though the archbishop did (Uot hesitate to punish James de Potema, ¦the sheriff', and all others engaged in it, with those who had excited the king's anger ¦against him, he succeeded in effecting a re conciliation with the monarch which lasted for several years. In 1207, however, he resisted the payment ofthe thirteenth penny which the king had imposed, and found it necessary to retire privately from England, in order to avoid the royal resentment. In this exile he continued nearly seven years, ;ind at last died at Gromont in Normandy, on December 18, 1213, The affectionate duty which he showed to his father. King Henry, must incline us to a favourable interpretation of his conduct in the two succeeding reigns, and induce us to attribute his misfortunes to the irrita- liility of Richard and the overbearing tyranny of John, each of whom his independence of character and his strict sense of justice would, though in a dift'erent manner, excite. His miUtary inclinations do not appear to have .prevented him from being a "'ood bishop ; uor do some minor dissensions between him and the canons of his cathedral at all de tract from the character he must ever hold in history as a valiant soldier, an able com mander, a wise counsellor, and an excellent son. (Godwin, 286, 675; Rich. Dims. 15, 34 ; Madox, i. 35, 87, ii, 139 ; Wendover : Jyord LytteUon!) rLATI, Thomas Joshua, the son of PLESSETIS 517 Thomas Piatt, Esq., an eminent solicitor m London, who lived to be the father of the profession with undiminished respect tiU the age of eighty-two, and held the office of prmcipal clerk to three chief justices. Lords Mansfleld, Kenyon, and EUen'borough, during a period of thirty years, was born about 1790, and was sent first to Harrow, and then to Trimty College, Cambridge, where he took his degrees of B.A, in I8I0, with honours, and of M.A, in I8I4. He had in the meantime been admitted to the Inner Temple, and in 1816 was called to the bar. Joining the Home Circmt, he gradually was entrusted -with briefs, and by his ready address and confident bearing eventually acquired a considerable practice. In January 1835 he received a silk gown, and became m the end a favourite leader of his circuit. Before a common jury he was a formidable adversary to his opponent, but before a special jury he was not so success ful. In January 1845 he was raised to the bench of the Exchequer, and sat there more than eleven years, when, in consequence of the failure of his health, ho retired in No vember 1856. As an advocate he was remarkable for the energy of his manner and the simpUcity of his language ; and as a judge, though not deeply read, his good sense led him to sound conclusions, while his blunt courtesy and amiable disposition made him a favourite with the bar. He died on February 10, 1862, PLESSETIS, John de (Eael 'of Wae- wick), stands second among the six justices assigned in 35 Henry IIL, 1251, to hold the pleas of the city of London, which were usually tried before the justices itinerant, the others being regular j usticiers. TMs is the only time in wliich he appears in a ju dicial position, and he held it then no doubt in his character of constable of the Tower, where the sittings were to take place. He was Earl of Warwick for life only, m right of Margery, his second vrife, the sister and heir of Thomas de Newburgh, the last earl. His marriage with her was obtained for him by the king, iu addition to numerous other favours by which he had been raised from a comparatively low origin to a high position in .the court. He was a Norman by birth, and is first named in 1227, as the last of four whom the king often describes as his knights (Rot Claus. ii. 202), and who are always mtro duced together, receiving various payments for their services. They were all evidently servants in the king's household, and each partook of the king's generosity. Hugo de Plessetis, another of the four, was probably the father of John, John advanced rapidly in the king's good graces, and for his services in the Welsh wars received ample rewards. He was appointed governor of Devizes, warden of 518 PLESTE Chippenham Forest, and sheriff of Oxford ; had grants of the wardships of various minors, with the custody of their lands {!Excerpt e Rot Fin. i. 319-409) ; and, to raise his fortune to the highest point, the king took such measures that Margery, the sister and heir of the Earl of War'wick, whose first husband, John Mareschall, had lately died, did not venture to refuse him as her second. He married her accordingly in 1243, but did not assume the title of Earl of Warvrick until he had obtained the con sent of WUliam Malduit, the presumptive hefr to the earldom in the event of the countess's death, that he should enjoy it for his life if he survived her. He had been appointed constable of the Tower of London in 28 Henry IIL, and the remainder of his Ufe is chiefly remarkable for the liberal proofs he received of the king's favour, and for his steady adherence to his royal master. After attending the Mng mto Gascony, and the conclusion of the truce there, he was, in 88 Henry IIL, trea cherously seized by the people of Pontes in Poictou, notwithstandmg a safe-conduct from the King of France, and cast into prison, whence he was not released till the foUo-vring year. In his last years he saw the commencement of the troubles between the kmg and the barons, during which he was entrusted -with the sheriffalty of War wick and Leicester, He died in the midst of them, on February 26, 1268. (Baronage, i. 772.) PLESTE, Robeet de, is not mentioned in any of the pubUshed records, but, ac cording to Dugdale's 'Chronica Series,'wasa baron of the Exchequer in 1862, 86 Edward III, There was a 'William de Pleste, who, in the same year, is called 'attornatus regis.' PLESYNGTON, Robeet de, evidently mixed much in the politics of his day. His name is that of a to-wnship in the parish of Blackburn in Lancashire, which was pro bably Ms native place. In 50 Edward IH., 1376, he was appointed one of the custodes of certain property in the town of Lancaster, and of several manors in the neighbourhood, {Abb. Rot Orig. ii, 841,) At this time he held an office in the Court of Exchequer, to the head of which he was ad^i'anced four ye.irs afterwards, bemg constituted chief baron on December 6, 1880, 4 Richard IL Dugdale removes Plesyngton from his seat on the bench on June 27, 1383 ; but WilUam de Karieol, whom the leamed author names as his successor, was appointed chief baron, not of the EngUsh, but the Irish Exchequer; and the Liberate Rolls show that Robert de Plesyngton continued in office without interruption till the tenth year of the reig-n. His actual retirement took place on No vember 6, 1886, 10 Richard II. This day was during the sitting of the parliament PLUMEE which inipeached the chancellor Michael de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk, aud which passed the ordinance constituting commissioners for regulating the government. 'This ordi nance, however, was not dated till a fort night after Plesyngton's removal, which therefore, there is little doubt, was the act of the king himself. It not improbably arose from a desire to thwart and counteract his uncle, Thomas Duke of Gloucester, to- whose party Plesyngton was strongly at tached. The reasons for his removal no where expressly appear ; but if they are to be found m the articles against him which are refeiTed to in Appendix II, to the Ninth Report of the Deputy Keeper of the Public Records, 1848 (p. 244), they are of the most frivolous character. It is not likely that any proceedings were taken upon these articles, because, on the passing of the ordinance, the influence of Plesyngton's friend, the Dulfe of Gloucester, would be paramount ; but they were per haps considered sufficient to prevent his reinstatement in the court at the time. In the parliament of the foUo-wmg year we find Plesyngton actmg as the spokesman of the duke and the four other lords appeUant, when they exMbited their charges against the Archbishop of York, the Duke of L-eland, the Earl of Suffolk, Sir Robert TresiUan, and Nicholas Brambre, the con viction of whom was qmcklj' followed by that of the judges who had answered the unconstitutional questions propounded to them, among whom was Sir John Cary, the new chief baron. But, even upon the attainder of the latter, Plesyngton was not replaced on the bench of the Exchequer, nor is any explanation to be found why he was then passed over. He died in 17 Richard H., 1393^, but the king was so inveterate agamst all those who were connected -with the Duke of Gloucester's proceedmgs that, when he resumed his authority in the -twenty-first year of his reig-n, he was not content -with punishing the survivors, but he caused those who were dead, and among them Robert de Plesyngton, to be inipeached for their- share in the supposed treasons. The par liament, being then under his control, of course confirmed his law, and the chief baron's property was declared forfeited to the crown. These unjust sentences, how ever, were all overtui-ned in the first par liament of Henry IV., and the possessions of Robert de Plesyngton in Rutland and Yorkshire seemed to have descended to the son of the same name, whom he had by his wife Agnes. (^Rot ParL iU. 384, 425; Cal. Inquis, p. m. iii. 176, 806,) PLUMEE, Thomas, descended from' an old and respectable "Yorkshire family, was the second son of Thomas Plumer, of Lil- ling Hall in that county. He was born. on. PLUMER October 10, 1753, and at eight years of age he was sent to Eton, where he gained that character for classical abiUty and suavity of disposition which afterwards distinguished him at University College, Oxford, While WiUiam Scott (afterwards Lord Stowell) was regarded as the best tutor in the uni versity, Plumer was considered one of the best scholars. He was elected Vinerian Scholar in 1777, and, takmg his degree of B.A, in 1778, became fellow of his college in the next year, and proceeded M,A. in 1788. He had become a member of Lmcoln's Inn so eai'ly as April 1769, but was not called to the bar till February 1778, Be fore that event took place he had the advantage of attending Sir James Eyre ou his circuits, and frequently assisting the judge, whose eyes were weak, in taking down the evidence on the trials at which he presided. This employment was of great benefit to Mm in his future practice, which was principally in the Court of Ex chequer, Ll 1781 he was made a commis sioner of bankrupts, and attended the Oxford and also the Welsh Circuits, at the end of the latter of which hejoined in the reveU-y of the Horseshoe Club, instituted by the members for their relaxation and indul gence in all sorts of fun and nonsense, (Notes and Queries, 2nd S. xii. 87, 214.) He soon acquired practice, dnd stood so high in estimation that he was employed in the defence of Sir Thomas Bumbold at the bar of the House of Commons, and there ex hibited such powers that he was selected in 1787 as one of the three counsel to defend Warren Hastings, his coadjutors being Mr. Law and Mr, Dallas, each of whom, aa well as he, eventually fllled high offices in the law. In 1798 he was made a king's coun sel, in wMch character he was often em ployed in the public trials that took place durmg the next ten or twelve years. He successfully defended John Reeves when absurdly prosecuted in 1797 for a libel. In the next year he defended Arthur O'Connor and others on a charge of high treason, one only of the defendants, James O'Coigley, being found guilty, Iu 1802 he was engaged in the prosecution of Govemor Wall for a murder committed twenty years before, in the next year in the prosecution of Colonel Despard for high treason, both of whom were condemned and executed. He was leading counsel in the defence of Lord Viscount Melville in 1806, on his impeachment by the House of Commons, and contended with so much success against the case of the managers as to procure an acquittal for his noble client on all the ten charges in the articles. Just before this trial, on March 26, 1806, he was appointed a judge on the North Wales Circuit, He had a great reputation as a tithe la-wyer. PLUMEE 519 and had much employment before election committees. Of the suppressed volume called ' The Book,' arising out of the ' Delicate Investigation ' into the conduct of Caroline, Princess of Wales, iu 1806, he was supposed to be, if not the author, at least the corrector, joining with Lord Eldon and Mr, Perceval as her royal highness's friends. In April of the next year, on the defeat of the whig ministry, Mr, Plumer was ap pointed soUcitor-general, and was knighted. He then entered parliament for Lord Radnor's borough of Do-wnton, which he continued to represent till he was raised to the bench. He remained solicitor-general for five years. Sir Vicary Gibbs being the attomey-general ; but he does not appear to have taken part in any of the numerous prosecutions instituted by the latter, except in the case of the 'Independent Whig-,' when he spoke for two hours in the House of Lords in support of the sentence pronounced against the libellers. On Sir Vicary's elevation to the bench Sir Thomas Plumer succeeded him on June 27, 1812, but flUed the post for less than a year, being ap pointed on April 10, 1813, the first vice- chancellor under the statute 53 Geo. III. c. 24, After presiding in the new court for nearly five years, he received another and a last promotion as master of the Rolls on January 6, 1818. He filled this station till his death, which occurred six years after, on March 24, 1824, when he was buried in the Rolls Chapel, Though a deep-read la-wyer, and exhibit ing great powers and abiUty in Ms plead ings, his style was so hea-yy and his speeches of such length and elaboration that he fatigued his hearers without in teresting them. His estimation as a judge may be seen by the manner in which Sir Samuel RomiUy, a sufficient authority, re cords in his Diary Sir Thomas's appoint ment to the mastership of the RoUs. While acknowledging his great anxiety to do the duties of his office to the satisfaction of every one, and most beneficially to the suitors. Sir Samuel pronounces him to be wholly incapable of discharging those duties, and accounts for the fact that Sir WilUam Grant, his predecessor at the Rolls, notwithstanding his great dispatch, left an arrearof more than 500 causes, by statmg that causes were set down at the Rolls for a two fold object— that Sir WilUam Grant might hear them, and that SirThomas Plumer might not hear them. His j udgments were as pro lix as his speeches used to be ; and m allu sion to them and to the delays attributed to Lord Eldon this epigram was perpetrated : To cause delay in Lincoln's Inn Two difPreiit methods tend : His lordship's judgments ne'er begin. His honour's never end. 520 POER Though unpopular in his court, his man ners were most obliging, and his disposition most kind. His judgments too were so exceedingly learned and forcible, and in general correct, that he left a reputation of being an urbane and erudite, though a tedious, judge. By his marriage with Marianne, the eldest daughter of John Turton, Esq., of Sagnal Hall in Staffordshire, he left seve ral children, (Gent Mag. xciv, 610; State Trials, xxvi, xxvii, xxix, xxx. ; Romilly's Diary.) POEE, Waltee le, was in some way engaged in the service of King John. , In February 1215 he was sent with three others into Worcester to explain the king's affairs, and in the following August was employed to make an extent on the manor of Budiford in Warwickshire, and on that of Sukeleg in Worcestershire, for the use of Llewellyn. The county of Devon was committed to his charge as sheriff' in 6 Henry IIL, 1222 ; and iu 1220 he was one of those appointed to collect the quinzime in Worcestershire. In the same year he was nominated a justice itinerant into Glou cestershire, and in 1227 into the counties of Oxford, Hereford, Stafford, and Salop. (Rot Pat 128 ; Rot Claus. i. 266, 499, ii. l46, 151, 205.) POICTIEES, Philip of (Bishop of Due- ham), was a confidential servant of Richard I., and was employed by him as his clerk or chaplam iu the expedition to Palestine, After the truce with Saladin was made, he was one of the few whom the king selected as his companions on his return. Soon after Richard's redemption he was re warded with the bishopric of Durham, in January 1196. He received priest's orders in the following- June, but was not conse crated till May 12, 1197, when that cere mony was performed by Pope Celestine at Rome, whither he had been sent with William de Longchamp, Bishop of Ely (who died during the journey), in order to procure the pontift''s interference in remov ing the interdict which Walter de Con stantiis, the Archbishop of Rouen, had laid on Normandy. His representations suc ceeded in inducing tbe pope to promote an iigi-eement between the king and the arch bishop, and in restoring the afflicted duchy to the rites of the Church. On his return to England he took his place as a justicier in the Curia Regis, having probably been educated to the legal profession, and filled some office in the court before he was selected as clerk to the king. His name does not appear to fines levied at Westminster after 10 Richard I. He undertook a pilgrimage to Conipos- tella in 1200, and on his return home the next year he is stated to have beeu one of the ciiief advisers of that mona-.ch iu dis- POLE regarding the pope's anathemas, which seems little to accord with the above act of devotion, or with Ms having been fined a thousand pounds the year before his death for having the king's goodwill. (Mctdox, i. 408.) The statement, however, whether true or false, drew the papal thunder on his o-wn head, and the sentence of excommu nication was pronounced against him. As this was not removed before his death, in 1208, his body was buried outside the church, without the performance of any funeral rites (Godwin, 788; R. de Wen dover, iii. 66-237) ; an indignity which would not be very distressing to the monks, whom he had violentlj' persecuted, (Sur tees' Durham, i. xx-rii.) POLE, William de l.a, was one of the two sons of William de la Pole, a rich merchant in the newly rising port of Kmg- ston-upon-IIuU. Both of them rendered valuable pecuniary assistance to Edward I II. and Edward HL, and were rewarded accordingly. 'j William was born at Ravenser, in the 1 neighbourhood of Kingston-upon-HuU, to which he ultimately removed. In 1 Edward III. he had a grant of 4000/., out of the first issues of the customs of that port, in payment of an advance he had made to meet the royal necessities, and m 1332 he sumptuously entertained the kmg when he visited Kingston on his way to Scotland, On this occasion he is said to have received the honour of knighthood, and to have pro cured the title of mayor for the principal officer of the town, being himself the m-st who bore it. The next year he was one of those employed in a mission to Flanders, and was several times engaged m similar duties during the six follo-wmg years. In 9 Edward III. he was constituted custos of the exchanges of England, and receiver of the old and new customs of Hull and Bos ton. The immediate consideration ofthe last appointment was his undertaking to pay the expenses of the king's household at the rate of 10/. a day. He was the general agent for the crown with the tradmg in terest, and was commonly denominated the king's merchant. In the twelfth year Ed ward III. gave him a royal acknowledg ment for 10,000/. advimced, and for 7,500/. for which he had become bound; and m consideration of moneys paid by him in aid of the royal expenses, and for the defence of the kingdom, the king granted him va rious manors in Nottinghamshire and York shire, and afterwards invested him with the order of knight banneret, adding other rents for the support of the honour, toge ther with a reversionary assignment of 1000 marks of rent in France, when the king recovered his •rights there. Besides tlii,^<, houses in Lombard Street, London, which had belonged to the ' Societas Bar- POLE ¦dorum,' were appended to the royal dona tion, (N. Fcedera, U, 862-908, 1065, 1085 ; Abb. Rot Orig. ii, II-I42,) He was constituted second baron of the Exchequer on September 26, 1389, and in the parliaments held in the following Oc tober and April he was present as one of the judges (Rot ParL ii. 103, 112) ; but he was removed, or retired, from his seat on the bench on June 21, When Edward III. retumed from Tour nay, in November 1340, grievously dis appointed by the ill-success of his ministers in the collection of funds, WilUam de la Pole was among the sufferers from his in- -dignation, (Bames, 212.) He was im prisoned, and all Ms estates were taken into the king's hands. The particular charge agamst him arose from a commission which he had received as to the purchase and sale of wools for the king's use. (N. Fcedera, ii. 988.) A judgment was given against him in the Exchequer, but the whole process was annulled in the parlia ment of July 1844. (Rot ParL ii, 154.) He lived for more than twenty years afterwards, highly in the king's favour. The remainder of his life is principally illustrated by his founding and liberally endowing an hospital at Kingston-upou- Hull, which in the last year of his life he obtained a licence to convert into a reUgious house of Dims, of the order of St, Clare, (Abh. Rot Orig. U! 286.) He died on April 21, 1366. (CaL Inquis. p. m. U. 274.) By his wife, Catherine, daughter of ¦Sir John Norwich, he had several sons, one of whom was the next-mentioned Michael Earl of Suffolk. (Baronage, ii, 182 ; Monast. iv. 20 ; Burgon's Gresham, i. 56 ; Allen's Yorkshire, iii. 12.) POLE, Michael de la (Eael of Suf- folk), long before the death of his father, the above William de la Pole, devoted him self to arms, and was engaged in the French wars ; in 1356 in the retinue of Henry Duke of Lancaster, and in 1359 accompany ing Edward the Black Prince. (N. Fcedei-a, iii. 448.) His miUtary character was sufficiently established in 60 Edward III. to warrant his appointment as admiral of the king's fleet in the northern seas, a commission which was renewed in I Rich ard II. (Ibid 1065 ; Rymei-, vii. 172.) In the foUo-wing year his talents in diplomacy were tried in two missions, one to the court of Rome, and the other to treat for a marriage between his royal master and Catherine, the daughter of Barnabo, ' Lord of Millaine,' which came to no successful issue. Having by this time completely in gratiated' himself with the young king, he was appointed in the parliament of Novem ber 1381, 5 Richard II,, one of the counsel to regulate the household (Rot. Pari. iii. | POLE 521 104) ; and in little more than a year he was raised to the highest office in the state, being constituted chanceUor of Eng land on March 18, 1383, In January 1384 he received a payment of 938/. 6s. 8d. for his expenses in going to the com-t of Rome, to the King of the Rornans and Bohemia, to treat for the marriage of King Richard with Queen Anne, and for the money paid for her re lease (Devon's Issue Roll, 224), she having been taken prisoner on her way to England. Though he presided in the Chancery three years and a half, he soon had reason to regret that he had aimed at so high an elevation. He had been iu office Uttle more than a year when he was impeached by oue John Cavendish, a flshmonger, for taking a bribe to favour him in a cause m which he was engaged. It turned out, however, and indeed was acknowledged by Cavendish, that the chancellor, as soon as he heard of the delivery of some fish, and, of the bargain that had been made by Ottere, his clerk, insisted on paying the full price for the former, and on the obliga tion being destroyed. Notwithstanding this fact. Cavendish had been foolish enough to persist, and the consequence was that, a commission being appomted to try Cavendish for defamation, he was con demned to pay 1000 marks as damages to the chancellor, and such further fine to the king as should be imposed on him. (Rot Pari. iii. 168-170.) Although de la Pole escaped on this occasion, he was not so fortunate two years afterwards. In the meantime the king's weakness and extravagance had excited great discontent among all classes, and a general cry was raised against the favourites who surrounded him, to whose mismanage ment and waste the distress of the people was, probably with some j ustice, attributed. The honours and more substantial favours which were extravagantly distributed did not tend to allay the public discontent, De la Pole was created Earl of Suffolk on August 6, 1385, and for the support of this title he had a munificent grant of the lands of the last earl, whose family had become extinct. (Rot Pari iii, 206.) The jealousy with which these favours were regai'ded is evidenced by the bold re tort given to the new-made earl by Thomas Arundel, Bishop of Ely, as related in the bishop's life. The unpopularity of the earl increased so rapidly that, though he opened the next parUament on October 1, 1386, as chan cellor, the Mng, under a threat of deposition in case he refused, was compelled by the complamts of both houses to remove him from the office on the 3rd of that month ; and Bishop Arundel was appointed his successor. 522 POLE The Commons immediately exhibited seven articles of impeachment against him, which certainly were of no great weight or importance. Not-withstanding an able de fence by himself and his brother-in-law, Richard le Scrope, who referred to his thirty years' good services as a knight, the earl was convicted on most of the charges, and condemned to make restitution of all the purchases and grants acquired, except the title of earl and the 20/. a year out of tbe county. He was thereupon ordered to be committed to prison, there to remain at the king's will until he had paid such fine and ransom as should be imposed on him. (Ibid. 216-220.) At the close of these proceedings the king was compelled, be fore he could obtain a subsidy, to agree to a statute appointing eleven commissioners as a permanent council for the regulation and correction of all state matters, with a complete power over the royal revenue. Although the king, on hearing the charges against de la Pole, is said to have exclaimed, ' Alas ! alas ! Michael, see what thou hast done ! ' it may be well doubted that he felt any real indignation, for as soon as the parUament was dissolved he not only released the earl from the castle of Windsor, where he had been confined, but gave a willing ear to his dangerous counsel at once to break the bonds which the parliament had thus imposed. To effect this object, the judges were sum moned to Nottingham in the following August, and in a measure compelled to give answers to certain questions pro pounded to them, whereby they declared that the late statute was illegal and void, and that all those who procured it were traitors, and, further, that the judgment again.st the Earl of Suffolk was erroneous. The plans of de la Pole and the other royal favourites were, however, so badly laid that they soon came to the knowledge of the members of the council, who took the promptest steps to counteract them, forcmg the king to call a parliament in February 1388, and there appealing the Archbishop of "York, the Duke of Ireland, de la Pole, TresiUan the chief justice, and Nicholas Brambre, an alderman of London, of high treason. The articles were thirty- nine _ in number, which, besides compre hending every act they had committed in their previous career, mainly pressed their last attempt to overturn the statute of the preceding pariiament. The archbishop, the duke, the earl, and the chief justice, failing to appear, -were found guilty, by default, of fourteen of the charges which were declared to be high treason, and were condemned to the punishment of traitors, (Ibid 229-287,) De la Pole, wisely escaping before the meeting of the parliament, avoided the POLLARD fate of TresiUan and Brambre. On going to Calais, he is said to have been refused. admission by his brother Edmund, who- was then captain of the castle there ; and, proceeding to Paris, he did not long sur vive his disgrace, but died on September 5- in the foUovring year, 1389. By his wife, Catherine, the daughter and heir of Sir John Wingfield, he left four sons. Michael, the eldest, was restored to- his father's lands and honours, and his. descendante were successively created Marquis of Suffolk, Earl of Pembroke, Duke of Suffolk, and Earl of LincoM ; but all these honom-s became extinct in 1513 ¦ by death or attainder, (Baronage, ii. 181 ; Nicolas's Synopsis.) POLE, Ralph, appears to have belonged to a family the various branches of wMch- have been honoured with three baronetcies, all of which are extinct, except that of Shute iu Devonshire. It seems probable- that he was the brother of Thomas, the direct ancestor of the baronet of Poole in, Cheshire, whose title became extinct m 1821 ; and that he was one of the sons of Thomas Pole or Poole, of Barretepoole m, Cheshire (descended from Gwenwin-wyn de- la Pole, lord of Po-wis), by EUzabeth,. daughter of Sir WUliam Stanley, of Hoo- ton in the same county. (Wotton's Ba ronet ii. 124, iy. 635.) He was caUed to the degree of a serjeant m Michaelmas, 21 Henry VI. , 1442 ; and on July 3, 1452, he- was constituted a judge of the King's Bench, and certainly continued to perform the duties of that office tiU Michaelmas, 1459, after wMch his name does not occur. He was one of the commissioners for Der bysMre in the thirty-thfrd year, to raise money for the defence of Calais (Acts Privy Council, vi, 243), and acted as a judge of assize in Yorkshfre m 1457. (Newcome's St. Albans, 361.) Another account makes Mm the son of Sir Peter de la Pole, of Newborough m St.affordshire, and of Radborne m Derby shire, and states that he married Joan, daughter of Thomas Grosvenor, that several of his descendante served as sheriffs of the comity of Derby, and that his repre sentative still enjoys the family seat caUed Radborne Hall. (Topog. and Geiieal. i. 176 ; Burke's Landed Gentry, 1050.) POLLAEB, Lewis, was the son of Robert Pollard, whose father, John Pollard, of Way, settled on Mm lands at Roborow, near Great Torrington. He was bom about 1405, and wos called to the bar by the society of the Middle Temple, where he was reader in 1602. He received the degree of the coif in November of the following year, and was made one of the king's seijeants on July 9, 1507, his patent being renewed on the accession of Henry -^'111, In the sixth year of that POLLEXFEN reign, on May 29, 1514, he was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas. Prince, who -wrote about 150 years after him, says that ' the fragrant odour' of his faithfulness / and reputation ' perfumes his memory unto this day.' If he died, as Prince states, in 1540, he must have retired from the bench many years previously, for the last fine acknow ledged before him was in Michaelmas 1526, and he is not mentioned in the Re porte even so late as that date. By his wife, Agnes, daughter of Thomas Hext, Esq., of Kingston, near Totnes, he had no less than eleven sons and eleven daughters, all of whom with his wife and himself were represented in a window of the church of King's Nympton, in which parish he had purchased an estate and erected a stately mansion. One of the descendants of his eldest son, Hugh, was created a baronet in 1627, but the title be came extinct in 1693. {!Dugdale's Orig. 47, 113,215.) POLLEXFEN, Henet, derives his descent from one of the branches of an .ancient Devonshire family. He was the eldest son of Andrew PoUexfen, of Shorforde m that county, and was born about 1632, In 1658 he was called to the bar by the Inner Temple, and arrived at the dignity of bencher in 1674. Long before that date he had made Mmself prominent in the courts, and soon acquired a lead in tho state prose cutions, principally for the defence. In 1679 he advised Lord Derby to plead his pardon, and was assigned as counsel for Lord Arundel, one of the five Popish lords, who however was never brought to trial. He defended Sir Patience Ward, William Lord RusseU, W^illiam SachevereU, and others, and delivered an able argument in support of the charters of the city of Lon don, All these occurred m the reign of Charles H., and show that his reputed tendencies were in opposition to the court. Roger North says he ' was deep in all the desperate designs agamst the crown,' and was ' a thoroughstitch enemy to the crown and monarchy.' It therefore excited con siderable surprise that Chief Justice Jef freys should select him to conduct the prosecutions in the bloody we,stern assize against the -rictims of Monmouth's rebel lion. From the reports of the trials he does not appear to have done more than his usual duty of stating the case for the prosecution. Before the end of James's reign he resumed his original position, and on the trial of the seven bishops in June 1688 he was offered a retainer on their behalf, which he refused to accept, unless Mr. Somers were associated -with him. This being reluctantly conceded, as the bishops thought Somers too young and inexperienced, PoUexfen exerted himself POLLOCK 523 zealously for his reverend clients, and Somers justified the recommendation of his discriminating patron by the effective as- .sistance he aft'orded, (State Trials, vii,- xii, ; North's Lives, 214.) PoUexfen's strong opinion on King- James's desertion of the government, and in favour of the establishment of the Prince of Orange, were so well known that he was one of the lawyers summoned by the Peers to advise them on the emergency, and was retumed for the city of Exeter to the Con vention Parliament, In February 1689 he received the appointment of attorney- general and the honour of knighthood, and when the nomination of judges took place he was made chief justice of the Common Pleas on May 4. In the following month he was called before the House of Lords for turning the Duke of Grafton out of the treasury office of the Common Pleas, which his grace held by a grant from the crown. After enjoying his promotion for- little more than two years, he died at his house in LincoM's Inn Fields, from the bursting of a blood-vessel, on June 15, 1691, and was buried in the chancel of Woodbury Church in Devonshire. (Clarendon's Cor resp. and Diary, ii. 227, 231; Luttrell, i. 490-546, U. 247 ; Princes Worthies, 827,) Roger North adds to the opinion already given that when PoUexfen was raised to the bench 'he proved the veriest butcher of a judge that hath been known ; ' but there does not appear any ground for so harsh a dictum, Burnet (ii. 209), more inclined to look favourably upon him, gives him but a quaUfied character in describing him as ' an honest and leamed, but perplexed law yer ; ' but his colleague Judge Rokeby in recording his death describes it as 'a great and publike loss, he being a very learned, upright, and usefull man.' His Reports, commencing in 1670, which were not pub lished till after his death, are not held in any great repute, POLLOCK, Febdeeiok, was the third son of Mr, David Pollock, of PiocadUly, the highlyrespected saddler to King George IH., and of Sarah, daughter of Richard Parsons, Esq., comptroller of a department in the Customs. The family was originally settled in the north, and his father was an eye witness of the Pretender Charles Edward and his army triumphantly crossing the Tweed in November 1745; vrithm a few months to retrace their steps and to be de feated and almost annihilated at Culloden. Good fortune attended him both in his business and his family, three of his five sons greatly distinguishing themselves m their respective professions— the eldest, Sfr David,. becoming chief justice of Bombay ; the third,. Sir Frederick, the subject of the present sketch; and the fifth. Sir George, who ob tamed imperishable fame in the Indian army,. ¦524 POLLOCK by his exploits in Afghanistan, and in nu merous other well-fought fields in that part of the world, 'Frederick Pollock was born on September 23, 1783, In his early years he lost much time at three metropolitan and suburban ¦schools, in which he told his father that he learned nothing. On being taken away from the last he remained at home for sixteen mouths, employing them in very miscel laneous reading, principally devoted to Eng lish literature, chemistry, physiology, and other scientific subjecte. Hewas thenplaced under Dr. Roberts at St. Paul's School. A story is related on good authority that young Pollock, fancying that he waa wasting his time there, as he intended to go to the bar, intimated to the head-master that he should not stay; and that the doctor, who was de sirous of keeping so promising a lad, there- 'upon became so cross and disagreeable that one day the youth wrote him a note, saying- he should not return. The doctor, ignorant of the cordial terms on which the father and son lived together, sent the note to the father, who called on him to express his regret at his son's determination, adding that he had advised him not to send the note. Upon which the doctor broke out, ' Ah ! sir, you'll live to see that boy hanged! The doctor, on meeting Mrs. Pollock some years after his pupil had obtained university honours and professional success, congratulated her on her son's good fortune, adding, quite unconscious of the humorous contrast, ' Ah ! madam, I always said he'd fill an e/euaiec/ situation.' At the end of a year and a half he accord ingly left St. Paul's, and entered Trinity Col lege, Cambridge, in October 1802, There, although prevented by a serious accident, which confined him to his bed, from attend ing any lectures during the whole of his third. term, he went up for the college ex amination, and to his surprise was placed in the first class. Before he knew of his ho nourable position he had come up to town, with the intention of not revisiting Cam bridge, considerately thinking that his father could not afford the expense. But with the announcement of his success, his tutor, the Rev. George Frederick Tavel, expressed a strong hope that he would return, aud con tinue a career so auspiciously begun. His parents being equally anxious, the young man returned, fully resolved iu his own mind to be senior wrangler, but also with a determination to reUeve his father from part of the expenses by taking pupils. On ap plying for permission to do so his tutor gene rously, and with true coUege patriotism, said that the college could not afford to let him waste his time in teaching others, and that he should never send another bill to his father, but that whatever he wanted should lie supplied, and he should not be expected to refund till after he had taken his degree. pollock; Mr, Tavel felt himself more amply repaid for his munificence by his pupil's gratitude, and subsequent success, than 'by the ultimate discharge of the pecuniary debt. From that time Pollock was noted as a regular readmg man, alternating his college studies with reading and reciting the best specimens of ancient and modern oratory, and -with lay ing m an unusual stock of general Uterature. The effect of such studious habits was sure to be tested at the trial for his degree. After the examination, which took place in Ja nuary 1806, a laughable incident occurred. He of course went to the senate-house, -with a crowd of others, to see how he was placed. Another's name appeared to be at the top, bracketed alone with a Ime above and below. Then looking for his own, he got down to a name he felt certain could not be above his ; and having gone carefully up the list, he found his name above the one he had sup posed to be at the top, but pierced by the nail on which the paper hung, and that he had atteined the honour to which he had aspired. In the next year he had an equal triumph in classics by being elected a fellow of Trmity ; and his connection -with the university was kept up long after his mar riage had deprived him of his feUowship by receiving theappomtment of ite commissary. Havmg been previously adniitted a stu dent at the Middle Temple m 1802, he was on November 27, 1807, called to the bar, where the reputation he brought from the university was one of the gi-eat elemente of his future success. He jomed the Northern Circuit, but did not attend any sessions, as his knowledge of bookkeepmg and of com mercial business in general was found so useful in cases of bauM-uptcy that it intro duced him at once to considerable employ ment before the seventy liste of commis sioners at that time existing. Many of the questions arising there requiring fm-ther in vestigation led consequently to his engage ment in the actions that resulted in West minster Hall, so that he almost immediately obtained full practice at Nisi Prius. On his circuit he was ultimately equally fortunate. Among- the eminent advocates who attended it he soon acquired a prominent station, and at last had the undisputed lead. His busi ness there was greatly increased before he had been three years at the bar by his very able and judicious raanag-ement on the part of Captain (afterwai'ds Admiral) Blake, in the famous trial of Colonel Arthur before a court-martial for his implication in a rebel lion against the captain while governor of New South Wales, His success on that occasion attracted to his chambers many in fluential clients. A remarkable evidence of the rapid effect arising out of an occasional success happened to him. On the trial of a cause at the Guildhall sessions after Hilary Term in 1827, in which ilr. Brouaham as POLLOCK bis junior opened the pleadings, it was his fortune to gain a triumphant verdict against Sir James Scarlett, who led on the other side. At the ensuing spring assizes at Lan caster, where he had previously never had above four briefs, he found no less than sixty-one delivered to him. Mr, Pollock received his patent as king's counsel some weeks after. In the forensic conflicts in which he was subsequently engaged he had the usual alternations of victory and defeat. In May I83I he became member for Huntingdon, and in the autumn of 1834, when Sir Robert Peel became prime minister, he was at once promoted to the office of attornej'- general, without having, as is usually the case, fllled any minor post. His appoint ment, which was made on December 17, and was accompanied with the customary honour of knighthood, lasted only four months, ' Lord Melbourne's admimstration being restored to power, and retaining it for more than the flve succeeding years. On the resumption of the government by Sir Robert Peel in I84I, Sir Frederick was re placed in his former office on September 6 ; and m April 1 844 he was raised to the dis tinguished position he lately held, of lord chief baron of the Exchequer, and was im mediately called to the privy council. He continued to represent Huntingdon till his elevation to the bench. In the House of Commons, by his general deport ment and unaffected eloquence, and par ticularly by the temperate maimer in which he had on each occasion performed the duties of his responsible office of attorney- general, he occupied that most enviable position of being popular with both sides of the house, the evidence of which was specially shown m the cordial congratu lations he received from opponents as well as friends on the brilliant victories at that time gained by his gallant brother, General Sir George Pollock, in the Indian campaign. Of the chief baron's legal and judicial merits these pages profess not to speak. But at the end of two-and-twenty years from his appointment, and of near eighty- three from his birth, it may be allowed to record that he was to be found in his place exercising all the functions of his arduous office as efficiently as when he was at ffrst appointed ; frequently called upon to pre side in most important cases, and never flinching from undertaking them ; temper ing his judgments so as not unnecessarily to hurt the feelings of those against whom he was obliged to decide ; and ever acting towards his brethren on the bench, and the counsel at the bar of his court, so as to be a general favourite. On July 13, 1866, he retired from his position, having sat on the bench at a more advanced age than any common law judge before him ; Lord Mans- PONTE AUD03IAEE 525 fleld, though a little older when he actually resigned, having refrained from attending- the court for two years before, when he was only eighty-one years old. To the last Sir Frederick never excused himself from his daily duties, but enjoyed the conflict of mind which arose in an important argu ment, and the exercise of his faculties called forth in addressing a jury. His merits were recognised by the immediate grant of a baronetcy. Having suffered little from attacks of illness, and retaining much of his former activity, he may be truly said to enjoy a green old age. He has been long a fellow of the Royal Society, and among other essays contributed to that body he read in 1848, while he was attorney-general, a paper ' On a Method of Proving the Three LeadingProperties ofthe ElUpse and Hyperbole,' and he still has de Ught in pursuing his mathematical studies. Sir Frederick has been twice married. His flrst wife was the third daughter of H. Rivers, Esq., of Spring Gardens, His second wife was a daughter of Captain Richard Langslow, of Hatton near Hounslow, where Sir Frederick now resides. He had chil dren by each of them, no less than twenty- five in all, of whom twenty survive, ten 'by the first union, and ten by the second. He can boast of a more numerous issue than is usually the lot of humanity. Besides his twenty children, he counts fifty-four grand children, and seven great-grandchildren ; and he has had the gratification of seeing Ms eldest son's eldest son the first man of his year at his own alma mater. PONTE, Richaed de, is inserted by Mr. Hunter among the numerous justiciers before whom fines were taken in 10 John (Abb. Placit 88); but none of the fines hitherto published appear to have been acknowledged before him, nor do any ofthe contemporary rolls notice such a person. PONTE AUDOMAEE, Heney de, was a Norman, and in 1296 was custos of the escheats of the bailiwick of the Evrecin, and in 1298 baiUff of Caux, (Rot Scacc. Norm. Observations, i. olxix., ii. cxxxiii.) He held one knight's fee m Permton, of the honor of Gloucester, from the scutage of which he was excused in 7 John, and had a grant in 16 John of sixty shillings, the customs of the salt upon his land there. (Rot. Claus. i. 49, 206.) His regulai- employment as a justicier for eight years is evidenced by his name ap pearing on fines acknowledged both at Westminster and in the country from 9 to 16 John inclusive. (Rot de Fin. 484, 621.) It would seem that he soon afterwards got into disgrace, as his property feU into the king's hands, which is proved by an entry on the Close RoU of 2 Henry III, 1218,, whereby it is ordered to be restored to him. (Rot Claus. i. 389,) 526 POORE He was entirely reinstated in the royal favour and entrusted in the same year with the custody of the lands of William Earl of Devon, and of Lucas Fitz-John; and there is a record in the next year of certain wool being seized in Northampton market by him and Ralph de Norwich, subsequently one of thejusticiers. (RotClaus. i. 343-602.) POOEE, Richaed (Bishop of Chiches ter, Salisbitet, andDiTEHAM), appears once only in the character of a justice itinerant, being, as Bishop of Salisbury, at the head of those who in 3 Henry ill., I2I8, were appointed for WUtshire, Hampshire, Berk shire, and Oxfordshire. He was born at Tarent in Dorsetehire, ,and was made dean of SaUsbuiy in 1197, 8 Richard I., from which he was raised to the bishopric of Chichester on January 7, 1215, 16 John. His translation to SaUs"bury occurred about June 1217, 1 Henry HI. ; and during the time that he held that see he undertook the removal of the cathedral church fi-om Old Sarum, commencing the present magnificent building in 1219, The Close Rolls contain many royal grants of timber and other materials to aid this erec tion, to the progress of which he devoted the next nine years. Its completion, how ever, which occupied thirty years, he left to his successors, as he was advanced to the see of Durham in May 1228. There he presided for nine years, and died on April 15, 1237, -with the character of a man of extraordinary sanctity and profound science. He founded a hospital for the poor at Salis bury, and greatly endowed a convent at the place of his birth, in the latter of which his heart was deposited, his body being in terred in Salisbury Cathedral, or, according to Surtees (i. xxvii,), conveyed to Durham, (Godioin, 348, 504, 740; Monast v. 619.) POPHAM, John, was descended from a family settled at Popham, a hamlet in Hampshire, early in the twelfth century. The estate of Huntworth in Somersetshire was acquired in marriage in the reign of Edward I. ; and there .lohn, the future chief justice, was born about the year 1581, being the second son of Alexander (or, as some say, Edward) Popham, of that place, by his wife Jane, the daughter of Sir Edward Strad Ung, of St. Donat's Castle, Glamorganshire. He received his education at Bailiol Col lege, Oxford, whence he removed to the Middle Temple to pursue the study of the law. Instead of doing this, tradition charges him with entering into wild courses, and even with being -wont to take a pm-se -with his profligate companions. However this may be, he must have soon reformed, and, as FuUer says (U. 284), ' appUed Mmself to a more profitable fencing ; *' for he does not seem tonave been delayed iu obtaining the usual honours of his society.' His nomina- .tion as reader took place in 1568, when he POPHAM was thirty-seven years old ; and he became treasurer twelve years afterwards. {Dug dale's Orig. 217, 221.) In the interval between these two dates he had obtained, as member for Bristol, a seat in parUament, where in 1671, when the subsidy was under discussion, he joined with Mr. BeU (the future chief baron) in calUng for the cor rection of some abuses, and pointed out the evil of allo-wing the treasurers of the cro-svn to retain in their hands 'great masses of money,' of which, becommg bankrupt, they only repaid an instalment. In the next year he was one of the committee appomted to confer with the Lords on the subject of the Queen of Scots. (ParL Hist. i. 735, 779.) He was called to the degree of the coif on January 28, 1578 ; and m the followmg year he was offered the place of solicitor- general. This office being inferior m rank to that of a serjeant-at-law, he obtamed a patent exoneratmg him from the latter degree, and was thereupon appointed soU citor-general on June 26, 1579. (DugdaMs Orig. 127.) While holdmg that office he was elected speaker of the House of Com mons in January 1581 ; aud some idea may be formed of his wit, and also of the Ught- ness of the parliamentarj- labours during that session, by his reply to Queen EUzar beth, when, on his attending her on some occasion, she said, 'WeU, Mr. Speaker, what hath passed m the Lower House ? ' he an swered, ' If it please your majesty, seven weeks.' His last and indeed principal duty in this capacity was the makmg the cus tomary speech to the queen on presentmg the subsidy voted at the end of the session. This was on March 18, after wMch that parliament never again met, (Pari. Hist i, 311, 828.) On June 1, 1581, he became attomey- general, and held that office for eleven years, during which he took part m all those criminal trials, the perusal of wMch, even where the gmlt of the prisoners is most apparent, cannot but excite feeUngs of indignation a-t the gross injustice of the proceedings. His conduct in them, how ever, is not chargeable -with any unneces sary harshness ; and even in the openmg of the unwarronteble charge against Secretary Davison he performed the difficult duly without any words of aggravation. (State Trials, i. I051-132I.) His elevation to the office of lord chief justice of the King's Bench took place on June 2, l692, when he was immediately knighted. He presided in that court for the flfteen remaining years of his life — eleven under Queen Elizabeth, and four under King James. He accompanied Lord Keeper Egerton in February 1600 to the Earl of Essex's house, as already related; and when Sir Ferdinando Gorges offered to deliver him POPHAM from his forced detention there, he refused 'to depart vrithout his companions in con finement, saying that 'as they came to gether, so would they go together, or die together.' This fact is nqt mentioned at the earl's trial, either in the chief justice's evidence or in Gorges' exammation ; but it is related by himself on the subsequent trial of Sir Christopher Blunt and others implicated in this insurrection, at which was exhibited the unbecoming spectacle of prisoners tried, and sentence pronounced, tby a judge who had himself been a sufferer. (Ibid i, 1340, 1344, 1428,) One of his earliest duties after the acces sion of James was to preside at the trial of Sfr Walter Raleigh — stained not only by a ¦conviction founded on weak and unsatisfac tory evidence, but also by that disgusting ¦conduct towards the prisoner of Sir Edward Coke, which wiU ever disgrace his name, and for wMch the chief justice felt himself caUed upon to apologise, saymg to Sir Walter, ' Mr, Attorney speaketh out of the zeal of his duty for the service of the Mng, and you for your life ; be valiant on both sides.' (Ibid. ii. 10.) He would have done better to have silenced the brutal tongue. The last state trials which he presided over were those against the conspirators in the Gunpowder Plot, finishing with that of Garnet the Jesuit, on March 28, 1606. lilhid. U, 169, 217,) He was then seventy- five years old ; but he sat on the bench for another year, pronouncing a judgment in the Court of Wards as late as Easter Term 1607, On Jime 10, m the following term, he died, and was buried under a magnificent tomb in the church of Welling ton in Somersetshire, where he had long resided in a stately house he had erected, :and to which he left a testimony of his charity and goodwill by the foundation of a hospital for the maintenance of twelve poor and aged people. Sir John died in possession of several valuable estates, one of which was that of Littlecott in Wiltshire. In connection with this a dark and improbable story is related of ite having come into the chief justice's hands as the price of his corruptly allowing one Darell, the former proprietor, to escape on his trial for an atrocious murder. There is no doubt of the existence of such a tradi tion ; it is told by Aubrey, who was cer tainly no admirer of the judge, and it is related by Sir Walter Scott in iUustration of a ballad in Rokeby, Sir Wafter does not give the judge's name, but that appears in full in other accounts both in prose and verse detailing the horrid particulars. It would be curious to trace the circumstances to which such a tradition owes its origin, especially in a case where every other in cident in the career of the party implicated seems to render its occurrence impossible. POPHAM 527 and where contemporaries so eminent as Lord EUesmere, Sir Edward Coke, and Sir George Croke give voluntary testimony to the purity of his character. Lord EU&smere, in the year after Pop- ham's death, says of him, ' And here I may not omit the worthy memory of the late grave and reverend judge Sir John Popham, chief justice ofthe King's Bench, deceased, a man of great vrisdom, and of singular learnmg and judgment m the law.' (Ibid. ii. 669.) Coke, not long afterwards, in re porting Sir Drew Drury's case (6 Reports, 76), says, 'And this was the last case that Sir John Popham, the venerable and ho nourable chief justice of England, &c., re solved, who was a most reverend judge, of a ready apprehension, profound judgment, most excellent understanding, and admir able experience and knowledge of all busi ness which concerned the commonwealth ; accompanied -with a rare memory, with perpetual industry and labom- for the main tenance of the tranquillity and pubUc good of the realm, and in all things with great constancy, integrity, aud patience ; ' .ind Croke, in noticing his death, calls him ' a person of great leaming and integrity.' These are quaUties which oppose the idea of the possessor of them being possibly guilty of such a dereUction of principle and duty as that with which the tradition charges him. If the petition which Sir Francis Bacon, m his argument against HolUs and others for traducing public jus tice, states was presented to Queen Elizabeth against Chief Justice Popham, and which after investigation by four privy councillors was dismissed as slanderous (State Trials, ii. 1029), could be found, it might possibly turn out that this story was the slander ; and the chief justice's subsequent enjoy ment of his high office would be a sufficient proof of its utter falsehood. An able defender has at last been found, Mr. Long, in a recent article in the ' Wilt shire Arohceological Magazme,' has not only refuted the story as it regards the chief justice, but raises reasonable doubt whether the charge against Darell himself is not altogether a myth, Aubrey's account, which is the first printed authority for the tradition, was written about eighty years after the judge's death ; while Camden, the judge's contemporary, speaks of Mm as a man of ' distinguished vfrtue, ' and, in writing of Littlecott, says nothing of the astounding crime of Darell, ite late pro prietor. Neither Symonds nor Evelyn, when mentiomng the place, make any aUu sion to this mysterious tradition. Mr. Long confutes Aubrey's loose statement by prov ing that Darell was never a knight and was never married, as asserted, and that he died before Popham was advanced to the bench ; so that he could not have been the judge 528 POET who pronounced the supposed sentence. No record has been found ofthe trial, though every search has been made in the proper repositories. But a deposition has been found among some of Darell's papers in the Rolls Chapel, made before his relation and corresponden-t Anthony Bridges by the mid wife concerned in the deed, whose story h.as evidently no reference to Darell or to Little cott Hall, and was apparently taken in 1578, eleven years before Darell's death, aud one year before Popham was even solicitor- general. He is reputed to have been a severe judge, and, according to Fuller (Worthies ii. 284), to haye recommended Kmg James to be more sparing in his pardons to the malefactors who then infested the highways. This author adds, ' In a word, the deserved death of some scores preserved the lives and livelyhoods of more thousands, tra- veUers owing their safety to this judge's severity many years after his death.' David Lloyd, in his ' State Worthies ' (760), gives him credit for ha-ring ' first set up the dis covery of New England to maintain and employ those that could not live honestly in the Old ; being of opinion that banish ment thither would be as well a more law ful as a more effectual remedy against these extravagancies.' And Aubrey (ii. 495) says that ' he stockt and planted "Virginia out of all the gaoles of England.' Neither of these accounts is quite correct, the truth being that, having associated himself with Sir Ferdinando Gorges (the knight who released him from the Earl of Essex's house) in a speculation for the estabUshment of a colony in North America, and a patent haying- been granted to them and seyeral others, their expedition sailed on December 19, 1606 (Banci-oft's Amei-ica, i. 123), about six months before the chief justice's death; so that whatever might have been his inten tions as to transportation, he did not live to see them carried into effect. After his death some Reports collected by him were published with his name ; but the book is considered as of no authority. The chief justice married Amy, daughter of Robert Gaines, of Glamorgan, Esq., and by her, besides several daughters, left a son, Sfr Francis, whose descendants are still in possession of the Littlecott estate. POET, Henet de, was the son and heir of a great Norman "baron named Hugh de Port, who held fifty-five lordships under WilUam the Conqueror at the general survey, the principal of which was the barony of Basing in Hampshire. By the roll of 31 Henry I. he appears to have been one of the justices itinerant acting in Kent, in which county part of his property was situated. He founded the priory of West Shirburn in Hampshire, and endowed it with his POET manor of Shirburn. He also gave the tithes of his manor of Hageley, in Hawley, near Dartford, Kent, to the church of Rochester. His wife's name was Hadewise, and by her he left two sons, John and William, the former of whom succeeded to his baron}', John had a son Adam, generally supposed to be the under-mentioned justi ciary. (Dugdale's Baron, i. 463 ; Monast. i. 170, vi, 1018 ; Hasted.) POET, Adam db, is stated by Dugdale (Baronage, i. 463) to be the grandson of the above Henry de Port, and the son of John de Port, and that he fled out of the king- j dom and was outlawed in II72, 18 Henry : IL, haying become impUcated in the trea sonable machinations carried on against the king by his eldest son and Queen Eleanor. (Lord Lyttelton's Henry II. ii, 104.) Bu-t from the records and other 1 documents of the period, the detaU of which would be umnteresting, it is mani fest that there were two mdividuals named Adam de Port, both probably descended from the same great-grandfather, and there fore second cousins, and that wMle one Adam was a fugitive, the other was in continued attendance on the king, and was the justice itinerant now to be noticed. He was the son of Roger de Port by Sybilla de Albinero, and the grandson of another Adam, the brother of the above- noticed Henry. The Charter Rolls of King ,Tohn contain numerous instances of Ms acting as a witness among the magnates of the land fi-om the flrst' to the fourteenth year. (Rot Chart. 23-189.) In 9 John he had the custody of the priory of Shireburn, then m the king's hands on account of the interdict (Rot. Claus, i. 108) ; and in 10 John he was one of the justiciers before whom fines were acknowledged at Carlisle ; but he is not othei-wise mentioned in a judicial character. On June 25, 1213, 15 John, the custody of the castle of Southampton was committed to him ; but before the 25th of the follow ing month he died, (Rot. de Oblatis, 477.) He married Mabil, the daughter of Regi nald de Aurevalle, whose wife, Muriel, was the daughter of Roger de St. John, to whom Mabil ultimately became hefr, and their son William assumed the name of St, John, The title of St. John of Basmg, by which his descendants were summoned to parliament, eventually devolved, sometimes through female representatives, on William Paulet, Marquis of Winchester, which title still survives. (Nicolas's Synopsis.) POET, John, was a native of Chester, where his a,ncestors were merchante for several generations. His father was Henry Port, a mercer in that city, who became mayor in 1486 ; and his mother was Anne, daughter of Robert Barrow, of Chester, who had also attained the same dignity. PORTESEYE Pursuing his legal studies at the Inner Temple, he reached the post of reader in 1607, and again in 1615, becoming treasurer in the latter year, and governor in 1620, (Dugdale's Orig. 168, 170.) In 1504 he was one of the commissioners for raising the subsidy in Derbyshire, and was attomey for the earldom of Chester, On May 31, 1609, he was constituted solicitor-general, the duties of which office he performed tiU Trinity Term I62I, when he was raised to the degree of the coif (Rot ParL vi. 539 ; CaL State Papers [1547-80], 132.) Though Dugdale does not date his eleva tion to the 'bench till January 1633, it certainly took place several years before. He is called a judge of the King's Bench and a knight in the will of Lawrence Button of Dutton, proved on .Tanuary 22, 1527-8 (Lane and Cheshire Wills [Chesham Soc.]), and he was summoned to parliament in that character in November 1629, He was again summoned in April 1636 (Rymei-, xiv, 304, 665), and was one of the com missioners on the trials of Sir Thomas More and Bishop Fisher in 1586. His death occurred before November 1541, He married twice. One of his vrives was Margery, daughter of Sir Edward Trafford, of Trafford in Lancashire ; and the other was Joan, widow of John Pole of Radburn, and daughter of John Fitz Herbert, remem brancer of the Exchequer, by whom he acquired the manor of Etwall in Derby shire. (Nicholls's Leicestershire, 858.) POETESEYE, Adam de, is mentioned among the justices itinerant for the county of Hants in 9 Henry IIL, 1225, and there is no further reference to his name except that in the next year he assessed the quin zime for that county, (Rot. Claus.ii.76, 147.) POETINGTON, John, was of a Yorkshire family which was still flourishing at the end of the seventeenth century. Though we have not the date of Ms call to the degree of the coif, we find him appointed one of the Mng's Serjeants on April 17, 1440, 18 Henry VL, and m the next year he acted as a justice of assize in Yorkshire. (KaL Exch. iii, 283,) Three years afterwards he was made a judge of the Court of Common Pleas. (CaL Rot Pat 285.) How long after Easter 1454, when the last fine was acknowledged before him (Dugdale's Orig. 46), he remained in the court we have no account, nor of the date of his death ; but he was one of the executors of Ralph Lord Cromwell, treasurer of England, who died m January 1456. (Testam. Vetust. 276.) POETMAN, William, belonged to a family which flourished in the county of Somerset from a period earlier than the reign of Edward I. His grandfather, WU liam, was a reader at the Middle Temple, and by marriage with Christian, the daugh ter of William Orchai-d, acquired the estate POTEENA 529 of that name in the same county, to which he added his o-wn ; and it still remains -with the double designation m the family. His father was John, also a member of the Middle Temple, where the judge himself became reader in 1632 and 1640, (Dug dale's Orig. 175, 215, 216.) He was caUed to the degree of the coif in the following Trinity Term, and was nominated one of the king's Serjeants on November 23. In Ja- niiai-y 1641 he was sent to Plymouth on a commission to examine into an unlawful assembly of its inhabitants ' uppon a Por- tugallesship.' (ActsPrivy Council, vii. 115.) His elevation as a judge of the King's Bench took place on May 15, 1546, and on the death of King Henry m the following year he was continued in his seat, which he retamed during the whole of Edward's reign, and for the first two years of Mary's, when he was raised to the head of his court on June II, 1565. His name frequently appears in the commissions for the trial of state prisoners, among whom was Sir Ni cholas Throckmorton (State Trials, i. 894) ; but he presided over his court for little more than a year and a half, his death oc currmg on February 5, 1557. He was buried at St, Dunstan's-in-the-West, and his epitaph is given in Maitland's 'London ' (p. 1095). Whatever religion he professed during the reign of Edward, he clearly belonged to the Roman Catholic body in the last years of his Ufe, and was considered so earnest in that faith as to be sent to Sir James Hales, his brother judge, then in the Fleet, to persuade him to recant, (Wotton's Baronet. i. 221,) Sir William's grandson was honoured with a baronetcy in 1612, which failed in 1695. The barony of Portman of Orchard- Portman was granted on January 27, 1837, to Edward Berkeley Portman, the present lord, a descendant of the eldest daughter of the first baronet, whose estates devolved upon him, (Hutchins's Dorsetsh. i. 87,) POTEENA, James de, acted as a justicier from 9 Richard L, 1197, through the whole of the reign of John, (Abb. Placit 83.) His name also appears on various itinera withm the same time ; and on one occasion he incurred a fine of one hundred marks for granting leave to settle a cause vrithout the king's licence, which was, however, after wards remitted. He was continued m Ms judicial position under Henry IH., in the third year of whose reign he was one of the justices itinerant into 'Wiltehire, &c. In 1200, 2 John, he was under-sheriff of York to Geofirey Fitz-Peter, and was the principal instrument in despoiling the arch- ¦bishop's lands and goods when he refused to pay the comage imposed by the Mng, For his severity in the performance of this duty he was introduced by name into the sentence of excommunication fulmmated by 530 POWELL the irritated prelate, (R, de Wendover, iii, 164, n,) In 6 John the county of Wilte was committed to his charge, and in the next year the manor of Wellop in Hamp shire was given to him for his support. This manor, in 17 John, the sheriff was ordered to deliver up to Roger Elys, 'si Jacobus de Potema non sit ad servicium nostrum,' showmg that in that troublesome period his fidelity was suspected. It would appear that he soon cleared himself, for the property was subsequently in his possession. He died in 6 or 6 Henry HI. (Rot. Claus. i. 8, 114, 282, 475, 487.) POWELL, Thomas, There are three con temporaneous judges ofthe name of Powell, the Christian name of one being Thomas, and of two being John ; of whom two sat on the bench in the reign of James IL, two in that of William IIL, and for a short time in the same court, and one of them in the reign of Queen Anne, It is difficult always to distinguish them, and it is there fore not surprising that writers have fre quently appropriated to oue the character and the anecdotes and even the Imeage which belong to another of his namesakes. Thomas, the subject of this memoir, is not so liable to this misapprehension as the two Johns. He was of Welsh extraction, tracing his lineage to the princes of North Wales. His father was John Powell, of Llechwedd Dyrys in the county of Cardigan ; and Ms mother was Anne, daughter of Thomas Pryce, of Glanfread. On his admission to Gray's Inn in 1656 he is described as of Staple Inn, where probably he was initiated in legal studies. He was called to the bar in 1660, and afternearlyfour-and-twenty years' practice he was sworn a seijeant in 1684. Three years after, on April 22, 1687, he was appointed a baron of the Exchequer, and was knighted ; and on July 6 in the next year he was removed to the King's Bench in the place of Sir John Powell, tm-ned out for the bold expression of his opinion in the case of the seven bishops. He had little opportunity of shovring his legal ability, for his judicial career termi nated a few months afterwards with the flight of the king. He survived his removal from the bench for sixteen years, and died in January 1706, He married EUzabeth, daughter and heir of David Lloyd of Aber- brwynen, by whom he left a son, whose descendant still occupies the family seat at Nanteos in Cardiganshire, (Bramston, 275, 311 ; Luttrell, 514.) POWELL, John, was the senior of the two John Powells who were contemporary judges, and was, like Sir Thomas Powell, descended from a very ancient Welsh family. He was the son of John Powell, of Kenward in Carmarthenshire, and was born about 1633. The inscription on his monument states that he received his flrst PQ-WELL instructions from Jeremy Taylor, the re nowned Bishop of Do-wn, and subsequently at the university of Oxford, but Anthony "Wood does not name him as taMng any degree. His legal education commenced in 1650, at Gray's Inn, where he was called to the bar seven years after, and became an ancient in 1676. We have no detail of his professional experience till his nomination as a judge of the Common Pleas on April 26, 1686, when he was kmghted. In the next Trinity Term he was called upon to give his opinion -with the rest of the judges at Serjeants' Inn as to the Mng's dispensmg power in Sir Edward Hale's case, when he required time for consideration; and, ac cording to his O'wn statement, the judgment was pronounced -without his having had an opportunity to give his decision. The chief justice evidently conssidered that PoweU coincided with the majority, and therefore he at that time escaped the dismission to which some of his feUows were subjected. He was removed to the Kmg's Bench on AprU 16, 1687, and in the same month Thomas Powell was made a baron of the Exchequer, so that there were then two judges of the name. During the whole time he sat on the bench in James's reign he was always associated on the cfrcmt with Sir Robert Wright, a junction wMch was probably dictated by the necessity of supplying Wright's deficiency -with Sfr John's profound knowledge of law. (Bram- stcm, 226, 278; State Trials, xi, 1198; ParL Hist V. 333.) Sir Robert Wright,- a few days after Powell's appointment to the Kmg's Bench, was restored to that court as ite oMef, and PoweU was therefore an unfortunate and unwilUng participator in the outiageous sentence on the Earl of Devonshfre, fmmg him in the sum of 30,000/., and committing him to prison till it was paid. It must be acknowledged that when caUed upon by the House of Lords after the revolution to account for this breach of pri^•ilege he made a very lame excuse. The Lords overlooked the offence, and contented themselves vrith voting the committal to be a breach of privilege, and the fine to be excessive. On June 29, 1688, came on the trial of the seven bishops, and the remarks made by Sir John Powell durmg its progress suffi ciently indicated his opinion of the prose cution, and must haye prepared his col leagues for the exposition of the law wMch he pronounced when his turn came. He declared that he could uot see anythmg of sedition or imy other crime fixed upon the reverend fathers, for they had with humi lity and decency submitted to the king not to insist on their reading- his majesty's declaration, because they conceived that it was against the law of the land, it being founded on the dispensing power, which, he POWELL "boldly said, if ' once allowed of, there wiU need no parUament.' The consequence of this honest demonstration, and of Justice HoUoway's concurrence in it, was the bishops' acquittal, and the dismissal of both these judges, which took place on July 7, Sir Thomas Powell being substituted for Sir John in the Kmg's Bench, (State Trials, xi, 1369, xii. 426 ; ParL Hist. v. 311,) On King William's government being established. Sir John Powell was immedi- ^ately restored to his original seat in the Common Pleas, a place which he preferred to the more prominent one of keeper of the Crreat Seal, which, according to his epitaph, was offered to him. He was sworn in on March 11, 1689, and for the next seven years he administered justice m that court with undimmished reputation. He died of the stone at Exeter on September 7, 1696, -and bemg removed to his mansion at Broad way, near Laughame, in Carmarthenshire, he was buried in the church of that parish, Tvhere a tablet was erected to his memory. His son Thomas was created a baronet a short time afterwards, but the dignity became extinct in 1721, (Luttrell, i. 504, 609 ; Gent Mag. July 1889, p, 22,) POWELL, John, Junior, As he and the last-mentioned judge sat at the same time -in, the same court, it almost unavoidably followed that frequent mistakes occurred as to thefr identity. Several biographers, as Chalmers, Noble, Britton, and others, have run in this error, confounding the two, and mixing up the history of the Carmarthen- shfre judge with that of the native of Glou cester, whose career is now to be related. His family was origin.iUy resident in Herefordshire, but migrated to Gloucester, where his father held various municipal honours, and was mayor in 1663, The judge was born there in 1646, and became in 1664 a member of the Inner Temple, being called to the bar in 1671. In 1674 he was elected town clerk of his native city, and chosen representative of it to the sole par liament of James H, m 1686, In September of that year he was turned out of his office, but was restored in 1687, ha-vmg first been obUged to make an application to the Court of King's Bench. (Rudge' s Gloucester, 89 ; 2 Shower, 490.) At the revolution he was included in the first batch of serjeante; and in May 1691, the king having ordered that the vacant seat in the Common Pleas should be filled by Mr. Powell, the serjeant named his officers and bespoke his robes; but by the interference of Sir John Trevor and others in behalf of Sir WilUam Poul- teney, the intended promotion was delayed tiU the king's return from Holland, when, Trevor's plot being counteracted, Powell was, on October 27, appointed a baron of the Exchequer instead. He was thereupon POWLE 531 knighted, and remained in that court tUl October 29, 1696, when he was transferred to the Common Pleas, where he sat till the death of the Mng, Three months after the accession of Queen Anne he made another change, and on June 24, 1702, took his seat in the Court of Queen's Bench, wMch he graced with universal esteem and respect till the last year of her reign. He died at Gloucester, unmarried, on June 14, I7I8, and was buried in the cathedral, where a monument, with an effigy of him in his robes, records his judicial excellencies, (Luttrell, U, 220, 229; Lord Raymond, 769 ; Rudder's Gloucester, 119.) During the two-and-twenty years he sat in one court or the other his conduct on the bench was -without reproach ; and m the last eleven he ably seconded the efficient rule of Chief Justice Holt. Distingmshed as a profound lawyer, he was equally re spected in his private Ufe. Dean Svrift represents him in his letter to Stella of July 5, I71I, as the merriest old gentleman he ever saw, speaking pleasant things and chuckling till he cried again. When Jane Wenham was tried for -witchcraft before him, and charged with being able to fly, he asked her whether she could fly, and on her answering in the affirmative he said, 'Well, then, you may; there is no law against flying.' The poor woman was saved from the effects of her own faith, and re ceived the queen's pardon. (Fosbrooke's Gloucester.) POWEE, Waltee, who was one of the commissioners of array for the counties of Bedford and BucMngham in 20 Edward HL, held the manor of Brereby and other pro perty in Yorkshire, part of which he gave to the prior of the convent of Monk Bretton. He was a clerk or master in Chancery fi-om 25 to 47 Edward IIL, 1351-1373 ; and in that character was at the head of four in whose custody the Great Seal was left on March 18, 1371, durmg the temporary ab sence of the chancellor, Sir Robert de Thorpe. He is noticed as holding the office of attorney-general to John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, in 1386. (N. Fcedera, iii. 78, 483; Abb. Rot Orig. U, 220; Cal Inquis. p. m. ii. 172 ; Rot ParL U. 225-817.) POWLE, Henet, was rather a politician than a lawyer. His oratory was oftener heard in the chapel of St, Stephen's than in the courts of "Westminster, and he owed his promotion to the office of master of the Rolls more to his being a whig leader than to his prominence at the bar. He was bom about 1629, and was the younger son of Henry Powle, of Shottisbrooke in Berkshire, sheriff of that county in 1632, by Catherme, daughterof Matthew Herbert, of Monmouth, From his being retumed for Cirencester to the Convention Parliament of 1660, it may be presumed that he was known to be MM 2 532 POWLE averse from a monarchical government, with a -riew to the resumption of which that parliament was summoned. In it he seems to have preserved a modest silence, and not to have spoken in the next till it had satfornine sessions, occupying nearly twelve years. His first appearance, as reported, was in February 1673, when in a clear and convincing speech he exposed the tricks played by Lord Chancellor Shaftesbury in issumg writs for the election of members -without the speaker's warrant, and procmed a vote declaring all the returns under them void. He next by his strenuous opposition succeeded in obtaining the cancelment of the king's declaration of indulgence to dis senters; and from that time he took the lead in getting the Test Act through the house, and in all the other important pro ceedmgs of the session. In the remaining seven sessions he continued to be one of the most active heads of the country party in opposition to the court. That parliament, having lasted eighteen years, was brought to a close iu January 1679 ; and to the next, summoned in the foUovring March, he was retumed by his old constituency. He dis tinguished himself in it by the bold stand he made against the king's rejection of the speaker (Seymour), thereby conflrming to the Commons for the future their right to uncontrolled election; and also by his severe recapitulation of the crimes imputed to the Earl of Danby, thus securmg the passing of the act of attainder which obUged the earl to surrender himself In this session also some enquiries were made into the money distributed by ministers among the mem bers who supported them for secret service. It is more than probable that neither party were fi'ee from contamination ; for accord ing to a late discovery several of the leading members of the opposition, and among them Powle himself is named, disgi-aced them selves by accepting large gratuities from the King of France. Before the dissolution of this short par liament he was taken into the ministry as one of the thirty privy councillors, part whig and part tory, to whom by Sir W. Temple's advice the king conflded the government. As might be expected from ite heterogeneous materials, the structure feU to pieces in the foUowing October ; and Powle once more returned to the ranks of opposition. There he joined with Shaftes bury in his endeavours to exclude the Duke of York from the throne, and procured a strong declaration against the illegal and arbitrary discharge ofthe grandjury to avoid their presentment against the duke for recu sancy. For this an impeachment was voted agamst Chief Justice Scroggs, who only avoided the consequence by a lucky disso lution of the parliament and a timely sacri fice of his place. Strongly prejudiced against POWYS the Roman CathoUcs, Powle gave his full beUef to the existence ofthe Popish Plot; and as a manager for conducting the trial of Lord Stafford he summed up the evidence against him -with peculiar severity. In the Oxford parUament of March 1681, which lasted only a week, Powle took very little part; and to the smgle parUament called by James II. he was not retumed. When that king fled to France, and the old parliamentary members were sum moned, Mr. Powle was selected as thefr chairman, and presented the address to the Prince of Orange to take upon him the govemment till 'the meeting of the Conven tion on January 22, 1689, In that Conven tion, the second in which it was his fortune to have a place, he represented Windsor, and on ite flrst sitting was unanimously chosen speaker. He had the satisfaction in that character of presentmg the Declaration of Righte, and of hearing the prince and princess's acknowledgment of them m thefr acceptance of the cro'wn. In the new ar rangement of the judicial bench he received the post of master of the Rolls, and was admitted mto the pri-vy council. With the dissolution m January 1690 his senatorial life terminated. He died on November 21, 1692, and was buried in Quenington Church, where there is a marble -with a flattermg inscription to his memory. He married, first, EUzabeth, daughter of the first Lord Newport, of High Ercall ; and, secondly, Frances, daughter of Lionel Cranfield, first Earl of Middlesex, aud vridow of Richard Earl of Dorset, (Atkyns's Gloucestersh. 322 ; Manning's Speakers, 389 ; Townsends Com mons, i. 33 ; Pari. Hist iv, v.) Powle was a -riolent partisan m -riolent times; but he was evidently an honest one. Though his Une of conduct cannot always be approved, it is difficult to credit the doubtful imputation of Ms receiving gra tuities fi-om the French king. His speeches bear the impress of smcerity ; they were ready, effective, and often eloquent, particu larly some of his addresses as speaker. For that office his historical knowledge and par liamentary learning peculiarlyqualified Mm. How far they aided him in the distribution of justice as master of the Rolls we have but little means of kno-wing; but as no complaints have come do-wn to us we may conclude that he performed his duties -with efficiency. He was a member of the Royal Society, and an mdustrious collector of MSS,,, principally those relating to English history, a great part of which are now in the Lans downe Collection in the British Museum, POWYS, Littleton, was descended from the Princes of Po-wys in the twelfth cen tury, according to his pedigree as authen tically traced by veracious genealogists, who carry it down till the reign of Ed- POWYS ward n,, about which time the Welsh ¦appendage was discarded, and the more pronounceable name of Powys adopted, 'The family subsequently divided into se veral branches, one of which settled m ¦Shropshire. Thomas Powys, of Henley m that county, reader of LincoM's Inn in 1667, and serjeant-at-law in 1669, by his first wife Mary, daughter of Sir Adam Lit tleton, Bart., was the father of four sons, the eldest of whom, who was baptized with his mother's maiden name, and the second, Thomas, both became judges. (CoUins's Peerage, viii. 577.) Littieton Powys was born about 1648, and was instructed in the mysteries of law at LincoM's Inn, where he was called to ¦the bar in May 1671. At the revolution he took arms in favour of WiUiam -with three servants, and read aloud that prince's ¦declaration at Shrewsbury. He was re warded for his zeal by being made in May 1689 second judge on the Chester Circuit. In 1692 he was raised to the degree of the coif, and soon after knighted ; and on Oc tober 29, 1695, he was promoted to the bench as a baron of the Exchequer. In that court, and afterwards in the King's Bench, to which he was removed on Janu ary 29, 1701, he sat durmg three reigns till October 26, l726, when, being then seventy- eight years old, he was allowed to retire on a pension of 1500/, (9 Reports Pub. Rec, App, U, 252; Lord Raymond, 622, 1420,) On the accession of George I, in 17 14 Lord Cowper had represented to the king ¦that as the judge and his brother frequently acted in opposition to their two colleagues in the court, it was expedient to remove ¦one of them, and recommended that Sir Lit tleton should be retamed, as a blameless man, though ' of less abilitys and consequence,' {Lord Campbell's Chanc. iv, 349, 864,) He was a good plodding judge, though, according to Duke Wharton's satfre, he could not ' sum a cause vrithout a blunder,' .and was somewhat too much inclmed to take a political view in the trials before him. With moderate intellectual powers, lie filled his office with average credit, but was commonly laughed at by the bar for commencing his judgmente with ' I humbly conceive,' and enforcing his argumente with ' Look, do you see.' He is the reputed victim of Philip Yorke's badinage, who, ¦dining with the judge, and being pressed to name the subject of the work which he had jokmgly said he was about to publish, stated that it was a poetical version of Coke upon Lyttelton. As nothmg would satisfy Sir Littieton but a specimen of the compo- .sition, Yorke gravely recited, — He that holdeth his lands in fee Need neither to shake nor to shiver, 1 humbly conceive ; for looli, do you see, . They are his and his heirs' for ever. POWYS 533 That Sir Littleton was ridiculed by the bar appears in another metrical lampoon written by PhiUp Yorke, called ' Sir Little ton Povris's Charge m Rhyme, 1718,' hu morously quizzing his insipid phraseologv. (State Trials, xv, 1407-1422 ; Cooksey's Lords Somers and Hardwicke, 57, 66; Harris's Lord Hardwicke, i. 84.) The judge lived nearly six years after his retirement, and died on March 16, 1732, PO-WYS, Thomas, was the brother of Sir Littleton, and only a year his junior. He filled a larger space in the history of his time, though he occupied a judicial position for the brief period of a year and a quarter. After being educated at Shrewsbury School, he became a student at LincoM's Inn, and was called to the bar in 1673, Bumet calls him a young aspiring lawyer ; and he certainly outstripped his elder brother in the race for legal honours, though neither of them had any eminence in legal attainments. When James II, found that his law officers decUned to comply with his arbi trary requirements, he selected Thomas Powys on April 23, 1686, to fill the post of soUcitor-general, and thereupon knighted him. Offering no objection to the issue of warrants to avowed Papiste to hold office, and arguing Sir Edward Hale's case m favour of the power assumed by the Mng to dispense with the test, he was advanced in December 1687 to the attorney-general ship. In that character he conducted the case against the seven bishops in June 1688, when the moderation, if not luke- warmness of his advocacy contrasted strongly with the indecent intemperance of Williams, the .solicitor-general. It may readily be believed, as he expressed him self in a letter to the Archbishop of Canter bury m the following January, excusmg his acting in that ' most unhappy perse cution,' that ' it was the most uneasy thing to him that ever in his life he was con cerned in,' (Burnet, iii, 91, 223 ; State Trials, xii. 280; Clarendon's Corresp. ii. 507.) The abdication of James of course brought his official career to a close ; and during WiUiam's reign, though he was a fair lawyer and fully employed, especiaUy in the defences on state prosecutions, he remained on the proscribed Ust. From 1701 till 1713 he represented Ludlow ; and at the beginning of Queen's Anne's reign he was made at one step serjeant and queen's serjeant; and before the end of it, on June 8, 1713, was promoted to a seat m the Queen's Bench, where his brother was then second judge. He did not long remain there, for, the queen dying in August 1714, King George on his conUng to England superseded him on October 14, at the mstigation of Lord ChanceUor Cowper, who, though he 534 POYNTON allowed that he had 'better abilitys' than Ms brother, objected to him as zealously instnimental in the measures that ruined Kmg James, and as still devoted to the pretender. He was, however, restored at the same time to his rank as king's serjeant. (Lord Raymond, 1818.) He survived his dismissal nearly five years, and dying on April 4, 1719, was buried under a splendid monument at Lilford in North amptonshire, the' manor of which he had purchased. Though strongly opposed in politics, Burnet had evidently a high opinion of him ; and Prior gives a graceful summary of his legal character in his epitaph. He married twice. His first wife was Sarah, daughter of Ambrose Holbech, of MolUngton in Warwickshire ; his second was Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Philip Medows, knight ; by both of whom he had a family. His great-grandson Thomas Po-wys was created Lord Lilford in 1797, and Ms descendante still enjoy the title, ( CoUins's Peerage, vii. 579.) POYNTON, AxEXANDEE DE, is named in 4 and 10 John as being present at West minster when fines were levied before him ; and he acted in the country also in those years ; but his name does not again appear judicially, (Hunter's Preface.) In I John he had a charter confirming a large grant of property in Lincolnshire, which had been made to him by Simon de Bret, This grant included the town of Wrengel in Hoyland, for which he ob tained a market "in 7 John, (Rot. Cliart. 60, 156.) In 14 John he was entrusted vrith the sheriffalty of Lincolnshire, the duties of which he performed durmg the two_ following years. (Rot Pat 97.) But havmg then joined in the barons' war, he was taken prisoner in Rochester Castle in December 1216, and remained in confine ment tiU the folio-wing July. His property was restored to him in 2 Henry III. (Rot, Claus. i. 241, 260, 808, 374; Rot Pat 190.) POYWICK, William de, visited the counties of Huntingdon, Buckingham, and Northampton as justice itinerant in 46 and 47 Henry III., 1262-3, He was of the clerical as well as the legal profession. In 50 Henry HI. he seems to have been rtiised to the bench, for from July 1266 tUl August in the following year there are entries of no less than eleven writs of assize to be held before him. (Excerpt, e !Rot Fin. ii. 440-469.) After the latter date his name does not appear. PEATT, John. The name of Pratt is highly distanguLshedin legal ann.ils, having been borne both by a lord chief justice and by a lord chanceUor, father and son. None ofthe biographers of the family state who the chief justice's father was; but they record that his gi-andfather, Richard Pratt, PEATT was ruined by the civil wars and obUged to sell his patrimonial estate at CarcvveU Priory, near CoUumpton, m Devonshire,. which had been long in possession of his ancestors. The parente of John Pratt, how ever, had sufficient means to afford him a liberal education. He was sent to Oxford, and eventually became a fellow of Wadham College, He studied the law at the Inner Temple from November 18, 1676, tiU Fe bruary 12, I68I, when he was called to the bar. He obteined sufficient prominence in his profession to be included in the bateh of serjeante who were honoured -with the coif in 1700, and to be employed m I7I1 to defend the prerogative of the cro-wn in granting an EngUsh peerage to the Scotch Duke of Hamilton, agamst which the Lords decided by a smaU majority. Speaker Onslow calls him a man of parts, spirite,, leaming, and eloquence, and one of ihe most able advocates of that time. (Collin^ s Peer age, V, 264; Bumet, vi. 80, n.) His suc cess must have been very considerable to have enabled him to purchase m 1703 the manor and seat of WUdemess (formerly caUed Stidulfe's Place) m the parish of Seale in Kent. In the parliament of No vember I7I0 he was returned for Midhurst, and agam in February 1714, after the first session of wMch the queen died. In neither parliament did he take any prominent part in the debates, nor is there any appearance of his bemg specially connected with either of the political parties in the stete ; but on the accession of George I., by the recom mendation of Lord Co'wper he was ap pomted a judge of the King's Bench, on November 22, 1714, and knighted. In Hilary Term 1718 he gave a decided opmion in favour of the crown respectmg the edu cation and marriage of the royal famUy; and on the resignation of the Seals by Lord Co-wper in the same year he was appomted one of the lords commissioners, holding that office from April 18 to May 12. TM-ee days after he was elevated to the post of lord chief justice ofthe King's Bench. He presided over the comt for nearly seven years, and ably supported its dignity. In the only two reported criminal cases that came before him, those of Reason and Tranter for murder, aud Christopher Layer for high treason, he acted with equal patience and fairness ; and in the exercise of his civil jurisdiction his rulings are looked upon with respect and consideration. One of them, which has however been par tially overruled, formed a subject for the wite of Westminster Hall. A woman who had a settlement m a certain parish had four children by her husband, who was a vagrant with no settlement. The chief jus tice decided that the wife's settlement was suspended during the husband's life, but that it was revived on his death, and that PRATT the children were then chargeable on the mother's parish. This judgment, though not regularly reported, is preserved and quoted in the followmg catch : — A -woman having a settlement Married a man with none : The question -was, he being dead. If that she had -were gone. Quoth Su- John Pratt, ' Her settlement Suspended did remain Living the husband ; but he dead. It doth revive again.' Chorus of puisne judges : Living the husband ; but he dead. It doth revive again. Sir John died at his house m Ormond Street on February 14, 1725. He married tvrice. His first wife was Elizabeth, daughter of the Rev. Hem-y Gregory, rector of Middleton Stoney in Oxfordshire, His second wife was Elizabeth, daughter of the Rev, Hugh Wilson, canon of Bangor. She produced to him, besides four daughters, four sons, the third of whom, Charles, is the following chief justice ofthe Common Pleas and lord chancellor. (Lord Raymond, 1819, I38I,) PEATT, Chaeles (Eael Camden), was the third son of the above Sir John Pratt by his second wife Elizabeth, daughter of the Rev, Hugh WUson, canon of Bangor, He was born in I7I3, and was educated at Eton, Among his schoolfellows was Wil Uam Pitt, afterwards Earl of Chatham, vrith whom he contracted a friendly inti macy, at first personal and eventually poli tical, which was never interrupted till death closed the minister's career. From Eton Charles Pratt proceeded in 1731 to the imiversity of Cambridge, honourably ob taming his election to King's College, In tending to pursue his father's profession, he had already, in June 1728, been entered at the Middle Temple ; and while waiting for his caU and his degree he devoted himself diUgently to the study of constitutional law. He took his degree of B.A, in 1735, and that of M.A. in 1740, haying been called to the bar in June 1738, thirteen years after his father's death. As the son of a chief justice he might fairly have expected early encourageinent ; but for some years his merits, though highly appreciated by his college associates and Ms brother barristers, failed to attract the dispensers of business, and his fee-book exhibited almost a total blank. On the eve of riding one of his western circuite he wrote to a friend, 'Alas! my horse is lamer than ever; no sooner cured of one shoulder than the other began to halt. My hopes in horseflesh ruin me, and keep me so poor that I have scarce money enough to bear me out in a summer's ramble ; yet ramble I must, if I starve for it,' So dis- PRATT 535 heartening were his prospects that he at last determined to retire on his fellowship at King's, and, entering the Chm-ch, to take his tum for one of the coUege livings. This resolution he communicated to his bar friend Sir Robert Henley (afterwai-ds Lord Northington), who sti-ongly dissuaded him from pursuing it, and induced him at least to try another circuit, Henley then con trived to get him retamed as junior to Mmself in an important case, and, knowmg that his talente only wanted an opportunity to be recognised, feigned illness at the hearing and left his young friend to defend the cause. This he did in so effective a manner as to secure him that full share of business which relieved him from any future anxiety. He now had the opportunity of shovring his soundness as a lawyer and his eloquence as an advocate, both on the circuit and in Westminster Hall, and the liberal prmci ples which he enforced in those arenas and at the bar of the House of Commons soon marked him as a rising man. In the tiial in 1762 of William Owen for publishing a libel he was engaged for the defence, and boldly insisted on the jury's right to judge both the law and the fact, which to the end of his life he so strenuously, and at last successfully, maintained, Owen's acquittal was one of -the earUest instances of a jury adopting the same doctrine. He received a silk gown in 1755, and was appointed attomey-general to the Prince ofWales. When his schoolfellow Pitt came into power, and the Great Seal was given to Sir Robert Henley, the attorney-general, on June 30, 1767, Pratt was immediately selected, with the consent of Lord Hard wicke, to fill the vacant post, and thus to be placed over the head of Charles Yorke, the solicitor-general, A seat in parliament was found for him as member for Do-wnton m Wiltshire. Here he introduced a biU to extend the provisions of the Habeas Corpus Act to persons under impressment, which, though it was almost unanimously passed in the House of Commons, was thrown out by the Lords, being resisted by Lords Hard wicke and Mansfield. 'Though the judges were ordered to prepare another bill, it does not appear that they did so, and the remedy it sought to provide was delayed till the year 1808, The recordersMp of Bath was conferred upon him in 1769, In the parliament caUed after the accession of George HI, he was elected by his former constituente, but vrithm less than two months he vacated his seat for a more pro minent position. WhUe attorney-general he confined his practice to the Court of Chancery, except when engaged in state prosecutions. In them he exercised the utmost moderation and fairness, not seek ing a conviction for the sake of a triumph. 536 PRATT but satisfying all men's minds of the delin quency of the accused by the force of the testimony adduced against them. The death of Sir John Willes in De cember I76I created a vacancy in the office of chief justice of the Common Pleas, which was pressed upon Mr, Pratt, though his patron Mr, Pitt was no longer in power. With some reluctance he was obliged to accept it, and was accordmgly knighted, and took his seat on the first day of HUary Term 1762, In the following year com menced the important proceedings con nected with the 'North Briton,' and its author, John WUkes, The question of the legality of general warrants, and the actions for damages brought by the sufferers under them against those who executed them, were tried in the Common Pleas, where the kno-wn principles of the chief justice led the complainmg parties to expect at least an unprejudiced hearing. His inde pendent conduct throughout these inves tigations, his discharge of Wilkes from imprisonment, his boldness in pronouncing the general warrant of the secretary of state to be wholly illegal, with other similar proceedings in reference to the ' Monitor or British Freeholder,' raised Mm to the very height of popular favour. Numerous ad dresses of thanks were presented to him, with the freedom of the corporations of Dublin, Norwich, Exeter, and Bath in gold boxes. The city of London added to a similar honour the request that he would sit for his picture to Sir Joshua Reynolds, This portrait was hung up in the Guildhall, with a Latin inscription, written by Dr. Johnson, designating him the ' zealous sup porter of English liberty by law.' Though these distinctions would seem to be a re flection on the general course of justice, as implymg that in no other court would the same opinions have been expressed, it should be remembered, for the honour of the law, that the Court of King's Bench upon an appeal in one of the cases conflrmed the ruling of Sir Charles Pratt, A ludicrous story is told of his being on a visit to Lord Dacre in Essex, and accom panying a gentleman, notorious for his ab sence of mind, m a walk, during which they came to the parish stocks. Having a -wish to know -the nature of the punishment, the chief justice begged his companion to open them, so that he might try. This bemg done, his friend sauntered on and totally forgot him. The imprisoned chief tried in yam to release himself, and on asking a peasant who was passing by to let him out, was laughed at aud told he ' wasn't set there for nothing.' He -was soon set at liberty by the servants of his host, and afterwards on the trial of an action for false imprisonment .against a magistrate by some fellow whom he had set in the stocks. PEATT on the counsel for the defendant ridiculing the charge and declaring it was no punish ment at all, his lordship leaned over and whispered, ' Brother, were you ever in the stocks ? ' The counsel indignantly replied, ' Never, my lord,' ' Then I have been,' said the chief justice, 'and I can assure you it is not the trifle you represent it' (Law and Laujyers, i. 260.) When Lord Rockingham's admmistia tion was formed in 1765, one of the flrst of its acts was to raise the chief justice to the peerage, and on July 17 he was created Lord Camden. He commenced his career in the House of Lords by exposmg the in justice of taxing the unrepresented Ame rican colonies and by strenuously supporting the repeal of the Stamp Act. The Earl of Chatham the next year resumed power, and gratifled himself and the pubUc by givmg on July 80, 1766, the Great Seal to his old friend Lord Camden, -with the title of lord chancellor, who received at the same time the reversion of a tellership of the Exche quer for his son, with the usual pension for himself upon his retirement from the chan cellorship. He then resided m Great Or mond Street. Ere long his position in the cabinet was anything- but satisfactory to him, and after the secession of the Earl of Chatham he so strongh' disapproved of many of its measures, especiaUy in regard to the American import duties and the Mid dlesex election, that, publicly denouncmg them as illegal and arbitrai'y, he was re moved from Ms office on January 17, 1770. He was justly blamed for contmumg so long in a cabinet whose counsels were op posed to the sentimente he entertained. His bearing iu the two courte of Com mon Pleas and Chancery supported the character he had acquired. To his pro found legal knowledge and clearness of reasoning were added an attractive bemg- nity and a graceful eloquence, which, according to '^h. Butler, was ' of coUoquial kind — extremely simple — dift'use but not desultory. He introduced legal idioms frequently, and always with a pleasing and great effect. Sometimes, however, he rose to the sublime strains of eloquence; but the sublimity was altogether in the senti ment ; the diction retamed ite simplicity, this increased the effect.' Many importan-t questions were ventilated before him in both courts and in parliament, and though some of his decisions excited considerable controversy, none of them were over turned. During the next eleven years he stood in the foremost rank of opposition to the ministry of Lord North, uniting with the Earl of Chatham in the arraignment of the AmerioMi war, and as well in that question as in all others assailing Lord Mansfield with uniform and somewhat PRATT imdignifled acrimony. He evidently felt a ¦deep personal animosity agamst his learned opponent, who imdoubtedly quaUed under the severe eloquence of Ms antagonist. In Ma,rch 1782 Lord North was obUged to retire, and under the next two short admi nistrations of Lord Rockingham and Lord Shelbume, Lord. Camden fiUed the post of president of the councU. During the Co aUtion Mmistry, and the flrst year after Mr. Pitt's accession to power, he remained out ¦of office, but resumed it in December 1784, In May 1786 he received the additional titles of Viscount Bayham and Earl Camden, He continued to enjoy his office for the ten remaining years of his Ufe, actively supportmg the measures of his leader, without desertmg the principles on which he had founded his fame. Though a zeal ous Pittite, he still continued essentially a whig — that party becoming every day less distmct from the tories, m consequence of ite more moderate members not concurring m the factious extremes to wMch the spirit of party led the others. His last appear- ¦ance in the House of Lords was as the strenuous assertor of the right of juries to decide on all questions of libel, a principle which he had always advocated, and which ie Uved to see triumphant. From the commencement to the termi nation of his public life he was a universal favomite. His independence of character could not fail to secure the respect of his political antagonists, and his amiable dis position to engage the affection of all. Of ¦social habits, yet of exemplary life, he re tained the friendship of Ms youthful com panions, and with true wisdom never failed to provide a succession of intimates to eupply the place of those who were de parted. His relaxation, like that of Lord Keeper GmUord, was a devotion to music and the drama ; and he did not disdain to vary his graver studies with the Ught lite- ratm-e of the day. In Ms early years he was the author of a ' Treatise of the Process of Latitat in Wales,' pubUshed anony mously, but afterwards acknowledged. He died on April 18, 1794, at the age of eighty, and was buried in Seale Church m Kent. His wife, EUzabeth, daughter of Nicholas Jeffreys, Esq., of The Priory in Breconshire, left him several cMldren. His son succeeded to the eai-ldom, and, having held with distingmshed honom- several re sponsible employmente, was created a mar quis on August 15, I8I2, with the second title of Eari of Brecknock. Io reUeve the pecuniary pressure of the country, he with patriotic and mag-nanimous self-denial gave up to the state the large annual income derived from his office of teUer ot the Exchequer. He was elected a kmght of the Garter, and his son,, the late marquis, PEESTON 537 was decorated worthily with the same order, ( CoUins's Peerage, v. 265 ; Lives by Welsby and Lord Campbell; Harris's Life of Lord Hardwicke.) PEESTON, GiLBBET DE, was the son of Walter de Preston, who was in the service of King John, and on whose death in 1229 he paid 100 shilUngs for his relief on hav ing his father's lands in Northamptonshire. (Excerpt e Rot Fin. i. 204.) His name is flrst mentioned at the bottom of the Ust of the four justices itinerant who were assigned to take the Southei-n Cfrcuit in 24 Henry IIL, 1240. He was proba bly not then one of the justiciers at West minster, but was added to the commission m the same manner serjeante are at the present day. That he was raised to the bench before the Purification (February 2), 26 Henry IIL, there is no doubt, as fines were levied before him from that time, and in Easter of the same year his name appears on the pleas of the bench, (Dugdale's Orig, 48.) Till the end of this long reign no year occurs in which payments are not made for writs of assize to be taken before him. Of his precise position on the bench these entries afford "no certain evidence, the writs being principaUy addressed to him, as they were to other judges, alone. That he was eventually, however, raised to the highest place, ' capitalis justiciarius,' ofthe Court of Common Pleas, there can be no doubt, and as the transition from the old to the new forms occurred in this reign, it will be interesting to endeavour to trace the successive steps of his j udicial career. In 1242 he was at the bottom of the justiciarii de banco. From this time, judging from the Uste of justices itinerant, he graduaUy advanced to a higher station, until in 1252 he stood at the head of one of the commissions, and retained the same position, with one or two sUght exceptions, till 1257, It is not, however, to be pre sumed from this circumstance that he was then at the head of either of the courte, but simply that in the division of the cir cuits he was the senior in those he was appointed to take. Accordingly it appears that on October 8, 1258, he was the second of three, Roger de Thurkelby being the first, who were assigned to hold the King's Bench at Westminster until the Mng should arrange more fuUy, (Cal. Rot. Pat, 29.) In 1263 there are pleas before him and John de Wyrill at "Westminster, and in 1267 pleas ' de banco ' before him and John de la Lynde, which would seem to imply that he was no longer in the Kmg's Bench, but that he acted in the Common Pleas, In the foUo'wing year also he was called 'justiciarius de banco' (Madox, i. 2.30), and was at the head of the justices itinerant in various counties. His salary 538 PRESTON, in 1266 was forty marks per annum, but in 1269 he had a grant of one hundred marks annually for Ms support 'in officio justi- ciariee.' Although the term ' capitalis ' is not used, the amount of this stipend shows that he was then chief justice, and it may be concluded that this was the date of his advance to that rank. The actual title of chief justice does not seem to have been applied to him till the following reign, when, on his re-appoint ment by Edward I., he was so called in the liberate that grants him livery of his robes, and Dugdale remarks that he is the first whom he has observed to have the title of capitalis justiciarius of the Court of Com mon Pleas, He continued to preside there till his death, which occurred in 1274. (Dugdale's Orig. 39, 48 ; Cal. Inquis. p. m. i. 62,) PEESTON, RoBEET DE, is erroneously introduced by Dugdale as receiving the ap pointment of chief justice of the Court of Common Pleas on October 6, 1377, 1 Ri chard IL, but he never held that office in England, He became ajudge ofthe Irish Court of Common Pleas on October 17, 1842, 16 Ed ward III. ; but it would seem tha-t he was afterwards removed from the bench and returned to Ms practice at the bar, since there are records to show that in 18.57 he acted as the king's serjeant-at-law in that country, and accompanied the lord justice in Leinster and Munster to plead and de fend the pleas of the crown. On October 14, 1858, however, he was made chief justice of the Common Pleas in Ireland, and presided in that court during the re mainder of Edward's reign, a period of nearly nineteen years. The patent quoted by Dugdale is his re appointment, on the accession of Richard iL, to the same seat, from which he was allowed to retire in the following April. In the eleventh year of that reign his services were ,igain required, and hewas constituted chancellor of Ireland, in which office he remamed tiU October 25, 1389, Two years afterwards he received a patent as keeper of the Great Seal in Ireland, but was eventually reUeved on May 29, 1398, (Smith'sLaw Ofiicers ofIreland,7, 114,128, 132 ; N. Fmdera, iii, 833 ; CaL Rot Pat 196, 216, 222, 226.) PEESTON, John, of a very ancient family settled at Preston-Richard and Preston- Patrick in Westmoreland, was the second son of Sir John Preston, who represented the county in 86, 89, and 46 Edward III. He was employed in 18 Richai-d IL, 1394, in the prosecution of one David Panell, adjudged to death for the murder of nine men and one woman -, for his cost and labour in which the king gave him 2/. 6s. 8d. (Devon's Issue Roll, 261.) He was PRICE made recorder of London in 7 Henry IV.,. 1406, and was present in court in that character, declaring the custom of the city,. in the thirteenth year of that reign. (Y. B. 16.) From this it may be inferred that his first practice was confined to criminal cases and the city courts. He was caUed to the degree of serjeant-at-law in 14II,. and four years afterwards, on June 16, 1416, 3 Henry V,, was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas, up to which time he contmued to hold the recordership. He remamed in that court tM-oughout the reign of Henry V,, and up to Hilary Term, 6 Henry VL, when, on January 28, 1428,. being broken down with age, he was ex onerated from his office and permitted to retire. The date of his death is not re corded, but he left a son, Richard, whose descendants continued to enjoy the pro perty, and became at last possessed of the manor of Furness m Lancashire, by which title one of them, named John, was created a baronet in 1644 — a digmty which became extinct in 1710, PEICE, Robeet, a descendant from the ancient stock of one of the noble tribes of" Wales, was the son of Thomas Price, of Geeler in Denbighshfre, and of Margaret,, daughter of Thomas Wynne, of Bwlch-y- Beyde m the same county. He was born in the parish of Cerrig-y-Drmdion on Ja nuary 14, 1663, and, after receiving his education at Wrexham, and St, John's, CoUege, Cambridge, he entered Lmcoln's Inn in 1673, In 1677 he took the grand tour, and spent two years in -risitmg aU, parts of France and Italy, Among the books which he took -with him was Coke upon Lyttelton, which the scrutinismg officers at Rome thought was an heretical English Bible, and seizing it carried off ite possessor to the pope. Mr, Price soon sa tisfled his hoUness that the laws it Ulus trated, though not divine, were orthodox; and presenting it to the holy father, it is to be hoped that it still graces the Vatican Library, On Ms return he was called to the bar m July 1679. In September he married Lucy, daughter of Robert Rodd, Esq., of Foxley m Here fordshire, After bemg the mother of three children, it seems that her misconduct dis solved the connection. Under the date of November 21, 1690, LuttreU (U. 231) re cords that ' Robert Price, Esq., got 1500/. damages in an action against Mr. Neal for crim. con! He did not obtein a divorce, but, though she survived her husband, the ' Life ' that was published of him imme diately after his death omits all subsequent allusion to her ; and the judge's wUl, which speaks with affection of, and provides -vrith liberality for, all his other connections, only coldly mentions her in a legacy of 20/, ' for mourning,' and in a charge on his estates PRICE of an annuity of 120/, ' pursuant to a for mer agreement and settlement between us,' He was made attorney-general of South Wales in 1682, and recorder of Radnor in the foUo-wing year. He was complimented also by being elected alderman of Here ford, about flve miles from his seat at Foxley. On the death of Charles II. King James appointed Mm steward to the queen dowager, and king's counsel at Ludlow. The corporation of Gloucester also elected him town clerk m 1687, in the place of Mr. (afterwards Justice) John Powell ; but upon the latter appealing to the Com-t of Kmg's Bench, Mr, Price consented to his restora tion. (2 Shower, 490.) In James's short and only parliament he represented Weobly, King William removed him from his Welsh attorney-generalship. Although of course he was not retumed to the Con vention Parliament, he was elected by his former constituents to that summoned in the next year, and also for the two foUovring in 1695 and 1698, and that which met m De cember 1701. In 1696 he distinguished himself by strenuously opposing the ex orbitant grant made by 'the king to the Earl of Portland of extensive lands and lordships in Wales, and enforced his ob jections with such power and effect that upon an address of the house the king was obUged to annul it. In the next year he took an active part in the proceedings in Sir John Fenwick's case. The only state trial in which he was engaged as counsel was that of Lord Mohun in the House of Lords for the dastardly murder of William Mountford the actor, which resulted in the acquittal of his client ; and the only pro motion he received was that of a Welsh judgeship in 1700, when the tories had re- gamed power, which appointment he held to the end of the reign. (Petri. Hist. v. 979, 1016, 1041, 1046 ; State Trials, xU. 1020.) Ou the accession of Queen Anne, Mr. Price was constituted a baron of the Ex chequer on June 14, 1702, In this court he remained the whole of that reig-n and nearly to the end of the next, when he ob tained a removal into the Common Pleas on October 16, 1726, The excellent man ner m which he performed his judicial duties may be estimated by the follcwing lines in some eulogistic verses written after his death : — When Price reviv'd the crowding suitors' sight, The HaU of Eufus -was the seat of Eight. In all her arts -was Fallacy beguil'd, The orphan gladden'd, and the wido-w smil'd ; Sure to behold, in ev'ry just decree, The friend, the sire, the consort, shine in thee. Mild Equity resum-d her gentle reign. And Bribery -vvas prodigal in vain. In 1718 he and Mr, Justice Eyre were the only two judges who gave an opinion adverse to the king's claim of prerogative PEIDEAUX 539* with regard to the education of the royal grandchildren, and supported their view by an able argument deUvered to his majesty.. George II. was of course impressed in his favour, and on coming to the crown con tinued him m his place, which he fllled. during the remainder of his life. After a long judicial career of no less than thirty- one years, he died on February 2, 1733, and was buried in the church of Yazor in the county of Hereford, The ' Life ' of Mr. Justice Price, written. by ite publisher, the notorious Edmund Curll, vrithin a year of his death, is the foundation of all the biographical notices that have since appeared. As it was com piled 'by the appomtment of the famUy,' it cannot fail to be regarded as little more- than an extended epitaph, and the eulogies. of which it is fuU would naturaUy be received with considerable qualifications. Yet, making due aUowance for its party exaggerations, and for some errors m facts and dates, which its copyists have carelessly repeated, from all that can be coUected of " his career, the character that it gives Mm is substantiaUy true. Though a steady tory in politics, no whig pen writes a word in. his dispraise ; his courage in opposing the royal wishes receives no check, in conse quence of the kno-wn honesty of his prin ciples ; his desire and pains to get at the truth of matters on which his opinion was^ required is evidenced by letters recently published by the Camden Society ; and his charity is manifested by his erection and endowment of an almshouse for six poor people in the parish of his birth, and by the care that he took in his -will not only for the perpetuation of that institution, but for the continuance also of his other benefactions. As he never received the knighthood by which the j udges were usually distinguished, , it may be presumed that he declined tbe honour. The grandson of his son, Uvedale, who succeeded to his estates, received a baronetcy in 1828, which became extinct in 1857. PEIDEAUX, Edmond, who belonged to an ancient and honourable family, tracing ite Uneage as far back as the Norman Con quest, when it was seated in Prideaux- castle in Comwall, was the second son of an emment lawyer of the same name, by Catherine, daughter of Piers Edgecombe, Esq,, of Mount Edgecombe in Devonshire. The father in 1622 received from King James the dignity of a baronet, which sur vives at the present day, ( Wotton's Baro net, i. 517.) Edmond was born at his father's residence at Netherton, near Honiton, and seems to have received his education in the university of Cambridge, and to have taken his master's degree there, since, some years after, in July 1626, he was admitted ad eundem at 540 PEIDEAUX Oxford. His legal course is traced with greater certainty, having been called to the bar at the Inner Temple on November 23, 1623. His name does not appear in the Reports of Charles's reign, his practice being chiefly m Chancery ; but at one time he was recorder of Exeter. (Fasti Oxon. i, 424, ii, 66.) The electors of Lyme-Regis in Dor setshire returned Mm in 1640 as a member of the Long Parliament, where he took the popular side, and subscribed in June 1642 100/. towards itedefence. (Notesand Queries, 1st S, xii, 869.) He was an active partisan, and when the two houses adopted a Great ¦Seal of their own he was one of the four members of the House of Commons, who with two peers were nominated commis sioners on November 10, 1643. He fllled the post for nearly three years, the parlia ment then changing the custody of the Seal and placing it in the hands of the speakers of the two houses on October 30, 1646. WhUe holding this office he still kept his place in the House of Commons, and was named as one of the commissioners who assembled at Uxbridge m January 1646, to negotiate a treaty of accommodation with the king. On his removal from the Great Seal the Commons ordered that, as a mark of honour and of their acknowledgment of his services, he should practise within the bar, and have precedence next after the soli- ¦citor-general, (Journals; Whiteloeke, 92, 125, 226.) Prideaux then resumed his professional practice till 1648, when the parliament, on filling up the vacancies on the bench, named him solicitor-general on October 12, When he saw, however, what proceedings were •adopted for taking the king's life, it is evi dent that he threw up the office ; for on Charles's trial in the succeeding ,Tanuary WilUam Steele acted as attorney, and John Cook as soUcitor-general (Ibid. 342, 857, 368) ; and also on the subsequent tiials of •the Duke of Hamilton and others. (State Tricds, iv. 1167, 1209.) That he lost no favour with the parliament by his conduct in avoiding these trials is apparent from his receiving the appointment of attorney-gene ral on the 9th of the following April, and from his retaining it during the remainder of his life, through all the different changes that took place in the government. During the whole of this time he continued member for Lyme Regis. (Whiteloeke, 394; ParL -Hist iii. 1429, 1480, 1582.) The dignity of baronet was conferred upon him on May 31, 1658, ' in respect of his voluntary offer for the mainteyuing of 30 foot-souldiers in Ms highnes army m Ireland.' (5 Report Pub. Rec, App. 273.) He survived Cromwell about a year, dying on August 19, 1659, WMtelocke de.scribe8 him as 'a generous person, and faithful to the parUanient's interest. A good Chancery lawyer,' This PROBYN is not great praise ; and it seems that he was equally faithful to his own interest. Besides his practice at the bar, which was worth about 5000/. a year, he was post master for all the inland letters, an office which, at sixpence a letter, is said to have netted him 16,000/, a year, (Pari. Hist, in, 1606.) No wonder, therefore, that he made a large fortune, and that he was enabled to purchase Ford Abbey in the parish of Thorncombe, Devon, and to build on its rmns a noble mansion. He married two wives: the first was a daughter of — CoUins, Esq,, of Ottery St. Mary in Devonshire; the second was the daughter of — Every, Esq., of Cottey in the county of Somerset, by whom he left an only son, also named Edmond. ( Wotton's Baronet, i. 618 ; Hasted, xii, 27,) PEISOT, John, was a native either of Kent or Hertfordshire : in the former county his famUy possessed the manor of Westberies, in the parish of RucMng, in the reign of Henry IV., where his descen dants continued till they sold it m that of Henry VUI. (Hasted, viii. 355) ; and m the latter the judge held the manor of Wallington, m which his widow, Margaret, resided after his death. (Chauncy, 48.) Though we have no account of the court of his practice previous to his being caUed to the degree of the coif in 21 Henry VL, 1448, it is evident that he must have already acqmred some reputetiou as a lawyer, as six years afterwards, on June 16, I4'49, he was advanced to the office of chief justice of the CommonPleas. 'Certen ordinances made in the tyme of Sir John P'sott, chef justice of the Commen Place, touchyng the officers there,' are to be found in p. 8 of the first volume of the 'Recovery Indexes' now in the Record Office, He continued to preside in the court tiU Ed ward IV. had seized the throne, when he was not re-appointed. As we do not find that he took any decided part m the con test between the royal rivals, it is not im probable that, if his death did not occur about that time, he took the opportunity of the commencement of a new reign voluntarily to retire to private life. In one of the letters of the 'Paston Correspondence' (i. 29) he is represented as a partial judge, but this is merely the re presentation of a disappointed partisan in a particular cose. There is no doubt that he was a considerable and expert lawyer ; and he is said to have given 'great fui'therance' to Judge Lyttelton in the composition of his 'Tenures.' (Dugdale's Orig. 58.) PEOBYN, EDMirxD, whose ancestors were long known aud esteemed among the gentry of the county of Gloucester, was the son of William Probyn, of Newland in the Forest of Dean, and of Elizabeth, daughter of EdmundBond, of Walford in Herefordshire, PUCKERING He was born about 1678, and went through the legal curriculum at the Middle Temple, where he took the degree of barrister in 1702. -After spending nearly twenty years in the usual forensic drudgery of the profes sion, he occupied the position of a Welsh judge m 1721. Called serjeant in 1724, he was employed in January of the next year by the Earl of Macclesfield to conduct the defence against his impeachment; but, not withstanding the pains he took and the lucid argument he delivered, he failed to satisfy the peers of his client's innocence, (State Trials, xvi. 1080,) The abiUty he showed on that occasion no doubt pointed him out for promotion, and accordingly, on November 4, 1726, he was constituted a judge of the King's Bench, and knighted. He displayed so much learning and judg ment in the exercise of this office for four teen years that he was selected on Novem ber 28, 1740, to succeed Sir John Comyns as lord chief baron of the Exchequer, a dignity which he held less than eighteen months, his death occurring on May 17, 1742, He was buried in Newland Church, He married Elizabeth, daughter of Mr, Justice Blencowe, but left no issue, PTJCKEEING, John, was the second son of WiUiam Puckering, of Flamborough in the county of York. He was born about 1644, and, entering at LincoM's Inn, he was called to the bar on January 16, 1567, He became one of the governors in 1576, and was elected reader in 1577, at the age of thfrty-three, a proof that he had made himself remarkable for his leaming at a very early period. He was raised to the degree of the coif in 1580, and was made queen's serjeant in 1586, when he con- 1 ducted the trial of Abington and others for high treason, and also took part in the Sroceedings against Secretery Davison in larch 1687. (State Trials, i. II48, 1233.) In the parliament of 1585, Puckering, havmg been returned for Bedford, was elected speaker. During the session he had to reprimand Dr. William Parry (shortly afterwards executed for high treason) for the intemperate speech he uttered on the passing of^the bill against Jesuite, and at the end of it to address the queen on pre senting the subsidy granted — duties_ which he performed with so much discretion and propriety that he was re-elected speaker of the new parliament opened on October 15, 1686, by which the fate of the Scottish queen was decided. In a few days after the execution of the imfortunate Mary the speaker was again called upon to check the rising demand for greater freedom of debate. The immediate question was quickly decided by the com mittal of Mr, Wentworth and four others to the Tower (Pai-L Hist i. 822-852) ; but PULESTON 541 the spirit was not subdued. The attempt to control it was afterwards attended with serious consequences, and its ultimate recognition, though leading occasionally to fiery discussions, has been happUy found to be practically conducive to the real benefit of the realm. In the following parliament, which sat from February 4 to March 29, 1589, Puck ering was not called to the chair, probably because his services were required on the state trials which were then proceeding. In the arraignment of Sir Richard Knightley and others in the Star Chamber on Febru ary 13, he enlarged on the evil tendency of the different libels — 'Have you any Work for the Cooper?' and others — with the publication of which they were charged. On April 18 he agam appeared as the leader for the crown on the trial of PhiUp Earl of Arundel for high treason, conducting it without any unnecessary harshness. The last trial of which he had the con duct as queen's serjeant was that of Sir John Perrot, lord-deputy of Ireland, after which, between the verdict and sentence, the Great Seal was placed in his hands as lord keeper, on May 28, 1592, the honour of knighthood being conferred upon him at the same time. Dm-ing the four years that he sat in the Court of Chancery he pre served a ' good repute for his own carriage, but unhappy for that of his servants, who for disposing of his livings corruptly left themselves an ill name m the Church, and him but a dubious one in the state.' (State Worthies, 609.) He presided over only one parliament as lord keeper, and in his opening speech, after declaring the queen's wiU that there should be no new statutes passed, he added, ' So many there be that, rather than to burthen the subjects with more, to their grievance, it were fitting an abridgment were made of those there are already,' (Pari. Hist i. 869.) If subsequent legis lators had acted on this principle, the cry for a digested code would not now be so loud, nor ite execution so difficult. He died on April 30, 1596, and was buried in Westminster Abbey. By Ms ¦wife, Anne, daughter of Nicholas Chowne, Esq., of Kent, he left several children. His son and heir, Thomas, was created a baronet in I6I2, but died without surviv ing issue m 1636, One of the lord keeper's daughters havmg married Adam Nevri;on, tutor to King James's son Prince Henry, also created a baronet, her son Sir Henry became heir to the Puckering estates on the death of his uncle, and assumed the name, but that title also expired in 1700. {Manning and Bray's Surrey, i. 446; Hasted, i. 423 ; Wotton's Baronet iv. 270.) PULESTON, John, of a very ancient 542 PUSAR family settled at Emral in Flintshire as early as the reign of Edward L, was the son of Richard Puleston, by Alice, daughter of David Lewis, of Bulcot in Oxfordshire ; and received his legal education at the Middle Temple, where he became reader in 1634. (Dugdale's Orig. 220.) In February 1643 he was recommended by the Commons as & baron of the Exchequer in the proposi tions they made to the king, (aarendon, iii, 407,) FaiUng in this application, they invested him with the dignity of the coif in October 1648 ; and after the king was beheaded he was substituted for one of the judges who then refused to act, and took his place as justice of the Common Pleas on June 1, 1649, (TVIiitehcke, 343,, 405.) His conduct in the followmg August at the assizes at York, when he and Baron Thorpe tried and condemned Lieut.-Colonel Mor- rice, the governor of Pomfi-et Castle, for high treason, speaks strongly against his jus tice and humanity. (State Trials, iv. 1249.) It seems probable, though he did not die till September 5, 1669, that Cromwell, when he become protector in 1653, did not renew his patent ; for then, by the appoint ment of Sir Matthew Hale, the court had its full complement. By his marriage with Elizabeth, daughter of Sir John Woofrych, knight, he had a son, the last of whose male descendants died, leaving an only daughter, who carried the estate of Emral to her husband, Richard Price, Esq. Their son took the name of Tuleston, and was created a baronet in 1813. PTJSAE, or PTJDSEY, Hu&H (Bishop of Dueham), is said to have been the son of a sister of King Stephen, who in a charter to Mm ' De Mineraria iu Werdale ' calls him ' nepoti meo.' (Surtees' Durham, i. cxxvi.) In that reign he became treasurer of York, archdeacon of Winchester, and ultimately Bishop of Durham. (Le Neve, 289, 319, 347.) To this last dignity he was elected on January 22, 1163, but was refused con secration by the Archbishop of York, as well because of his age, which did not exceed twenty-five years, as on account of the irre gularity of his Ufe, evidenced by his having three illegitimate sons by as many mothers. The pope, to whom he appUed, listened to the representations of the archbishop ; but the death of both put an end to the objec tions, and the new bishop obtained conse cration fr-om the succeeding pontiff on De cember 20, 1153. His conduct in his see was correct and praiseworthy, and his memory will last while the beautiful build ing called the Galilee, which he added to the cathedral, exists. His munificence ex tended throughout his diocese in many use ful and pious works. He caused a survey to be made of the possessions of the see, which is known as the ' Boldon Book,' and has been published by the Surtees Society. PUSAE He was present at the council of Tours in 1163, and at that of Lateran in II79. In the early part of his career he mixed little in politics ; but in II70 he assisted at the coronation of Prince Henry, the son of Henry II. , an act which, at the mstigation of Becket, occasioned his temporary suspen sion by Pope Alexander from his episcopal duties. When this young prince and his brothers rebelled against their father m 1178, the bishop found himself suspected of adhering to their party, and deemed it prudent to deliver into the Mng's hands his castles of Durham, Norham, and Alverton. The latter was toteUy destroyed, but the two former were some time after restored to the prelate, on the payment of a fine of two thousand marks ; wMle the kmg, as a proof of his recovered favour, granted to his son Henry the royal manor of Wickton. A few years afterwards he got into a new disgrace -with Kmg Henry by a somewhat pert answer he sent to him. Roger, Arch bishop of York, had made a verbal -wiU, which Henry declared to be mvaUd, and demanded of Pusar, who was one of the ex ecutors, the restoration of tMee hundred marks which he had received of the pro perty. The bishop repUed that he had dis tributed them, as directed by the deceased, among the poor, the bUnd, and the lame, from whom he could not ooUect them agam. Henry resented this by deprivmg him of his palace at Durham till the money was returned. The bishop, however, was em ployed by the Mug in 1188 m coUecting m Scotland the disme he had imposed for his purposed expedition to the Holy Land. "When Richard succeeded to the throne, and, for the purpose of raising funds to carry on the Holy War, exposed offices, honours, and estetes to sale, the bishop, urged by ambitious promptmgs, was m- duced to give a large sum for the enjoy ment, during the short remains of his Ufe, of the earldom of Northumberland. Even the king, though benefiting by the infatua tion, coiUd not refrain from a sneer, re marking at his investiture upon his cleverness in thus being- able to make a young eail out of an old bishop. At the same time, and for a further consideration, he appointed him, in conjunction with William Earl of Albemarle, chief justiciary of the Iringdom, associating with them five others as a council for the government of the realm during his absence. (Madox, i. 21, 84.) The Earl of Albeniai-le, how ever, dying two months afterwards, and before the king's departure, the chancellor, WilUam de Longchamp, Bishop of Ely, was named in his stead. The government of England north of the Trent was en trusted to the Bishop of Durham, while the Bishop of Ely's authority was limited to the south of that river. As might PUSAR naturally be expected, however, the sole power was soon usurped by the latter, who, not content -with this, deprived his weak ¦coadjutor of his newly-acquired earldom, and seized his person tiU he gave hostages for the deUvery of the kmg's castles com mitted to his charge. The king's com mands for his reinstatement were dis regarded, nor were the castles restored to him till the fall of the arrogant chan ceUor. Pusar was not, however, replaced m the office of chief justiciary, which was then given to Walter, Archbishop of Roqen, He died on March 3, 1195, havmg pre sided over Ms see above forty-two years, (Godwin, 735; Lord Lyttelton, iii, 162, 290-363; Ric. Devizes, 8, 11, 39; R. de Wendover, ii, 298, iU, 9-16.) QUINCY 543 PTMME, Thomas, whom Dugdale caUs in one place Pyne, was appointed a baron of the Exchequer on September 30, 1662 ; but nothmg whatever is recorded of him, except that he died a short time before his successor, James Lord, received his patent, on November 12, 1666. PYNCHEBEK, Thomas, whose family re ceived its name from a parish so called in Lincolnshire, was made chief baron of the Exchequer on April 24, 1388, 11 Richard IL, and his successor, John Cassy, was ap pointed on May 12 of the following year. That this change was occasioned by his death appears probable, as part of the Lin coMshire property of Sir John de Bello Bfonte, who died in 20 Richard IL, is stated to have come from ' the heirs of Thomas de Pynchbek,' (Cal. Inquis. p, m, iii, 199.) Q QTJINCY, Saheeus de (Eael oe Win chester), was the second son of another Saherus de Qmncy, who was possessed of the lordship of Buchby in Northampton shire, by royal grants from Henry II, and Richard I. His mother was Maud de St, Liz, daughter of Simon Earl of Huntingdon, and widow of Robert Fitz-Richard, of Tunbridge, He was early in the confldence of Kmg John, and was present at Lincoln when "William, King of Scotland, did homage, (Madox, i. 665,) In 5 John, Robert Fitz-Walter and he, bemg besieged m the castle of Ruil in "Normandy, of which they had the command, delivered it up -without resistance to the French king, who, disgusted at their ap- parenttreachery, placed them in strict con finement. He, however, succeeded in satis fying King John, for m the next year, on the ¦death of Robert de Breteuil, Earl of Lei cester, whose sister Margaret he had mar ried, he had a grant, on a fine of one thousand marks, of all the earl's lands ; to which was added m 7 John, on another flne of flve thousand marks, the lands of the honor of Grentemesnil. (Rot. de Libe rate, 38 ; Rot de Fin. 268, 820.) In the charter of 8 John, 1210, Saherus is for the fii-st time caUed Earl of "Win chester, to which dignity he had been just raised. (Mado.r, i. 51.) He was in per sonal attendance on the king in II and 12 John, accompanying him into Ireland, and partaking, according to the record, of his amusements at play. (Rot. Misce, 162, 162 ; Rot de Prcestito, 18-3-240.) For the three following years he acted as a justicier, fines bemg levied before him in 13 and 15 John, and his name being men tioned in Rot, Claus. 14 John, as one of those ' tunc ad Scaccarium residentes,' (Rot Claus. i. 132; Dugdale's Orig. 50.) Although he had hitherto contmued loyal to the Mng, and had been one of the witnesses to the resignation of the crown to the pope on May 15, I2I2, and after wards one of the sureties for the restitution to the clergy, he eventually joined the in surgent barons; and being chosen of the twenty-flve who were appomted to secure the fulfilment of Magna Charta, he under went in consequence the pope's excommu nication. He was one of the ambassadors from them sent to in-rite Louis of France to assume the throne, and, adhering to him even after the accession of Henry III., -was defeated and taken prisoner at the battle of Lincoln, on May 19, 1217. On his submission, however, to the king, his lands were restored, and he went the next year to the Holy Land, where he was present at the siege of Damietta. He died in 1220 on his journey to Jerusalem, and was succeeded by his son Roger, on whose death, in 1264, without male issue, the title became extinct. (Baronage, i, 686 ; Roger i de Wendover; Nie Trivetus, 206.) 544 E EADECLYVE, Thomas db, a native of Radcliff on Sore in the county of Notting ham, was summoned among the judges to the great councU at Westminster in 17 Edward II. He was the last named of six justices itmerant into Bedfordshire in 4 Edward IIL, 1830, and was sub-sheriff of the county of Nottingham in the same year, as appears by a complaint made against him in parliament, the result of which is not recorded. (Issue Roll, ii, 1319 ; Rot Pari. U, 411,) BADENHAIE, John de, derived his name from the parish of Radenhale, or Reden- hale, in Norfolk, where, and in Suffolk, the familypossessed property. A Henry Reden- hale was m the king's hoiisehold, and was paid 20/. to provide small pike, and ten marks to obtain lampreys from Gloucester for the coronation of Edward II. John, who was perhaps his son, was employed in judicial investigations in those counties in the latter years of that monarch, and his name occurs in the Year Books as an advocate m 3 Edward III, In 1329 he was appointed a justice itinerant into North amptonshire, and he continued to act in other counties till 7 Edward III. (Issue RoU, 120-1 ; ParL Writs, U. p. U, 1319,) EADES-WELL, or EEDES-WELL, John DE, was probably the complainant in a suit m 18 Edward I,, wherein he recovered a considerable estate in Bedfordshire from Henry, the son of Beatrice, the -widow of Robert de RadesweU, by provmg that Henry was born eleven days after the forty weeks which is the legitimate time of bearing by women, the more especially as it was further shown that Beatrice had no access to her husband for one month before his death, (Ahh. Placit 221, 234.) In 18 Edward II. he is mentioned as ' senesoaUum regis,' and principal custos of the lands and tenements of Queen Isa bella in England and Wales, Two years afterwards, on September 1, 1326, he was advanced to the office of a baron of the Exchequer, which he held only for the few remaining months of that reign. Though not re-appointed by Edward III., he was still employed in Exchequer busi ness, being assigned towards the end of the first year to supervise and appraise the goods and chattels of Walter Reginald, Archbishop of Canterbury, then lately de ceased ; and in the record he is caUed 'clericus regis.' (Ahb. Rot Orig. i. 262, U, II ; Pari. Writs, U, 1319.) EAINSrOED,|J Richaed, was born in 1605 at Staverton, near Daventry, the resi dence of'his father, Robert Ramsford, who- was descended from an old Lancashire family. His mother was Mary, daughter of Thomas Kirton, Esq., of Thorpe-Mandeville. Admitted to Lmcoln's Inn, he was called to the bar on October 16, 1682, and for this society, as his legal mother, he showed his admiration and regard by presenting a silver cup when he was chief justice. He was appointed in 1630 recorder of Daventry, and m 1663 recorder of Northampton, and, known as a loyalist, he was elected member for the latter borough m the Convention Parliament that met before Charles's re tum, and was nominated after that event as one of the kmghte of the Royal Oak, had that order been instituted as at first m- tended. He sat also for the same borough in the parliament of I66I, but took no ostensible part in the debates. On October 5, 1661, he was caUed ser jeant, and soon after was knighted, for he is named with that title m his patent as baron of the Exchequer, dated November 26, 1663. After sitting in that court a little more than five years, he was removed into the King's Bench on February 6, 1669. Baker (i. 323) states that in 1667, wMle a baron, he officiated as recorder of Daventry; and Roger North (Lives, 180) relates a curious story about a -witch brought to Salisbm-y to be tried before him. 'Sir James Long came to his chamber and made a heavy complamt of this witch, and said that if she escaped his estate would not be worth anything, for aU the people would go away. It happened that the -witch was acquitted, and the knight continued ex tremely concerned ; therefore the judge, to save the poor gentleman's estete, oi-dered the woman to be kept in gaol, and that the town should allow her 2s. 6d. per week, for which he was very thankful. The very next assize he came to the judge to desire his lordship would let her come back to the town. And why P They could keep her for Is. 6d. there, and in the gaol she cost them a shilling more,' Sir Richard was promoted to the chief justiceship of his court on April 12, 1676, The only important state question which is reported as discussed before Mm was the Habeas Corpus applied for in June 1677 by the Earl of Shaftesbury, on his imprison ment by the House of Lords, when it was decided that the court had no jurisdiction, and the earl was remanded to prison, Ventris (p, 829) says that Sir Richard was removed from his office in Trinity Term 1678, It might be that his age and RALEIGH incapacity, which ought to have prevented his promotion to so prominent a position, had then become more apparent, or that the minister. Lord Danby, made them the excuse, m order to promote his favourite. Sir WilUam Scroggs, to the place ; but it is far from improbable that Sir Richard's o-wn feelings of decay prompted his retire ment, for he did not survive it much above eight months. His death occurred on February 17, 1679, at DaUington, where there is a monument over his remains, and where he left a memorial of his charity in an almshouse for two old men and two old women, vrith a weekly allowance of two shilUngs each. He was very estimable in his private life, and would have had a fair, though second ary, reputation as a lawyer, had he not been so unfortunate as to succeed such an eminent judge as Sir Matthew Hale, whom he was as much below in point of leammg as he was above Sir WilUam Scroggs his suc cessor ill point of mtegTity. He married Catherine, daughter of the Rev. Samuel Clarke, of Kingsthorpe, D.D. ; his eldest son by whom, by his marriage with Anne, daughter of Richard Neville of BilUngs- bere, had a daughter from whom Lord Braybrooke is descended. (Bridge's North ampt i. 436 ; Baker's do. i. 134, 323 ; Col Uns's Peerage, viii, 157,) EAIEIG-H, William de (Bishop oe NoEwiCH and Winchbstee), sometimes caUed de Radley, was a native of Devon shfre. He was brought up to the Church, and m 14 John w^ presented by the king to the living of Bratton m the archdea conry of Barnstaple. (Rot. Pat. 93.) He pursued at the same time the study of the law, and it is as difficult to distinguish him from as to identify him -with persons bear ing the same name, and fiourishmg at the same period. There is, for instance, a Wil Uam de Raleigh, who, being coroner, was raised in 9 Henry IH. to the sheriffalty of the county of Devon. (Rot Claus. ii, 67,) There is nothing to show distmctly that he was the same man ; but either office might have been held by him, as a clergyman, or an officer of the court. In the next year he was one of those appointed to collect the quinzime in Lincolnshire, and in the foUovring to assess the tallage in Cumber land and Northumberland. (Ibid. 146,208.) His nonUnation as a justicier at West minster took place soon after. Fines were levied before him in this character from 1228 tiU 1234, during which time he also performed the duties of a justice itinerant. There are instances Ukewise of parties pay ing fines for write to take assizes of novel disseisin before him m 1236 (Excerpt eRot Fin. 286), beyond which date there is no evidence of his actmg as a judge. In 1287 he was employed to open the parliament. RAMSEY 545 and by his eloquence to mduce the barons to grant a subsidy to the king, (Rapin, iii, 65.) His clerical preferment proceeded at the same time: he was appomted a canon of St. Paul's and of Lichfield, and treasurer of Exeter Cathedral. So high was his character both as an ecclesiastic and a la'wyer that he was soon after elected to two bishoprics — those of Lichfield and Co ventry, and of Norwich — the latter of which he accepted, and was consecrated on September 26, 1289, Almost immediately afterwards the chapter of Wmchester, on the death of Peter de Rupibus, selected him as his successor, m opposition to the king, who wanted to force upon them Wil liam of Valence, his wife's uncle. The chapter were, however, forced to proceed to a new election ; but thefr next choice, Ralph de Neville, bemg equaUy obnoxious to the sovereign, it was also made void, and the see remamed vacant for three or four years longer. The monks then proceeded to a third election, when, persisting in the nomination of William de Raleigh, their choice was confirmed by the pope on Sep tember 13, 1243. Though the new bishop was compelled to avoid the mdignation of the king by retiring into France, he suc ceeded at last, by the mtercession of the pope and of Archbishop Boniface, in pro curing the royal concurrence. For the in terference of the pope he is reported to have paid no less a sum than six thousand marks, and is foolishly supposed to have expected the pontiff to retum him a part of the bribe. In 1249 he retired to Tours, where he died m September of the fol lowing year, and was buried in the church of St, Martm in that city. Some letters addressed to him by Robert Grossetete, Bishop of LincoM, are extant, (Godwin, 219, 316, 430 ; Brown's Fascicul. 316.) EALPH (Aechdeacon oe Colchestee) was one of the justiciers in the latter part of the reign of Henry II. He was present when fines were levied in the Curia Regis at Canterbury in the thirty-third year, 1187, and at Oxford m the thirty-fifth, (Hunter's Preface.) The Pipe Roll of I Richard I, (11-236) records his pleas in various coun ties. He died in 1190, (Le Neve, 196,) EALPH (Aechdeacon oe Heeefoed) is considered by Le Neve (118) to be sur named Foliot, and to have held that digmty as early as II68 and as late as 1197, He appears to have been a justicier for several of the latter years, as fines were acknowledged before him in 33 Henry H., 1188, and from the 7th to the 9th years of Richard L, II96-7, (Hunter's Preface.) EASISEY, Abbot oe. In Mr. Hunter's list of justiciers extracted from the fines he introduces 'Abbas Sancti Benedicti de Ramsey ' in 10 and 15 John, I208-12I3, but in the fines hitherto published his name 546 RANDOLPH does not appear. When Robert do Re- dinges resigned the abbacy in 1207, the king issued a precept to the monks, com manding them to elect the prior of Frenton in his place, which they > refused to obey. He thereupon kept the abbey vacant for seven years. ( Willis's Mitred Abbeys, 154 ; Monasticon, ii. 554.) It would seem, how ever, that the prior of Frenton, whose name has not been discovered, assumed the title of abbot of Ramsey, notwithstanding the monks' resistance. EANDOLFH was prior of Worcester at the time he was appointed abbot of Eve sham in 1214, 16 John, 'The only occa sion on which he acted as a justice itinerant was in 5 Hemy IIL, 1221, when he and the abbot of Readmg were placed at the head of the commission for nine counties. He died on January 16, 1229. (Willis's Mitred Abbeys; Rot Claus. i. 162,476.) EANDOLPH, John, belonged to a family settled in Hampshire, aud is first mentioned in 13 Edward I., 1285, as one of the exe cutors of WilUam de Braboef, the justice itinerant. He was connected -with the Ex chequer, and in 26 Edward I. was appointed one of the commissioners to -risit the sea porte, and enquire into the concealment of the customs on wool, &c. (Madox, i. 231, 784.) The only time his name appears m Dugdale's ' Chronica Series ' is as the third of five justices itinerant into Cornwall in 80 Edward I. ; but a document contamed in the Rolls of ParUament of 8 Edward II. proves not only that he acted for four years as a justice of assize, as well as a justice iti nerant in the last circuit into CornwaU, but also that his salary for these services then remained unpaid. (Rot ParL i. 332.) In the first two years of the reign of Ed ward II. he had been summoned to par liament among the j udges, and was employed in a variety of ways in a judicial character as late as the thirteenth year, when he was commanded to cause his proceedings as a justice of assize, or otherwise, to be estreated into the Exchequer. (ParL Writs, i. 799, U, p. U. 1323.) Although he is not judicially mentioned for the next seven years, there are several entries relative to him in the interval ; and in 2 Edward III. he was named on a com mission to try certain malefactors of France charged with molesting the merchante of Southampton, In 1329 he was one of the justices itinerant into Northamptonshire; but after 4 Edward III,, when he had the custody of the castle and manor of Por chester committed to him, he is not again noticed. (Abb. Rot. Orig. i. 284, ii 41, 81 • N. Fmdera, ii. 751.) ' EANULPH, who succeeded to the trea surership of the church of Salisbury in 1192 {Le Neve, 270), acted as a justice itinerant in 10 Richard I., II98, making amercements EASTALL in Essex and Hertfordshire, and fixing the taUage in Surrey. (Madox, i. 566, 783.) EANTJLPH. sometimes called Arnulph by the historians, but not in the records, was one of the chaplains of Henry I., who raised Mm to the office of his chanceUor. In Thynne's Catalogue, from which all the subsequent writers copy, the first date at tached to his holdmg the Seal is III6, but from the follo-wmg evidence it wUl be ap parent that he was m possession of it at a much earlier period. He attested, as chan ceUor, a charter granted to the priory of St, Andrew at Northampton m 8 Henry L, II07 (Monast. v. 191), and another at Whit suntide 1109, granting the archbishopric of York to Thomas. (Ihid. vi. II80.) His continuance in office until 1123 is proved by his name and title being appended to seven other charters in the ' Monasticon,' (i, 308, 483, 629, ii. 267, Ui. 86, vi, 188, 1076,) At Christmas 1128 the Mng held his court at Dunstable, It is related that, ridmg there -with the monarch, the chan cellor fell from his horse and was carelessly (improvide!) ridden over by a monk of St. Albans, ' cujus possessiones,' Roger de Wendover slyly adds, ' male occupaverat,' In a few days Ms career was closed. Although he did not live long enough to attam the episcopal honours usuaUy awarded to chancellors, he had made some way in his ecclesiastical preferment, bemg described in one of the above charters as ' Abbas de Salesbia,' probably Selby, He is described by Wendover (U. 202) as suffering under heavy bodUy infirmity during the last twenty years of his life, but as ready for all Muds of -wickedness ; and Henry of Huntmgdon (Angl. Sac. ii, 698), in recording the characters of those great men whose lives he had 'witnessed, while he bears the strongest testimony to his leaming, sagacity, and experience, speaks m terms of severe censure of his impiety, oppression, and avarice. EASTALL, William, was the son of John RastaU, who was educated at Oxford, and established himself in London as a prmter, an occupation wMch, in those times, was deemed more as a profession than a trade, and was 'pursued by men of learning and education. That John RastaU deserved this character is manifest fr-om various works, some connected with the law, wMch he wrote and which were published at his O'wn press. His marriage with EUzabeth, the daughter of Sir John More the judge, and the sister of Sir Thomas More the chancellor, shows the grade in which he moved. He was a most zealous CathoUc, and his kno-wn hatred of the innovations of Henry VIII. was not diminished by wit- nessmg the sacrifice of his brother-in-law as one of the victims. ( Woods Athen. i. 100.) He died in 1536, leaving two sons. RAVENSER -the elder of whom, WilUam, afterwards the judge, was born in London in 1508. He was sent to the university of Oxford, which he left vrithout teMng a degree. The increasing inflrmities of his father probably drew him from his studies, and induced Mm to enter into the printing busmess, for books vrith Ms imprimatur appear from the year I53I. How long he continued to exercise this calling, or whe ther he did so after his becoming a student of Lincoln's Inn, where he was admitted on September 12, 1632, is not known ; but it may be presumed that he had renewed Ms legal course before the end of the reign of Henry VIH,, masmuch as he was ap pointed reader in 1547 (Dugiiale's Orig, 262), within a few months after Edward VI, came to the crown. Feeling that one of his reUgion was not then safe in England, he retired to Louvain, where he remained during Edward's life, and where he buried his vrife Winifred, the daughter of the learned Dr, John Clement, On the restoration of the Catholic wor- sMp, RastaU returned to England and resumed his professional practice. In Oc tober 1665 he was raised to the degree of serjeant-at-law, and m three years was promoted to the judicial seat, receiring his patent as a judge of the Queen's Bench on October 27, 1568, not a month before Queen Mary's death. All the judges were re-appointed the day after EUzabeth's accession, without regard to their religious persuasion ; and three months after, Mr. Justice RastaU was appomted one of the justices of assize in Durham during the vacancy of that see. (Cal. State Papei-s [1647-80], 122.) He continued on the bench at Westminster, at least as late as Michaelmas 1562, his name appearing m that term in Plowden's Reports ; but his resignation occurred shortly after, as the date of Ms successor Mr, Justice Southcote's patent is February 10, 1563, He spent the remamder of his life in Louvain, where he died on August 27, 1565, and was buried there in the church of St. Peter, He was the author of several works ; but some confusion has arisen m distinguishing them from those written by his father. Among his undoubted compositions, are ' The Chartuary,' 'A CoUection of Entries of Declarations, &c,,' 'Les Termes de la Ley,' and a 'Collection of Statutes to 4 & 6 Philip and Mary,' which is spoken Mghly of by Sir Edward Coke. ( Watt's Biblio. Brit.) EA'VENSEB, JoHj[ DE, and the next- mentioned Richard, apparently his brother, were natives of Ravenser, the place in the neighbourhood of Kingston-upon-HuU where 'William de la Pole was bom. To the influence of this powerful merchant was EAWLINSON 547 probably owingtheadvanceof these brothers. Both were ecclesiastics; and John m 48 Edward HI. granted an endowment to a chantry at 'Hellewe,' in connection vrith the church of Waltham. (Ahb. Rot. Orig, ii, 383.) He was keeper of the Hanaper in 1386, 10 Richard IL, and it was in that character that he was appointed vrith the master of the RoUs on March 26, 1898, to hold the Great Seal tiU April 19, while Thomas de Arundel was chancellor. As William de Waltham was keeper of the Hanaper in the foUovring year, Ravenser probably died in the interval, (Rymer, vii, 648,) EA'VENSEE, Richaed de, apparently the elder brother of John, in 31 Edward HL, 1367, had a grant ofthe office of keeper of the Hanaper, In the next year he was assigned to admimster the goods ofthe late Queen IsabeUa (Abb. Rot. Orig. ii,), and was rewarded for his services in 36 Edward III, by bemg appomted one of the twelve clerks in the Chancery of the higher grade, still, however, retaining the Hanaper for some years afterwards, (Cotton. Julius. F. X. 16 fo.l03; iV, Fmdera, iii. 703, 934,) He continued a clerk of the Chancer}' during the remainder of his life, and was endowed with the usual ecclesiastical pre fermente, the last of which was that m 42 Edward HI, he was made archdeacon of Lincoln. He was rich enough to lend the Mng 200/,, which was repaid in 44 Edward III, (PeU Records, i. 190,) He died at the end of May 1886, 9 Richard H,, and was buried m LincoM Cathedral. His will is printed in the ' Proceedings of the Archas- ologioal Institute at Lmcoln ' (1848), pp. 312-17. He was tvrice called upon, vrith two other clerks, to hold the Great Seal durmg the temporary absence of the chan cellors — first, from May 4 to June 21, 1877, the day of King Edward's death : and se condly, from February 9 to March'28, 1386, 9 Richard II., but two months before his own death. EAWLINSON, William, of Graythwaite, near Newby Bridge, on the Lake of Win dermere, a scion of a family of great emi nence and antiquity in Westmoreland and Lancashire, descended from two bi-others, Walter and Edward, who shared iu the glory of the field of Agincourt, was born at Graythwaite about 1640, and was the son of Captain William RawUnson, who for his services in the civU wars had a grant of arms in which three swords were introduced to commemorate the gallantiy of himself and his two ancestors. Studymg the law at Gray's Inn, he was called to the bar in 1667, and attained the dignity of the coif in 1686. With a fair practice and a good repute he was selected at the Revolution to be third commissioner of the Great Seal, to which he was appointed on March 4, 1689, N N 2 548 RAYMOND in conjunction vrith Sir John Maynard and Sir Aiithony Keck. He was at the same time knighted ; and when both his col leagues retired in June 1690 he was re tained, being then joined with Sir John Trevor and Sir George Hutchins. Luttrell (ii, 128) records that in November he was heard in the House of Lords against the bill for the regulation of the Court of Chancery, He sat under this commission for three years, when in March, 1698 the Seal was delivered to Sir John Somers as sole keeper. King William wished on his removal to make him chief baron of the Exchequer, but the lord keeper objecting that it was necessary the chief judge of that court 'should be experienced in the course of the Exchequer and knowing in the common law,' — ^thus inferring his igno rance of both, — his appointment was not insisted on, and Sir 'William returned to the bar, where we find him pleading as a serjeant for the Duke of Devonshire in October 1697. He died on May II, 1708, and was buried in Hendon Church, Middle sex. (Dyson's London, iii. 8.) EAYMONS, Thomas, is described in his admittance mto Gray's Inn as the son of Robert Raymond of Bowers-Giffard in the county of Essex, which is near Do-wnham, where the judge possessed an estate called Tremnals. He was called to the bar on February II, 1650, and from the period of the Restoration he was a diU gent reporter during the remainder of his life. In 1677 he was created a serjeant, and less than two years afterwards was raised to the bench and knighted, though, as he declares, he laboured, and not with out reason, to prevent his promotion. He filled, in the course of one year, a seat in each of the three courts, receiving a patent as baron of the Exchequer on May 1, 1679, from which he was removed to the Com mon Pleas on February 7 foUo'wing, and on April 29 was transferred to the King's Bench. In the latter court he sat for Uttle more than three years, during which he assisted in the trials and acquittals of Mr. Cellier and the Earl of Castlemaine, luckily coming into office at the fag end of the pretended Popish Plot, when the tide was beginning to turn, and Chief Justice Scroggs thought it bis interest to test the credi bility of the witnesses whose evidence he had before received with undoubting faith. Though Roger North (136) relates of Sir Thomas that two old women were tried before him at Exeter for -witchcraft, and that, by his passive behaviour, and neglect ing to point out to the jury the irrationaUty of their confessions, he suffered them to be convicted, and one of them to be hanged, by his general conduct on the bench he escaped the censure to which too many of his colleagues in this reign were liable, and RAYMOND probably by his early death avoided the- dismissal which was the too common re ward of straightforward independence and an honest administration of justice. As- there is no evidence of the ' extraordmary servility' which Lord Campbell imputes- to him, nor any other ground adduced for- designating him as au ' unprincipled judge' except his concurrence vrith the rest of the court in the decision on the quo warranto against the City of London (a case tuming- on many difficult pointe of law), the pro phetic future, which his lordship's preju dice would ascribe to him if he had Uved may in fairness be disregarded and set aside, receivmg only the noble author's re luctant admission that he was a judge of ' extraordmary leammg ' — a subject on which every lawyer is ready to allow his lordship to have been a sufficient authority. He died m the fifty-seventh year of his age on July 14, 1683, whUe engaged on the circuit, and was buried m the parish- church of Do-wnham. By his -wife, Ann, daughter of Sir Edward Fish, Bart., he had one only child, his more famous son, the next-mentioned Robert Lord Raymond. The Reports both of the father and son are- in great repute in Westminster HaU, (Morant's Essex, i, 206.) EAYMOND, Robeet (Loed Ra-mond), the oMy son ofthe above Sfr Thomas Ray mond, was born in 1673, and his father nme months before Ms death mduced the- society of Gray's Ttiti to admit the boy on November 1, 1682, when only nme years old. No doubt the young student was ex cused attendance on the usual eieroises- until he had completed the rest of Ms edu cation, but the devotion wMch he paid to his father's -wishes is shown by Ms early adoption of the most efficient course of ac quiring practical legal knowledge. He constently attended the courte, and his successors at the bar benefit to the present day by the fruite of his mdustry. His Reports commence m Easter Term 1694, when he was but twenty years old, and more than three years before he was caUed to the bar. They fimsh in Trinity Term 1732, a year before his death, thus extend ing over thfrty-eight years, during the reigns of four sovereigns. They were not pu"blished till ten years after his death, but are so highly valued, and stiU regarded as such high authoritj', that they have been several times reprmted imder the editorial care of eminent lawyers. His call to the bai' did not take place till November 12, 1697, fifteen years after his admission; but he got into immediate prac-^ tice, he himself reporting a case in which he was engaged in a leamed argument in Michaelmas 1698. In 1702 we find hiin employed as junior counsel in the prose cution of Richard Hathaway as a cheat and. RA"OI0ND impostor in pretending to be bewitched by ¦Sarah Murdock, whom he brought to trial for her life. After the conviction in this case indictments for vritchcraft almost en tirely ceased. In 1704 he very ably and strenuously (and in the event effectually) ¦defended David Lmdsay on a charge of Mgh treason m retuming to England from France vrithout leave, and in 1706 he was of counsel for the prosecution of Beau Field- mg for bigamy, in marrying the Duchess of Cleveland, his first wife being alive. In Queen Anne's parliaments of 1710 ¦and 1714 he was returned for Bishop's Castle, having been kmghted on May 13 in the former year on bemg made solicitor- general, an office from which he was re moved on October 14 in the latter year by the advice of Lord Cowper on the arrival of George I. in England. In that king's first parliament of 1715 Sir Robert was ¦elected for Ludlow, and in the second of 1722 for Helston. In the former he joined vrith the tories in opposing the Septennial Bill m I7I6, which was however passed by a large majority. WhUe still a member he was again taken into the Mng's service, and appointed attorney-general in May 1720, in which character he conducted the prosecution against Christopher Layer for Mgh treason in November 1722, On Ja nuary 81, 1724, he was appointed ajudge of the King's Bench, On the removal of Lord ChanceUor Macclesfield, Sir Robert was appointed one of the three commissioners of the Great Seal, which they held from January 7 to June 4, 1726, On March 2 he succeeded ¦Sir John Pratt as,chief justice of the King's Bench, stUl contmuing to act as commis- isioner tUl Lord King became chancellor. The judgments delivered by him during the eight years he presided in the Kmg's Bench are most elaborate, and display a great fund of legal knowledge. In the state trials before Mm he was patient, im partial, careful, and discriminating. In one of them, that against Curll, the book seller, he established the doctrine that to publish an obscene libel is a temporal offence ; and the delinquent was punished ¦on this confirmation of Ms conviction, George II. on his accession continued him in his place, and raised him to the peerage on January 15, I73I, by the title of Lord Raymond of Abbots Langley in Hertford shire, In the House of Lords he distin guished himself by opposing the bill enacting that all proceedings in courte of justice should be in the English language, aUeging that if the bill passed the law must Ukewise be translated into Welsh, as .many in Wales understood not EngUsh, Though the alteration was unpopular among lawyers (even Lord EUenborough thought it tended to make attorneys Ulite- READ 549 rate), it happily became law; to the great benefit and comfort of the community. Lord Raymond died on March 19, 1733, and was buried at Abbote Langley, in which parish his country seat was situate, and where a handsome monument was erected to his memory. By his wife, Anne, daughter of Sir Edward Northey, the attomey-general, he left an only son, of his own name, upon whose death in 1753 the title became extinct. (Lord Raymond, passim ; State Trials, xiv, 642, 989, 1829 ; ParL Hist vn. 335, 861 ; Strange, 948 ; CoUins's Peerage, ix. 432.) EEAD, or EEBE, Robeet, was of a family which originaUy came from Morpeth in Northumberland, His grandfather .Tohn was a serjeant-at-law in the reign of Henry IV,, and was settled at Norvrich ; and his father's and mother's names were, according to his will, William and Joan, though Burke calls them Edward and Izod, daughter of Sir Humphrey Stanley. Robert was their third son, and was educated at Buckingham Hall, afterwards Magdalen CoUege, in Cambridge, and be came a fellow of King's Hall, on the site of which part of Trinity College was built. He was placed at Lincoln's Inn, where he became reader in 1480, and agam in I486, having in the previous November received his summons to take on himself the degree of the coif. On Apri 18, 1494, he was ap pointed king's serjeant; and was made a judge of the King's Bench on November 24, 1496, II Henry VIL, when he was knighted. In October 1606 he was raised to the chief justiceship of the Court of Com mon Pleas, for which advancement the judge was obliged to pay to the avaricious king the sum of 400 marks, as appears by an account rendered by the noted Edmond Dudley, (Tui-ner's England, iv. 158.) King Henry named him as one of the executors of his will (Testam. Vetust. 35.) Henry VIlL continued him in his place, which he retained till his death on January 8, 1519, He was buried m the chapel of St, Catherme at the Charterhouse, where he founded a chantry of 8/. a year for thirty years, (Supp. of the Monasteries, 68.) He also left 100/, to Jesus College to found a feUowship and brewery there, and established three public lectures at the university of Cambridge, called ''Bamaby's Lectures,' on humanity, logic, and philo sophy, which are now oonsoUdated into one lecture every year, with the name of the founder, (Dyer's Cambridge, i. 82, ii, 69 269,) By his marriage with Margaret, one of the daughters of John Alphew, of Bore Place in Chiddmgstone, Kent, he became possessed of considerable property in Kent, (Hasted, iu, 133, 219,) 550 REEVE EEETE, Edmund, was of a Norfolk family, and is rightly claimed by the socie^ of Barnard's Inn as having com menced his legal studies there. He com pleted them at Gray's Inn, where he attained the post of reader in 1632. In 1629 he was named as the first recorder of Great Yarmouth. (CaL State Papers [1629-31], 131.) He was called seijeant on May 30, 1636, and was promoted to the bench of the Common Pleas on March 24, 1639. (Rymer, xx, 381.) In the propositions made to the king in Febmary 1643 he was one of the judges whom the parliament requested to be con tinued; and in Michaelmas Term of that year he sat alone in his court at West minster, when the king's proclamation to adjoum it to Oxford was delivered to Mm. In subservience to the parliament, he caused the apprehension of the messenger, who was tried by a council of war, and condemned and executed as a spy, ( Claren don, iU, 407, iv, 342,) The judge retained Ms seat tUl his death, on March 27, 1647, whenhis remains were mterred in the church of Estratuna (Stratton) in Norfolk. Lord Clarendon (Ui, 145-9) speaks of him as ' a man of good reputation for leaming, who in good times would have been a good judge,' and represente him as giving some prudent counsel to the Mng on his coming to Leicester during the assizes in July 1642. PhiUips states that Sir George Reeve of Thwaite in Suffolk (who obtained a baronetcy m 1663, which faUed about 1688) was descended from him, (Grandeur of the Law [1684], 87; Gent Mag. IxxxvUi. 396.) EEE'VE, Thomas, frequently miscalled Reeves, was the son of Richard Reeve, Esq., of New Windsor, who erected four alms houses in the parish. Admitted first a member of the Inner Temple, he transferred himself to the Middle Temple, and was called to the bar by the latter society m 1713. He had such success that he was made king's counsel so early as 1718, and soon afterwards attorney-general for the duchy of Lancaster, He became a bencher of the Middle Temple in 1 720, and reader in 1722, In the latter year he was counsel for the crown in support of the biU of at tainder against Bishop Atterbury and the other parties implicated m the same con spiracy ; and in 1730 he most ably advocated the cause of the widow of Robert CasteU iu the appeal of murder against Bambridge, the warden of the Fleet, In AprU 1783 he was constituted a judge of the Common Pleas, and knighted ; and after sitting there for nearly three years he was advanced to the head of the court in January 1736. His enjoyment of this post was limited to a single year, as on January 18, 1787, he died. REGINALD (State Trials, xvi, 469, 607, xvU, 398; Gent Mag. in. 215, vi, 66, vu, 60.) Leamed himself, he was an encourager of the aspirants to leaming ; and that he was a favourite among the literary men of the day is apparent from numerous prmted and manuscript verses written m his laudation. He resided at Eton, and at Gey's House, Maidenhead; and at his death his personal estate was estimated at 22,676/., besides real estates of considerable rentel, among which was a moiety of the playhouse in LmcoM's Inn Fields, let to Rich at 100/. per annum. His -vrife was Annabella, sister of Richard Topham, Esq,, of New Wmdsor, keeper ofthe records in the Tower ; but he left no issue, (Ex inf. of John Payne Collier, Esq., F.S.A.,, who occupied the family residence, Gey's House.) EEGINALD (Abbot oe Walden) is m- troduced among the chancellors of Stephen's reign on the sole authority of ' one anony mall brief-written cMonicle,' in which Thynne and his copyist Philipot s!iy that they have seen him so termed. How far this information is correct may be judged from the fact that Walden did not exist as an abbey tiU the year 1190, previously to which date it was only a priory. Although Reginald was the first abbot and the last prior, he did not attam even the latter dig nity tiU 1164, ten years after Stephen's death. (Philipot, II ; Browne Willis s Mi tred Abbeys.) EECrlNALI) is introduced as chanceUor to Henry I, by Thynne, on no other foimdation than the foUowmg words in Leland's 'Itine rary: ' ' Then came one Reginaldus Cancel- larius, so namj'd, hy likelyhode, of Ms office, a man of gret fame, about Kmg Henry the Ffrst,' Upon such vague eridence as tMs the name has been continued m subsequent lists, when there is not a single document to support the supposition, and when it is notorious that queens, and barons, and bi shops, and others had offices of this title, from which Regmald might hay e beennamed. Leland goes on to say that ' he felle to religion, and was prior to Montegue, and enlarged yt with buildings and possessions,' Yet It is curious that his name is not in the list of priors contained in the Cottonian Manuscript copied by Willis in his 'Mitaed Abbeys,' and that m the recapitulation of the grants to that priory set forth m its various charters his name does not appear as a benefactor, EEGINALD, or EAYNALD, Walieb (Aechbishop oe Canteebuet), whose career aft'ords an early instance in English history of the advance of an indi-ridual from the lower ranks of life to the highest eccle siastical honom-s, was the son of a baker at Windsor, and, being bred up to the Church, was brought under the notice of Edward I., a monarch whose powers of discrimination REGINALD were seldom at fault. The king soon dis covered merit m the youthful aspirant, whose appointment as tutor to the young prince is no small evidence in favour of his character and abiUties, Judgmg both from the earUer and the more matured career of his pupil, he failed (as might be expected from the evente of his own Ufe) to check the weakness of the prince's judgment, or to instU mto Mm steadiness of purpose. He, however, satisfled the father, from whom he received the living of Wimbledon in 1298, and mgratiated himself with the son, on whose accession he was rapidly advanced. He immediately obtained a canonry in St, Paul's, and was constituted treasurer of the Exchequer on August 22, 1307, To this was added the bishopric of Worcester in April 1308 ; and on July 6, I3I0, resign ing the treasurership, the Great Seal was placed in his hands. The terms used on the roll recording this event make it doubtful whether^he was invested with the office of chancellor or -with that of keeper. The oath he is described as taking is, ' de officio Sigilli illiusfldeliter exequendo,' which would seem to apply more directly to the latter. In sub sequent records, however, he is certainly called chancellor. (Mado.v,ii.38, 48.) Soon after his appomtment he lent 1000/. to the king, to the advance of which has been at tributed, without sufficient evidence, his attainment ofthe Seal ; but, as the loan was made after his elevation, it may more cha ritably be ascribed to his desire to assist the Mng in the necessities which then pressed upon him, the ordainers being in fact at that time in possession of the govemment and the royal purse : an order, indeed, for the repayment of nearly one-half of it was made so early as May 1, 1311, Between December 19, 13I1, and October 6, 1312, the Seal never appears to have been under his control ; but on the latter day it was again placed in his hands, only, how ever, as custos or keeper, remaining sealed up under the seals of the master of the Rolls and two other clerks in Chancery, in whose presence it would seem that all write were sealed. In this manner the office was executed till April 6, 1314, which is the last date on which the bishop is mentioned in connection with the Seal, His removal from this high office, which no doubt took place about that time, was not occasioned by any diminution of his sovereign's favour, but rather by his having attained a higher elevation. On the decease of Archbishop Wmchelsey in May 1313, although the monks had elected Dr. Cobham, the sub- dean of SaUsbury— a most leamed and exceUent man— in his place, the king contrived to get the election annuUed by the pope, and his favourite, Walter, to be substituted for him. The bull by which this was efi'ected is dated October 1, 1813 ; REINGER 551 and he was with great pomp enthroned on April 19, I3I4. His rule over the arch bishopric was illustrated by the acquisition of many important privileges from the papal see, Durmg the earUer troubles with the barons he remained faithful to the king; but on the queen's invasion of the king dom he basely deserted his patron and master, adding strength to her party by the weight of his position, and, on the king's deposition, completmg his infamy by crown- mg the son of his benefactor, TMs event, which took place on February 1, 1827, was quickly foUowed by his own death. The adulterous queen is said to have so pressed the consecration of James de Berkley, elected Bishop of Exeter, that the pusillanimous archbishop, more fearful of the prevaiUng and present power than that of the pope at a distance, did not dare to resist. The Roman pontiff, enraged that his conflrmation had not been first obtained, by his threats and reproaches against the offending prelate created such terror or such remorse in his mind that, within a few days after the announcement of the pope's anger, a mortal sickness fell upon him. His death occurred at Mortlake on November 16, 1327, and his remains were interred in Canterbury Cathedral, (Godwin, 103, 46-2; Hasted,xii- 379 ; Angl Sac i. 18, 59, 532.) EEINGEE, or EENGEE, John, was the eldest son of the under-named Richard ; and when his father was sheriff of London, in 6 Henry IIL, he and his brother Matthew were deUvered as pledges for the peace of that city, (Rot Claus. i. 617, 569.) Madox (ii. 319) introduces him as a baron of the Exchequer in 42 Henry IIL, but nothing further has been discovered concerning him in that character. In 52 Henry III, he proceeded against Stephen Bukerel for tak ing away his goods and chattels from his houses in ' Enefeud, Edelmeton, Mimmes et Stebeneth,' in Middlesex (Abh. Placit. 175), and died in the following year, (Cal Inquis. p, m. i, 32.) EEINGEE, or EENGEE, Richaed, was an alderman of London, serving the office of sheriff in 6, 6, and 7 Henry IIL, and that of mayor in the four foUovring years. During part of this time the king committed the chamberlainship ofthe city to him and John Travers ; and in II Henry III, he had a grant of the Queen's Hithe (Ripa Reginse) to hold at 40/. a year. About the same time he and Alexander de Dorset had the custody of the Mint of London ; but in 13 Henry HI, it was transferred, together with that of Canterbury, to him alone, for four years, at an annual rent of seven hundred marks. It was wMle he held this office that he acted as a justicier, fines being levied before Mm trom HUary 1280 tiU Easter 1231, There is a record shovring 552 REINY that he was stiU alderman in 19 Henry III, He died soon afterwards, (Stow's Survey; Rot Claus. i. 517, &c,, u, 21, &c. ; Madox, i. 709-781, ii. 134.) EEINY, John de, was the son of a knight of the same name to whom" the manor of Hemmeston in Devonshire belonged, and who bore arms against King John. His mother, in 6 Henry IIL, married Nicholas de Heaulton without the king's licence ; and he was placed under the wardship of Warin Fitz- Joel, In 9 Henry IIL, 1225, he was appointed one of the justices itinerant for Somersetehire, in which county also he had property. No other mention is made of him till 1246, when his executors were allowed to have administration of his pro perty, (Rot Claus. i. 270, 677, U. 4, 76 ; Excerpt e Rot Fin. i. 88, 89, 460.) EETFOED, Robeet de, was the son of Richard, who was the son of Richard de Retford (Abb. Placit 284), so called from a to-wn in Nottinghamshire. He was first sum moned to parUament among the judges m August 1296, 23 Edward I., and there are records of his pleas as a justice itinerant at Norwich and at Dunstable in the next year. (Abb. Rot Orig. i. 96, 97.) His attendance in parliament in that character is noted till the end of the reign (Pari Writs, i. 801) ; aud in February 1307 he was placed among the justices of trailbaston for the home counties. (Rot Pari i. 218.) From the commencement of the next reign there are regular writs summoning him to parliament in the same manner, which are continued till June 1318, 11 Edward II. ; and there is evidence of his exercising his functions, not only in the home district, but in Durham and in Siei- cestershire,upto theninthyearofthatreign, (Ibid 846; ParL Writs,ii. 1331.) EETFOED, William de, was probably the son of the above Robert de Retford. The document by which he was appointed keeper of the great wardrobe is on the Roll of Nottinghamshfre, the county to which that Robert belonged. This is dated in 23 Edward III. ; and he is there called ' cleri cus.' He was raised to the Exchequer bench as a baron on November 27, 1364, and is mentioned as a justice of assize in 32 Edward III, in Serjeant Benloe's Re ports. The period of his death or retire ment has not been discovered. (Ahh. Rot. Orig. u. 205; N. Fmdera, Ui. 114.) EEYGATE, John de, in 52 Henry HI., 1268, was appointed king's escheator north of Trent, and during the time he held that oflice he performed the duties of a justicier, from IMay 1269 to August 1271, numerous payments bemg made for assizes before him m the northem counties. He held the esoheatorship to the en(;l of that reign. (E.vcerpt. e Rot Fin. ii. 467-585.) Under Edward I. there is no actual entry EEYNOLDS sho-wing that he was a justicier at West minster; but from his frequent employ ment as a justice itinerant, and the position he gradually attained in the commissions, it seems probable that he continued to hold the office. In 8 Edward I, he was the third of four justices itinerant mto Worcester- shfre, and in the next year the head of four justices of assize. In 6 Edward I, Ms name in two commissions of itinera was preceded only by that of the Bishop of Worcester; in the following year he headed the circuit into Dorset, Somerset, and WUte ; and m 12 Edward I, a -writ was addressed to him and another to hold an assize m North umberland. (Ahb. Placit 276.) EETNOLDS, James (1). There were two j udges of the name of James Reynolds in the reign of George H.— one lord cMef baron, and the other baron of the Exche quer, They were not contemporaries m "Westminster HaU, the former bemg dead before his namesake ascended the English bench, although he had been chief justice of the Common Pleas m Ireland for nearly thirteen years before. The chief baron's great-grandfather (who was also the baron's ancestor) was Sir James Rey nolds, of Castle Camps m Cambridge shire, who flourished in the reign of Queen Elizabeth. His grandfather and father were also named James, both re siding at Bumstead HeUons in Essex, The estate of the former, who married Dorothy, a daughter of Sir William De Grey, of Merton in Norfolk, was decimated during the Rebellion, on account of his loyalty and great zeal for King Charles. The latter m 1655, at the age of twenty-two, married Judith, the eldest daughter of Sir WiUiam Hervey, of Ickworth, near Bury St, Ed munds, ancestor of the Marquis of Bristol. By this lady, who was then forty years of age, he had three sons ; and soon after her death, in 1679, he took for his second -wife, in 1682, Bridget, daughter of — Parker, who sui"riyed her husband thirty-three years, and died m 1723, Both the ladies were bmied at Castle Camps, By the latter marriage he had an only son, James, the future chief baron, who was born on January 6, 1686, at the house of his mother's aunt Gibbs in ClerkenweU. His precise relationship to the other judge is not traced -vrith certainty, but as by his wiU he bequeathed a large legacy to his niece, bearing the family name of Judith, and as the other judge (to whom the chief baron had before his second marriage de vised his estates in Cambridgeshire) had a sister named Judith, it would seem, if she were the same Judith, that he was the nephew of the chief baron, and perhaps the son of the chief baron's half-brother, Robert. ( CoUins's Peerage, i. 149 ; Gage's Suffolk, 287 ; Morant's Essex, ii. 522, 532.) REYNOLDS The chief baron was initiated into the mysteries of the law at LincoM's Inn, where lie was called to the bar in 1712, and was included m the batch of serjeante created by George I. in the flrst year of his reign. Having been in 1712 elected recorder of Bury St. Edmunds, probably by the influ ence of the Hervey family, then ennobled, that borough retumed him as its repre sentative in 1717 and 1722. In 1718 he was selected by the Prince of Wales to argue in favour of his royal highness's claim to educate his own children ; but the judges, with only two dissentients, decided that the care and education of the king's grandchildren belonged to his maj esty by the royal prerogative. (State Trials, xvi. 1203.) His argument did not prevent George I. from promoting him to a judgeship ofthe King's Bench m March 1726 ; nor did his ^ old client George II, forget him, but in \ April 1730 raised him to the office of lord \ X -chief baron. After presiding in the Ex- EICH 553 \ chequer for eight years he resigned in July 1738 ; and dying on February 9, 1739, he was buried in St. James's Church, Bury St. Fidmunds, where there is a splendid mo nument to his memory. That the graceful accoimt of his merite as a judge and as a man which his epitaph records is not exaggerated, may well be beUeved from the prayer (still in existence) which he was in the daily habit of using, petitioning for ' that measure of under standing and discernment, that spirit of justice, and that portion of courage, as may both enable and dispose me to judge and determine those weighty affairs which may this day fall unto my con.sideration, without error or perplexity, without fear or affec tion, without prejudice or passion, without vanity or ostentation, but in a manner agreeable to the obligation of the oath and dignity of that station to which Thou in Thy good proridence hast been pleased to .advance me,' He was twice married. His first wife was Mary, daughter of Thomas Smith, Esq., of Thrandeston Hall, Suffolk ; and his second was Alicia, daughter of — Rainbird. He left uo issue by either. On his elevation to the bench he resigned the recordership of Bury, but showed his affection for that borough by leaving 200/, to its corporation, (Ex inf. of Ven. Archdeacon Hale, Rev. J. C. Bode, Rev. A. Wratislaw, and Mr. Herhei-t Frere; Notes and Quei-ies, 3rd S, i, 286, iU. 54.) EEYNOLDS, James (2), born in 1684, was, accordmg to the mscription on his monument at Castle Camps, Cambridge shire, ' the last male descendant of Sir James Reynolds, knight, who flourished in these parte in the reign of Queen EUzabeth.' Though it is difficult to ascertam the real connection by relationship between him and Chief Baron James Reynolds, it would appear, for the reasons already given in the life of the latter, that he was the nephew of the chief baron, although born two years before that judge. They both had property in the manor of Castle Camps, which Ues on the borders of Essex in the neighbourhood of Bumstead-Helions. The baron is described m the books of Lincoln's Inn, to which he was admitted in February 1704, as the son and heir-apparent of Robert Reynolds, of Bumstead in Essex. This gentleman was, it seems probable, the half-brother of Chief Baron James Rey nolds, and a son of James Reynolds of Bumstead by his flrst wife Judith, the daughter of Sir William Hervey of Ick worth. Robert married Kesiah TyrreU, the granddaughter of Sir WUliam Hervey, another of whose daughters, Kesiah, mar ried Thomas Tyrrell, of Gipping in Suffolk, The baron was called to the bar in May 1710, but notMng is recorded of him till he was sent to Ireland on November 3, 1727, as chief justice of the Common Pleas, In that court he sat for thirteen years, and by his professional talents and accomplished manners endeared himself to all parties. On retiring from this honourable post he was appointed a baron of the EngUsh Ex chequer, and took Ms seat there M May 1740. He was not knighted tiU May 23, 1745, on going up with the judges' address. He administered justice on the English bench for seven years, and dying on May 20, 1747, he was buried in the church of Castle Camps ; and, as his monument there was erected by his sister Judith, it is pro bable that he never married. (Smyth's Law Off. of Ireland, 121, 809; Gent Mag, at the dates,) EICH, Richaed (Loed Rich), was no doubt of a very ancient family. One of the earliest of the name is John de Rich, who flourished at Rich's Place m Hampshire in the reign of Edward H. His great- grandson was Richard Rich, the father of another Richard, mercer in London, who was sheriff of that city in 1441, died possessed of large estates m Middlesex and Hertfordshire, and was the founder of five almshouses at Broxboume. His second son, Thomas, had a son Richard, who, by his wife Joan Dingley, was the father of the chancellor, ( Wotton! s Baronet, iv. 586 ; Baronage, ii. 887 ; Testam. Vetust 299.) Richard Rich resided m his youth in the same parish m London where Sir Thomas More dwelt, and, according to the authority of that eminent man, was of no commend able fame, very light of tongue and a great dicer — one -with whom neither he nor any man else would ever in any matter of importance vouchsafe to communicate. 'And so,' More adds (Ropier, 82), 'm your house at the Temple, where hath been your 554 EICH chief bringing up, were you likewise ac counted.' Assured of the truth of More's representation, it would be curious to dis cover by what means a character of this stamp pushed himself up so as to become a reader at the Middle Temple in 1529. (Dugdale's Orig. 216.) By what patronage he acquired the office of attorney-general of Wales in 1682 is not told. That of solicitor-general to the king foUowed on October 10, 1533. This he held tiU April 13, 1586, a period of tvvo years and a half, during which, by his intrigues, his degrading subserviency, and his bold-faced perjury, though he paved the wa,y to worldly honours, he at the same time secured to his name the everlasting infamy that attaches to it. Cunning much less than Rich's would soon discover that his interest lay in gratifying the humours of the king, but it required a hardened conscience to pursue the perfidious course which he adopted to secure the royal favour. The refusal of Sir Thomas More and Bishop Fisher to acknowledge the king's supremacy had irritated the monarch beyond even his usual ferocity, and every attempt had hitherto failed iu bringmg the two contumacious prisoners within the terms of the recent stetute which made it high treason to deny it. Either Rich was sufficiently known to be considered a fittmg instrument to make another trial, or he voluntarily undertook the degradmg office. The manner in which he acted towards both these good and pious men was ex posed on their trials. That of Bishop Fisher came on first, the sole evidence against whom was Mr. Solicitor-General Prich. It was there asserted by the bishop, and not denied, that Rich came to him ¦with a message from the king desiring his real opinion on the disputed pomt, and that on the bishop's reminding him of the penalty in the new act in case anything was said contrary to that law. Rich assured him on the Mug's honom-, and on the word of a king, that no advantage would be taken against him for declaring his secret mind, which he professed that the king was desirous to know for his own guidance in future. To this Rich added his own faith ful promise that he would never utter the bishop's words but to the king alone. Compelled thus, as it were by the king's command, the bishop expressed his real sentiments on the statute ; and upon these alone, so uttered and so perfidiously be trayed, was the aged bishop most unright eously condemned. Without chai-ging the witness with perjury (for there is too much reason to believe he was the bearer of such a message from the kiug), it is difficiUt to determine where the greater share of in famy rests — on the man who would suffer himself to be made an instrument in so vile RICH a plot, or on the judges who could permit con-riction on such evidence. On the next trial Sir Thomas More directly charged him -with perjury in his representation of what passed between them. There it appears that Rich, on going to the Tower to take away Sir Thomas's books, led Mm under pretence of friendship into an argument, m the course of which, as Rich alleged, Sir Thomas asserted that the parUament had no more power to make the king supreme head of the Church than it had to declare that God was not God, Who vrill doubt More's asseveration of the falsehood of Rich's evi dence ? For who can beUeve that More would be incautious enough, especially to a man of Rich's kno-wn character, to betray his sentimente so unreservedly on such an occasion, when he had guardedly concealed them in all the various attempte which persons of high position and ability had pre-riously made to entrap Mm ? Even Rich's impudence must have been daunted before Sir Thomas's exposure of his former life, and his digmfied denial of the eridence now offered. The two -witnesses caUed to support Rich's testimony failed to assist him, for though they acknowledged that they were present, they declared that they were too busy in pacMng the books to give ear to the conversation, (State Trials, i. 887-400.) Rich, however, procured what he sought for — his o-wn advancement. In the next year he obtained the valuable place of chirographer in the Court of Common Pleas, and resigned the soUcitorship for the more dignified and profitable office of chancellor of the Court of Augmentations, then newly established. He did not neglect the opportunity thus obtained of secmMg to himself an enormous share of the plunder arising ft-om the dissolution of the monas teries. The mquisition of his possessions, taken at his death, proves the immense extent of his acquisitions. One of the earliest and richest was Leeze Priory and manor in E^sex, which he made his capital seat, and from which he subsequentiy took his title. (Morant, U. 101.) At the new parliament which met on June 8, 1636, he was chosen speaker, and made himself as remarkable for the gross- ness of his fiattery as he had previously done for the baseness of his actions. (Pari. Hist. i. 529, 634.) In Ms introductory speech he compared the king 'forjustice and prudence to Solomon, for strength and fortitude to Samson, and for beauty and comeliness to Absalom;' and on another occasion he likened hini to the sun, which exhaled all noxious vapours hurtful to us, and cherished those seeds, plante, and frmts necessary for the support of human life : ' so,' said the obseqmous flatterer, ' this our most excel- RICH lent prince takes away by Ms prudence all those enormities which may hereafter be hurtful to us and our posterity, and enacts such laws as will be a defence to the good, and a great terror to evil doers,' He was soon after knighted. He was a regular attendant at the coun cil ; and at one of the meetings m 1641 he was charged by one John Hillary with not domg what pertained to his duty vrith re spect to a supposed concealment by the abbot of Keynsham of a part of his mcome, but the unfortunate informer got nothmg for Ms pams but imprisonment in the Mar shalsea, (Acts Privy Council, vii, IOI.) He is charged also -with havmg assisted Lord Chancellor Wriothesley in working the rack on which poor Anne Askew was stretched ; but even prejudice must hesitate to beUeve this, ¦ In 1644 he resigned the chanceUorship of the Court of Augmentations; but in the expedition against Boulogne in that year he accompanied King Henry as treasurer of the army — an office which he held in Scot land as well as in France ; and he assisted m negotiating the treaty of peace 'with the French king. Under Henry's will he had a legacy of 200/., and was appointed one of the twelve assistants to the sixteen privy councillors. On February 16, 1647, about a fortnight after the accession of Edward VL, in con sequence of an asserted promise by the late king, he was created Baron Rich of Leeze in Essex. On Lord Wriothesley's dismis sal from the chanceUorship on March 6, Rich hoped to supply his place ; but the lord protector hesitated for more than half a year as to the choice he should make, leavmg .the Seal in the meantime in the temporary keepmg of Lord St, John, Rich, however, ha-ring at last managed to ac quire the confldence of Somerset, was m- vested with the office on October 23, Within two years he turned against the- protector, aud, joining the Earl of War wick, headed the subscribers to the pro clamation against him. The last pubUc duty he is mentioned as performmg was on August 28, 1551, when he went vrith Sir Anthony Wingfield and Sir WiUiam Petre to the Pijncess Mary at Copped HaU in Essex, to announce to her the determina tion of the council that private mass should not be performed in her household. She returned a resolute answer, declaring that none of the new service should, be used m her house. (Archeeologia, xviii. 161.) Very shortly after this there are two entries in King Edward's journal which, though subsequently erased by his o-wn pen, show the commencement of doubt and un easiness on the part of Rich. On October 1, the Mng mentions that the chanceUor had sent back a letter for the execution of RICH 555 the commis.sion agamst the"Bishops of Chi chester .and Worcester, because but eight members of the council had signed it, though ten were present; whereupon Ms majesty wrote a letter to Rich marvelling at his refusal. (CaL St Papers [1647-80], 55.) In less than three months Lord Rich resigned his office on December 21, 1651. By an entry in the journal the king attri butes his retirement to ilMess ; and there is no doubt that in the previous year he had been so incapacited by sickness that a com mission had been issued to the master of the Rolls and others to hear causes for him. (Rymer, xv. 246.) Hayward (Kennet's Hist, ii, 823), however, gives a different version. He suggests that a wish to keep the ' fair estate ' he had got, and his desire to avoid the troubles he foresaw in the coming parliament, made him petition for his discharge on account of his inffrmities. Heylin's explanation (i. 261) of the occur rence is more curious. ' It so happened,' he says, 'that the lord chancellor, com miserating the condition of the Duke of Somerset, who had been committed to the Tower on his second disgrace in October, 'though formerly he had showed himself against him, despatched a letter to him, concerning some proceedings of the lords of the council which he thought fit for him to know. Which letter, being hastily superscribed " To the Duke," with no other title, he gave to one of his servants, to be carried to him. By whom, for the want of a more particular direction, it was delivered to the hands of the Duke of Norfolk. But, the mistake being presently found, the lord chanceUor, knowing into what hands he was like to fall, makes his address unto the king the next morning betimes, and humbly prays that, in regard to his gi^eat age, he might be discharged of the Seal and office of chancellor.' Lord Rich did not wholly retire from poUtical life, nor could he refrain from joining in the closing plot of the reign. He protested in the parliament of 1553 against a biU for the regulation of the re venue (ParL Hist. i. 600) ; and he not only -witnessed the Mng's wiU and subscribed the undertaMng to support ite provisions, wMch altered the succession of the crown and settled it on Lady Jane Grey, but he also gave such prominent aid to the project as to induce the lords of the council to address a letter of thanks to him for his services. (Lingard, vU. 103, 120.) By a timely desertion of the party he escaped the immediate consequences, and he probably obtamed favour with Queen Mary by his profession of the Roman Catholic faith. In a month after she was proclaimed he was nominated as one of the councU to attend at a sermon preached at St, Paul's Cross, when a tumult was 556 EICHAED apprehended, and was actually summoned among the twenty-five peers appointed to try the Duke of Northumberland for the crime m which he himself had participated, (4 Report Pub, Rec, App, ii, 234,) He formed part of the commission for deciding on the claims to do service at the queen's coronation (Rymer, xv. 388), and his name was frequently placed at the head of the commissions in his county for trymg here tics, at the cruel execution of some of whom he was directed to be present, (Archeeo logia, xviii. 181,) Dming the ten years that he Uved under the reign of Queen Elizabeth Uttle is told of him, except that in the first year he voted agamst the new Book of Common Prayer, and that iu 1666 he was one of the committee of Lords appomted to confer -with the Commons on the subject of the queen's marriage. (ParL Hist 607, 708.) He survived nearly seventeen years after his retirement from the chancellorship, and employed himself in several charitable works in the neighbourhood of his mansion. Dymg about May 1668, he was buried in Felsted Church. By his -wife, Elizabeth, sister of William Jenks, of London, grocer, he had a very numerous family. He was succeeded in the title by his eldest son, Robert, whose son, also Robert, was created in 1618 Earl of Warwick. The earl's second son was advanced to the peerage in 1622 as Baron Kensington, to which was added the earl- ¦dom of Holland in 1624, but both titles became extinct in 1769, (Wotton's Bar onet, iv, 586 ; Nicolas's Synopsis.) EICHAED (Bishop of Heeepoed) was one of King Henry's chaplains, and is men tioned by Thynne as keeper of the Seal when Ranulph was chanceUor, In no ¦document, however, is he so designated, and Malmesbury, with greater probability, caUs him 'Clericus de Sigillo,' In 1120 he was preferred to the bishopric of Here ford, and dying at Ledbm-y on August 15, II27, he was buried in his own cathedral, (Godwin, 482 ; Le Neve, 108,) EICHAED was archdeacon of Wilte, and although his pleas aud those of his companions are mentioned on the roU of I Richard I, for the county of Cornwall, they evidentiy refer to an iter in a previous year, as they are immediately foUowed on the same roll by two other series of pleas, the last of which are entitled ' nova placita,' and were taken before other justiciers m that year, (Pipe Roll, 112.) Tsi 31 Henry IIL, II85, he and two others were the custodes of the see of Exeter while it was m the king's hands (Madox, i. 310), and ft was probably while he had that charge that he acted as a justice itinerant in the diocese. His death occurred about 1203, 6 John, {Le Neve, 276.) ' EICHAEDSON EICHAEDS, Richaed, son and heir of Thomas Richards of Coed in Merioneth shire, and Catherine, sister of the Rev, William Parry, warden of Ruthyn, was born at Dolgelly on November 5, 1752, and commenced his education at Ruthyn grammar school. Entering the society of the Inner Temple, he was called to the bar in 1780, By his marriage in 1785 with Catherine, the daughter of Robert Vaughan Humphreys, he became possessed of the estate of Caerynwch in the same county, of which she was the heiress. Shortly after he was appointed counsel to Queen Anne's Bounty, of wMch WiUiam Stevens was then treasurer, and was one of the mem bers, and ultimately president, of ' Nobody's Clu'b,' instituted m honour of that amiable gentleman. His principal practice w£is in the Court of Chancery. He formed an early friend.ship vrith Lord Eldon, and when promoted often sat for him as speaker of the House of Lords. But a long time elapsed before that promotion arrived, for, though he became successively Mng's coun sel and soUcitor-general to the queen, he was above sixt)' years old before he was appomted chief justice of Chester, m May I8I3, He went only one cfrcuit in that character, being raised to the bench as a baron of the Exchequer iu the foUowmg Februarjr, when he was knighted. From this position he was promoted to the head of the court in AprU 1817, He presided for the next five years and a half -with the reputation, though not of a briUiant lav^yer, yet of an excellent judge, leamed m his arguments and sound in Ms decisions. Few men have been more respected and esteemed in private life, so amiable and benevolent was his disposition ; yet so fearful was he that his temper might have the appearance of partiality that when fri comt he was apt to assume an asperity of manner that was whoUy opposed to his real character. He died on November II, 1828, lea-ring a large family, several of whom gained considerable eminence iu their father's pro fession. His eldest son became a master m Chancery, and was for many years the representative in parUament of his native county, (Gent. Mag. Jan, 1834; Life of Stevens [1859].) EICHAEDSON, John, was the third son of Anthony Richardson, a merchant of London, and was bom iu Copthall Court, Lothbm-y, on March 3, 1771, He com menced his education at Harrow, and finished it at University College, Oxford, where he took his degree of M,A, in 1796, havmg been assisted in his progress through the university by the benevolent aid atid steady patronage of Mr. Stevens, the worthy treasurer of Queen Anne's Bounty, He aided his patron in procuring the repeal of the penal statutes against the episcopal RICHARDSON clergy of Scotland, and was highly instru mental in forming a club to Mr, Stevens's honour, called ' Nobody's Club,' from the pseudonym under which that gentleman's various writings were published. The club still exists, and has numbered among its members men the most famous in Uterature, theology, and law, Ha-ring been entered at Lincoln's Inn in June 1793, he practised as a special pleader for several years, and was not called to the bar till June 1803, In the very next year he appeared as counsel for WUUam Cob- bett, who was defendant in an action 'brought by Mr. Plunkett, and again for Mm when indicted for pubUshing a libel against the lord lieutenant and lord chan cellor of Ireland, which was written by Mr. Justice Johnson of that counti-y. He also soon after argued ably, though unsuc cessfully, m support of the plea filed by that judge against the jurisdiction of the Court of Kmg's Bench, and afterwards on his trial in that court, (State Trials, xxix, 1, 63, 394, 423,) Joining the "Westem Circuit, both there and in "Westminster Hall he soon esta blished such a character for industry and legal leaming as secured to him competent encouragement. When to this was added experience and observation, he obtained the laborious and responsible office of adviser to the attomey and solicitor general, com monly denominated their ' devil,' So effi cient did he prove himself in this capacity, and so universally acknowledged were Ms superior attainments, that m November I8I8 he was selected -with the approbation of all to supply the vacant seat in the Court of Common Pleas, and in June fol lowing he was knighted. After filling this post vrith the reputation of one of the soundest lawyers of the time, he was com pelled by ill health to retire from ite la bours in May 1824, He lived nearly seventeen years after his resignation, several of which he spent in Malta, where he com posed a code of laws for that island. He died on March 19, 1841. That excellent judge Sir John Coleridge describes him in a lecture he deUvered in 1869 as 'a thorougMy instructed lawyer, an accomplished scholar, and a man of the soundest judgment — a tender-hearted. God fearing man.' (Life of Stevens; Gent Mag. July 1841.) EICHAEDSON, Thomas, the son of Dr. Thomas Richardson, a clergyman of Mul- barton, Norfolk, was born at Hardwick in the same county on July 8, 1669. Ad- nutted a member of LincoM's Inn, he was called to the bar in 1696, and was elected recorder, first of Bury, and afterwards of Noi-wich, having been previously under- steward of the dean and chapter of that cathedral. (Blomefield's Norfolk, i. 684.) EICHAEDSON 557 He was appointed reader of Lincoln's Inn in 1614, on occasion of his being called ser jeant. His next advance was to be chan cellor to the queen; and soon after her death, being elected member for St. Albans, he was chosen speaker of James's third parliament in January I62I, which was remarkable for the proceedings which re sulted in the disgrace of Lord ChanceUor Bacon, against whom Mr. Speaker Richard son had to demand the judgment of the Lords. During this parliament he received the honour of knighthood, and after two noisy sessions it was dissolved in December foUowing. (ParL Hist i. 1191-1371.) He was not replaced in the speaker's chair in the next parUament ; but on February 20, 1625, he received the appointment of king's serjeant. On the place of lord chief justice of the Common Pleas becoming vacant at the end of that year, eleven months were allowed to pass before it was filled up. It was then given to Sir Thomas Richardson on Novem ber 22, 1626, not without suspicion that its acquisition cost him 17,000/, (Yonge' s Diary, 97,) There is a letter in the State Paper Office (CaL [1626-6] 482) from the king dfrecting him as soon as he has the chief justiceship to admit one Edward Nicholas to a clerkship of the Treasury, an ciently called the clerk of HeU, which the chief justice of the Common Pleas had been used to appoint. This perhaps was one of the conditions of his advance; but his marriage in the next month -with his second wife, Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Thomas Beaumont, of Staughton in Leicestershire, and widow of Sir John Ashbumham, sister of the Duke of Buckingham's mother, more probably accounte for the elevation. When, two years afteiwards, the duke was assassi nated, Sir Thomas, on a question put to him by the Mng, whether the murderer might not be put to the rack, had the grati fication to convey the judges' unanimous opmion that torture was not known or allowed by the law. On two or three other occasions he showed himself moderate in his sentences and independent m his prin ciples (State Trials, in, 369-874); but he was considered by the parliament to 'be a favourer of the Jesuits. (Pari Hist. ii. 476.) After presiding for flve years in the Common Pleas, he was removed on October 24, 1631, to the chief justiceship of the King's Bench, where he sat durmg the remainder of his life. He died on Feb'ruary 4, 1636, and was buried in Westminister Abbey, where his monument may stUl be seen. Although esteemed a good lawyer,* he was not respected on the bench. Evelyn (i. 10) calls Mm 'that jeering judge;' and nodoubthecarriedMs incUnation to humour and jocularity too much mto court. The 558 RICKHILL chief justice was inclined to the Puritans. His sentence agamst Sherfield for breaking a painted glass window was more lenient than that of other members of the court ; and he made an order, while on the Somer setshire Circuit, to suppress wakes and other pastimes on Sundays. For this the bishops, who considered it an intrusion on their power, encouraged Archbishop Laud to complain ; and the chief justice received a reprimand from the council. ( Whiteloeke, 47,) Even then he could not refram from jokmg ; as he passed out he declared that ' the lawn sleeves had almost choked him.' To remove, perhaps, all suspicion of his principles, he was as violent and absurd as any of his colleagues in the Star Chamber, in the unjustifiable sentence pronounced shortly after against William Prynne for writing his ' Histrio-mastix,' (Rushworth, ii, 234, 248.) And upon Prynne's being brought before the council on a subsequent occasion, and the question being," whether he might go to church and be aUowed books, the chief justice, not being able to restiain his joke, said, 'Let him have the Book of Martyrs,for the Puritans do accoimt him a martyr.' WhUe attending at the assizes at Salis bury, a prisoner, whom he had condemned to'death for some felony, threw a brickbat at his head ; but, stooping at the time, it only knocked off Ms hat. On his friends congratulating him on his escape he said, ' You see, now, if I had been an uprigh-t judge I had been slaine,' The additional punishment upon this offender is thus curi ously recorded by Chief Justice Treby, in the margin of Dyer's Reports (p. 188, b) : — """ 'Richardson, C. J. de C, B. at Assizes at Salisbury in Summer I63I, fuit assault per Prisoner la condemne pur Felony; — que puis son condemnation ject un Brickbat a le dit' Justice, que narrowly mist, Et pm- ceo immediately fuit Indictment drawn pur Noy envers le Prisoner, et son dexter manus ampute et fixe al Gibbet, sm- que luy mesme immediatement hange in presence de Court,' By his first wife, Ursula, daughter of John Southwell, Esq,, of Barham Hall in Suffolk, he had a large family. His second wife. Lady Ashbumham, brought him no issue. She, in 1628, Sir Thomas being then chief justice of the Common Pleas, was created a baroness of Scotland, by the title of Lady Cramond, with remainder to his children, which became extinct in 1736, (CoUins's Peerage, iv. 253.) EICKHILL, William, is described by Sir Edward Coke as a native of Ireland, and by Hasted as estabUshmg himself in the county of Kent, and becommg possessed of the manor of Ridley there. He is first men tioned as one of the king's Serjeants in 1384, 7 Richard II, Five years afterwards, on EICKHILL May 20, 1389, he was constituted a judge ofithe Common Pleas, When the Mng's uncle, the Duke of Gloucester, was arrested and taken to Calais in July 1897, Sir WiUiam_ RickhUl was employed to take Ms deposition. He stetes that he was awakened in the middle of the night of September 7 at his house at Essmg- ham in Kent, by a Mng's messenger vrith a writ requiring him to go to Calais vrith the Earl of Nottingham, the captain of that town, and there to do as the earl should order him; and he was directed immediately to proceed to Dover. On his arrival at Calais another -writ was presented to him commanding him to hear aU that the Duke of Gloucester had to communicate, and to report the same to the king. Sir WiUiam was wholly at a loss to understand the object of this commission, as there had been a report of the duke's death for some time previously both m England and Calais. The earl, however, satisfymg him that the duke was stiU alive, Sfr WUUam had the precaution to insist on having two -witnesses present durmg the interrogatory. At his first mterview -with the royal prisoner Sfr WilUam requested that the duke would put in writmg what he had to say,'and keep one copy for himself. To this the duke agreed, and afterwards gave to Sfr WilUam mne articles to be taken to the Mng, at the same time soliciting the judge to retum the next day in case he should -wish to add any thmg to Ms communication. On the fol lowing morning, bemg refused admittence, RickhUl retumed to England, and made his report to the Mng, (!Rot. Pari in. 340.) The duke was soon after privately murdered, and so much of the articles which he had delivered to the judge as were deemed necessary were brought as his confession before parUament, That assembly, not withstanding his death, condemned him as a traitor, and adjudged all Ms lands, &c., to be forfeited. On the accession of Henry IV., September 80, 1899, Sir WUUam received a new patent for his place ; but on November 18 he was called upon by the parliament to answer before Chief Justice Clopton for his conduct in obtaming the duke's confession. He gave the ' round unvarnished tale ' related above, showing that he had merely executed the commission he had received, -without any previous knowledge of ite intent, and strictly in performance of his duty. The Lords could do no other than acqmt him. (Ibid. 342.) Resuming his seat on the bench, fines continued to be levied before him till Trinity Term 1407. (Dugdale's Orig. 46.) How soon after this he died does not appear; but William his eldest son was member of parliament for Kent in the followmg reign. (Hasted, i. 243, U. 460.) RIDEL EIDEL, Geoeeeet, was a baron in the mgn of Henry L, of whom very few par ticulars remam. The authority on which he is called chief justiciary of England is that of Henry of Hunting'dom, m his 'Epistle de Mundi Contemptu,' one copy of which, however, omits his name. This author gives the title to several parties who were acting as jus ticiaries at 'the same period, and may, per haps, have considered all those who sat judicially in the Aula Regis as entitled to that designation. The assertion in this m- stance certaiMy requires some confirmation, ¦especially as the chief authority was un doubtedly exercised by Roger, Bishop of Salisbury, during the greater part of the reign, Dugdale mentions him as united -with Robert Bloet, Bishop of LincoM, Ralph Basset, and others, in a commission to hear and determine a case relating to the privilege of sanctuary in the church of Ripon, and then adds that he succeeded Ralph Basset as justice of England. This, however, is not very probable, as Ralph Basset lived ¦several years after the death of Ridel. That event occurred in 1119, when he shared the fate of Prince William, who was dro-wned on Ms return fi-om Normandy. WilUam of Malmesbury, who relates the disaster, mentions among the sufferers ' da- piferi, camerai'ii, pincernse regis, ac multi proceres cum eis,' and would scarcely have omitted the name or the title of so im portant a personage as a chief justiciary .' He married Geva, the daughter of Hugh de Abrincis, Earl of Chester, by whom he left only a daughter, named Matilda, who married Richard Basset, the justiciary. Their eldest son assumed the name of Ridel, and the barony became extinct in the third generation, (Angl Sac ii, 701 ; Dugdale's !Baron. i. 566,) EIDEL, Geoeeeet (Bishop oe Elt), was, according to the accoimt of one writer {Allen's Yorkshire, vi. 164), a younger brother of the before-mentioned Eustace Fitz-John, but the authority is not suffi ciently distinct to be entirely depended on. He was one of the chaplains of Henry IL, and so much in the royal favour that, after Becket's elevation to the primacy, he was appomted Ms successor as archdeacon of Canterbury, about Christmas II62, He probably continued to be employed at court, for his name stands second ofthe ' assidentes justicise regis ' before whom, in II65, a charter between the abbots of St, Alban's and Westminster was executed in the Ex chequer, (Madox, i. 44.) He took a pro minent part in the king's contest with the archbishop, and was sent -vrith John of Oxford, in 1164, to the pope, to obtain his confirmation of the ancient customs and dignities of the realm ; and again, in 1169, EIDEWAEE 559 he was one of the ambassadors to the court of France, vrith the king's request that Becket, who had withdra-wn there, might not be permitted to remam. Both embassies were unsuccessful. The irritated primate included him m the excommunication which he pronounced in 1169 against several of the bishops and chief men of the Mngdom ; and in announcing the sentence to the Bishop of Hereford, he designated the archdeacon ' arohidiabolum et Antichrist! membrum.' On Henry's remonstrance, how ever, the pope's nuncios found it necessary to absolve him before the end of the year, he being one of those who personally a1^ tended the king, Geoffrey's favour at court increased -with Becket's oppression, and, accordingly, in the same year the custody of the see of Ely was placed in his hands, and so remained during ite vacancy, which lasted about four years. In II73 the bishopric iteelf was given to him ; but he was not admitted to it until he had made his solemn protestation, in the chapel of St, Catherme in WestnUnster, that he had been in no ways knowmgly accessory to the murder of the archbishop. In 1179 Bishop Geoffirey was appointed, with the Bishops of Winchester and Nor wich, to fill the office of chief justiciary; and on the division of the kingdom by the council of Windsor into four judicial cir- cmte these prelates were respectively placed at the head of three of them. (Dugdale's Orig. 20.) They were superseded the next year by the appointment of Ranulph de Glan-rille as sole justiciary, GeoffreAr ap pears, however, to have acted subseqvlently m court, as he was one of the justiciers before whom a fine was levied m 1182, (Hunter's Preface.) \ In the roU of I Richard I. (67) &c.) his pleas are recorded as a justice itinerant in no less than five counties. As, however he died on August 21, II89, m the interval between the death of King Henry and the coronation of King Richard, this circmt probably took place during the last months of Henry's reign. King Richard, finding that he had died intestate, appropriated to the expenses of the coronation the treasure he found in his coffers. The cognomen ' superbus,' which he ac quired, is stated to have been given from the arrogance of his disposition and his want of affabUity, The history of Ely re lates that his tomb was violated, and that his successor, WiUiam de Longchamp, ou the day of Ms enthromsation, ascended'the pulpit, and, with the other bishops present, excommunicated aU those who had com mitted or consented to the sacrUege, (God win, 251 ; Angl Sac i. 631 ; Madox, i. 307 ; Lord LytteUon ; Hasted.) EIDE'WAEE, William de, only occurs 560 RIGBY as one of the justices itinerant with William Briwer and Simon Basset, fixing the tallage for the counties of Nottingham and Derby in 9 Richard I., 1197-8 (Madox, i. 733) ; and in I John he is one of the pledges for the payment of a fine to the king in North amptonshire. (Rot de Oblatis, 3.) EIGBY, AiEXANDEE, ' That Colonel Rigby be a baron of the Exchequer ' is the curious entry of .Tune I, 1649, in White locke's 'Memorials' (406), It appears, how ever, that he was bred a lawyer, and took up arms on behalf of the parUament at the earliest stage of the troubles. He was of a Lancashire family, then and now seated at Middleton, and was probably the son of another Alexander Rigby, clerk of the peace in Lancashire in 16ll. (CaL State Papers [1611-18], 100.) Elected member for Wigan in that county in the Long Parli ament of 1640, he distinguished himself by moving, in a violent speech, plentifully in terspersed -with scraps of Latin and Biblical quotations, that Lord Keeper Finch should 'be accused of high treason. Made a colonel by the parliament, and entrusted with the command of the Lancashire forces, his first exploit was routing a party of the king's near Thurland Castle in 1643, and taking 400 prisoners and their commander-in-chief ; which, says WMtelocke, 'was the more discoursed of because Rigby was a lawyer,' His next service is in the lengthened siege of Latham House, just before the battle of Marston Moor ; and immediately after he was appointed one of the commissioners for execu'ting martial law. In the ' Mystery of the Good Old Cause ' he is said to have been governor of Boston, When the death of the king rendered the miUtary assistance of Colonel Rigby no longer necessary the parliament raised him to the bench as a baron of the Exchequer, (ParL Hist U. 611, 692, iii. 286, 1607; Whiteloeke, 77, 98, 406.) He retained his judicial dignity little more than a year, dying on August 18, 1650, of an infection taken at Croydon on the circmt. (Peck's Desid. C. b. xiv. 23.) He married t-wice. His first wife was Margaret, daughter of Sir Gilbert Hoghton, Bart. ; his second was Anna, daughter of John Gobert, Esq., and widow of Thomas Legh, Esq. By both he had a large family. (Wotton's Baronet i. 20, 162.) EIPAEIIS, Robeet de (Rivers), is re corded once as a justice itinerant in 86 Henry IIL, 1252, into Berkshire, Oxford, and Northampton ; and as the under-noticed Walter lived in the first-named of these counties, it is not unlikely that Robert was his son, and that both in succession were placed in the commission on account of their residence within it. EIPAEIIS, Waltee de, is no further no ticed than that he was one of those appointed EIVALLIS in 1 Henry III. to assess and receive the- hidage of Berkshire. (Rot. Claus. i. 306,) His possessions in that county were no doubt the cause of his being selected to act as a justice itinerant in it in 3 Henry HI, EI-VALLIS, Petee de, who is sometimes^ called de Orivallis, was a Poicterin by birth, and Roger de Wendover plainly describes^ him as the son of Peter de Rupibus, Bishop of Winchester, Other writers more deli cately describe him as the nephew of that powerful prelate ; and of course he is sO' designated in any record where their con nection is alluded to. Whatever was the real relationship, he soon experienced the benefit arising from such patronage. So- early as 6 John, 1204, that kmg presented to him all the churches which GUbert de Beseby, deceased, held m LmcoM.shire of his donation. (Rot. Pat. 48.) He is not mentioned during the remainder of that reign ; but in 3 Henry HL, 1218, he was one of the Mng's chamberlams, and was a clerk in the wardrobe. (Rot. Claus. i. 883, &c.) In 1232 he is recorded as custos of the escheats and wards (Excerpt, e Rot. Mn. i. 225-252) ; and in the next year his patron, the Bishop of Wmchester, procured for him the high appointment of treasurer. (Madox, ii, 84.) About the same time he signed himself ' Capicerio Pictavise,' (Ibid. i. 66.) He now so effectuaUy ingratiated Mmself with the kmg that to this high office several others of great responsibUity and emolument were added, among which were those of custos of the foreste, and of most of the castles in England. But the dismissal of the old mmisters, and the substitution of Poicte-rins for all the fiu-mer officers, natu rally disgusted the nobles and the people, and led to a reaction, which produced the disgrace of the bishop, his father, in April 1234, and his own expulsion from court, with a threat that, if he did not resume the tonsure, he should lose both Ms eyes. He fled with the bishop to Winchester ; but, being summoned before the Mng to render an account of his mimstry, he appeared ' m habitu clericali cum tonsura et late corona.' His answers were so unsatisfactory that he was made to give up aU his possessions, and was sent to the Tower, from which, how ever, he was shortly released by the Arch bishop of Canterbury, and allowed to return to his sanctuary at Winchester, From this retirement he was suddenly recaUed in 1236, and, notwithstanding all his former offences, was restored to the royal confldence. He resumed his original duties in the wardrobe, of which hewas appointed keeper, and in 1261 he had a quittance from aU debts and accoimts to be rendered to the king from the time he flrst had the custody of the wardrobe till that date. (Ibid, ii, 230.) It was probably in tbis character that the GreatSeal was committed to him in conjunc- ROBERT iidH -witli 'VVilUain de KilkeUriy in 1249, ¦When John de Lexinton retired from court, tne wardrobe being a usual place of deposit- lug the Seal when the chancellorship -was vacant, Ttei'e is nothing to show that Peter de Rivallis was conceriied in the Chancery, nor that he acted in the office. In Februtoy 1249 he was one of the king's counfcil sent to receive the tallage of the city of London, and on July 16, 12.55, he was constituted a baron of the Exchequer, retainMg Ms place at the wardrobe. (Madd.v, i. 7l2, li. 17; PeU Records, in. 39, 40.) Matthew Paris relates that about Michael mas 1257 he was again appointed treasurer of the chaniber on the death of Hurtaldus, but probably soon after died, as the last notice of his name occurs in a royal grant to hiin in May 1268 of a piece of land in 'Wihchester. (Holinshed, iv. 289 ; R, de Weridtnier, iv, 244-813 ; Excerpt e Rot. Fin. U. 279.) bOBEET (Eael oe Moeeion or Moe- ¦TAGNE, and Eael of Coenwall). Ar lotta, the mistress of Robert Duke of Normandy, and mother of William the Conqueror, afterwards married Herluin de Conteville, the founder of the abbey of Crestein, and had by him t-wo sons, the eldest of -whom was this Robert, and the youngest was Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, Robert received from Duke WiUiam the barony of Bourgh and the earldom of More- ton or Mortagne in Normandy, When the invasion of England was pro jected, Robert greatly promoted the expe dition, and assisted in the triumph of his brother, bearing the banner of St, Michael before him in the battle. As a warrior, he would not have been overlooked by the generosity of William ; but, consideiing even is relationship to the Conqueror, his share in the spoil seems enormous. He not only was created Earl of Comwall, but received vast possessions in various counties, amount ing, it is stated, to no less than 973 manors. Although he is described as somewhat heavy in intellect, yet, -with these proofs of the king's affection, it is not unlikely that he should have been appointed, ih conjunction with Archbishop Lanfranc, and Geoffrey, Bishop of Coutence, to the office of chief justiciary during some part of this reign, as Dugdale supposes from several precepts having been discovered which appear to bear that interpretation. It is believed that he outlived the Con queror, and died about 1090. His remains were buried in the church of Bermondsey) where he had a mansion. By his vrife, Maud, the daughter of Roger de Montgomery, Earl of Shrewsbury, he left a son William, who succeeded to both his earldoms; but,having joined -with Duke Robert against King Henry I., and been defeated at Tenchebrai in li06, he died in RocKester 561 prison, suffering in addition the omel depri vation of his eyes. (Will, Malm. Gesta, 456; Baronage, i. 24; Hutchins's Dot-sit, i. 'SI.) %0C£LI^£ is mentioiied in no forUaer list as a vice-chancellor to Richard L, but there are three royal charters in the ' Mo nasticon ' (v, 372, 456, 625), giv'en under the hand of ' Magistri RoceUni, tunc agentis vices Cancellarii nostri,' all dated at Rupes Andeli, in 10 Richard I. — ^one on November II, II98 ; another on December 9, 1198 ; and the third on February 3, 1199. EOCHE, Thomas, is only kno'wn as being appointed fourth baron of the Exchequer in Michaelmas, 3 Henry VIL, 1487. He probably retained his place till 1604, when John Alleyn became fourth baron. (Ex- cliequei- Books.) BOCHESTEE, Solomon de, or, as his name is usuaUy abbreviated, Solomon de Roff, was oile of the canons of St. Paul's. He was flrst selected as a justice itinerant to assist the regular judges in 2 Edward I., 1274, when he acted in Middlesex, and m the foUo'wing year in Worcestershire. In 1276 he is called by Dugdale one of the justices of assize, but there was not at that time any distinction between the two classes; and two years afterwards his name again appears among the jnstices itinerant, and so continues till 1287, on the last occasion being placed at the head ofthe Ust. (Dug dale's Orig. 21.) In this position he is named in various documents among the Rolls of Parliament as actmg for the two following years. (Rot. ParL i. 42, 48, &c,) These rolls contain several complaints against him by parties in the country, but they probably were the consequence, not the cause, of the disgrace which he shared -with most of his judicial brethren m 1289. The corruption charged agamst him must have been of a far deeper dye than those complaints exhibit, for he was compeUed to pay a flne of no less than 4000 marks before he was discharged from his im prisonment. There is no evidence of his having been allowed to resume his duties as a judge, and the only other published record con- ceming him is a presentation made to the justices itinerant in Kent of his being poisoned at his house at Snodland in that county by Master Wynand, the parson of the parish, ' on August 14, 1298. (Abh. Placit 200.) Sir Edward Coke, however, in pronouncing the sentence ¦ against Sir ,Tohn Hollis and others, tried in the Star Chamber in 1616, for traducing the public justice, refers to this case, and states that the prayer of the monk (as he calls him) to be delivered to the censure of the Church was denied, ' because the same was a wrong to the state to poison a judge,' (State Trials, ii. 1031.) But the entry by no 0 0 562 RODBOROUGH means supporte Sir Edward either in his fact or his inference. Solomon de Rochester is not mentioned in it as a judge, nor is any reference made to his having filled that office ; and though it appears that the kmg refused at first to deliver the delinquent to the Bishop of Rochester, it was because he had shown too great a desire to procure his liberation and to purge him from the charge, Wynand was therefore handed over to the church of Canterbury, the archbishopric being then vacant, but eventually was actually given up to the Bishop of Ro chester. The result of the investigation does not appear. EODBOEOUGH, MiLO DB, took his name from that town in Gloucestershire, but was apparently resident in Worcestershire in the early part of the reign of Edward IL, as in the third year he was one of the assessors and collectors in that county of the twenty-fifth which was granted by par liament, and was also in a local judicial com mission therein. In the next year, 1310, he was the last named of the three justices of ,'issize appointed for both these counties aud three neighbouring ones. In May 1311 a commission was issued into Gloucestershire to four justices to hear the complaints made against him in a petition from the men of that countv, charging him -with many acts of oppression, corruption, and malversation in the execution of his office. The result of this enquiry does not appear, but it may be presumed to have been favourable to him, inasmuch as in the two foUowing years he was responsibly employed, and in the latter was one of three assigned to talliate the cities, &o., in the same five counties. He died in 7 Edward II. (Pari. Writs, ii. p, ii, 1844 ; Abb. Rot Orig. i. 205.) EODES, Feancis, was a descendant from Gerard de Rodes, of Horncastle in Lin colnshire, a powerful baron in the reign, of Henry IL, whose family eventually settled in Derbyshire, He was the son of John Rodes, Esq,, of Staveley Woodthorpe, and of Attelin a, daughter of Thomas Hewitt, of Walles in Yorkshire. Bom about 1634, he was educated at St. John's College, Cambridge, and being admitted a'mem'ber of Gray's Inn, he was called to the bar in 1552, arriving at the dignity of reader in 1666, and again in 1576, In Hilary Term 1578 he was advanced to the degree of the coif, and on August 21, 1682, was made queen's serjeant. His elevation to the bench as ajudge of the Common Pleas is dated June 29, 1685, and the last fine which was acknowledged before him was in November 1688, (Dugdale's Orig. 48, 294.) In the following year he died at Staveley Wood thorpe, lea-ring issue by both of his mar riages. His first -wife was Elizabeth, daughter of Brian Sandford, Esq,, of Thorpe Salvine in Yorkshire ; and his second was ROGER Mary, daughter of Francis Charlton, Esq., of Appley in Shropshire. His eldest son, John, who was knighted and served as sheriff of Derbyshire, was the father of Francis, whom Charles I. raised to the baronetcy in 1641, a title which became extinct in 1743. (Wotton's Baronet ii.255.) BOGEE (Bishop oe Salisbuet) was curate of a small church in the neighbour hood of Caen, and is said to have m- gratiated himself -with Henry by the celerity with which he despatched the ser- -rice when the prmce and his foUowers chanced to be present. From that time he becamed attached to the fortunes of the prince, who, though the apparent motive for the selection was not very commend able, had no reason to regret in after years the confidence he reposed m him. Roger became an active and zealous servant, and, by the dexterous manage ment of whatever business he was engaged in, so endeared himself to Henry during his adversity that when he mounted the throne of England he not only enriched him -with many preferments, but advanced him to the highest employmente. In the flrst or second year of Henry's reign he was appointed chanceUor, suc ceeding "^'illiam Giffard. Thynne, and after him Spelman and PhiUpot, place him in the same office m 1107, and agam at the end of the reign. But, taking the charters as the best authority, it appears from them that he did not retain the Great Seal long after he was appomted Bishop of Salisbury, which was on April 18, II02. In the ' Monasticon ' there are six charters with his name as chanceUor, four of which are before he was bishop, the earUest being dated m September 1101, and two only with the addition of his episcopal title. (Monast i. 164, 521, U, 145, iv. 16, 17, v. 1II4.) Ll Mai-ch 1108 WilUam Giffard was again m office, and from that time to the end of the reign there is a regular suc cession of other chancellors. Whatever was the position he held m the state, there is Uttle doubt that from a very early period the whole of the business of the Mngdom was submitted to his care, the treasures , were in his keeping, and the expenses under his regulation. That he was well versed in the knowledge of the Exchequer is proved by the author of the ancient 'Dialogus de Scaccario,' Richard Fitz-Nigel, who, though his grand-nephew, yet, -writing nearly forty years after his death, may be fairly trusted when describ ing his official character. He calls him 'vir prudens, consiliis providus, sermone discretus, et ad maxima queeque negotia per Dei gratiam repente prDecipuus;' and adds, 'Hie igitiir, succresceuti in eum principis, ac cleri, populique favore, Saris- buriensis Episcopus factus, maximis in ROGER regno fungebatur honoribus, et de Scaccario plurimuni habmt scientiam : adeo ut non sit ambigiium, sed ex ipsis Rotulis mam- festum, plurimum sub eo floruisse!' Part of his duty as chancellor was to attend to the busmess of the revenue, but it was peculiarly so in the offices of treasurer and chief justiciary or president of the Exchequer, in which he was afterwards placed. It is probable that he was not in vested -with the latter tiU the year 1107, because, having been offered that charge immediately after his appointment to the prelacy, he would not consent to accept it, deeming a judicial office mcompatible with his episcopal functions, without the autho rity of the pope and the archbishop. Al though, therefore, his election to the bishopric took place in April 1102, yet, bemg one of those whose consecrations were in abeyance pending the contest be tween the king and Anselm, his scruples could not be removed tiU that dispute was accommodated. This did not occur till 1 107, on August II m which year his con secration took place. From this period, therefore, we may consider him in full power, presiding over the admimstration of justice, and regu lating the revenue of the realm and the affairs of the state. The suppression of those violations of the law which were prevalent in the last reign, the improve ment in the purity of the coin, the punish ment of the oppression of the royal pur veyors, were the results of his wise and considerate counsels ; and, though the whole government of the Mngdom was en trusted to him in the frequent and long- contmued absences of the king in Nor mandy, no contemporary historian hints a doubt of Ms integrity, and no fact is re corded which can raise a suspicion that his ministry was distasteful to the people. His conduct was equally satisfactory to his sovereign, who never -withdrew his con fidence nor neglected to bestow upon him substantial marks of his favour. Among others, his two nephews, Alexander and Nigel, were invested with the bishoprics of Lincoln (in 1123) and Ely (m II33) ; and to Ms own care was entrusted the safe custody of the king's brother Robert, the captive Duke of Normandy. When King Henry was anxious to msure the succession of the kingdom to his daughter the em press, Roger not only joined with the other nobles in taMng the oath of fealty to Matilda on this occasion, but overcame the scruples of some who were unwilling to do so. Yet no sooner was King Henry dead than, setting aside his oath, from which he pretended the subsequent marriage of the empress with Geoffrey Earl of Anjou, without the consent of the peers, had absolved him, he aided Stephen in his as- ROGER- 563 sumption of the crown. Stephen, however, entertamed doubte of his fldeUty, wMch he at flrst endeavoured to secure by numerous favours, continuing him, in some of his offices, either as chief justiciary or treasurer, presenting him -with the borough of Malmes bury, and conferrmg on his son, Roger, the office of chanceUor. Thynne and some others place the bishop himself as chan cellor in the early part of Stephen's reign ; but they evidently confound him with his son Roger, as both their names appear on three charters of the flrst year, the one being designated as bishop, and the other as chancellor. The kmg's jealousy was at last excited by the representations made to him that the magnitude and strength of the castles built by the bishop at Devizes, Malmesbury, and SMrbum, and the additions he had made to that of SaUsbury, were intended to support the cause of Matilda, whenever he should flnd an opportunity to declare for her. Whether the king really beUeved these suggestions, or whether, being now, as he imagined, firmly seated on the throne, he forgot the assistance he had received in his anxiety to obtain possession of the bishop's wealth, may well be doubted, " He determmed, however, to seize his castles and his property on the first opportunity. This was soon contrived. In June 1189 the reluctant bishop was compelled to attend a council at Oxford, where, on a pretended quarrel between his servants and those of the Earl of Brittany, the king- required him, in satisfaction for the breach of the peace, to give up his castles as pledges of his fealty, and thereupon com mitted him and his son Roger, the chan cellor, and his nephew Alexander, Bishop of Lincoln, to close custody until this should have been done. His other nephew, Nigel, Bishop of Ely, suspecting to what these proceedings tended, fled, and shut himself up in his uncle's castle of Devizes, which he refused to surrender. The king immediately marched thither, taking his prisoners with him, and, havmg erected a gibbet in front of the walls, pronounced in the presence of Bishop Roger sentence of death upon his son, which he declared should be forthwith executed unless the gates were 'opened to him. Nigel, regard less of the entreaties of his uncle, persisted notwithstanding in his refusal, and the king directed the sentence to be executed. The victim ascended the scaffold, and the rope was adjusted, when Bishop Roger, horrified that his son should be so mur dered, threw himself at the Mng's feet, and bound Mmself by an oath, if his son were saved, to taste no food till the royal mandate was obeyed. Nigel at last unwil lingly submitted, but not tUl his uncle had endured three days' fast, . 0 o2 564 ROKEBY The king, on taking possession of the castle, appropriated to Ms own use a trea sure of 40,000 marks, besides an immense quantity of plate and jewels which he found there. A council was held at Winchester to examine into this extraordinary affair, and others of a similar character affecting the bishops and clergy, at which Bishop Roger made his last appearance in public life. The Mng was represented at it by certain earls, and his claim was defended by Alberic de Vere, then renowned in the law. No thing, however, could be done against the power of Stephen, who retained the posses sions he had thus acquired. The unfortunate bishop, either through grief at his loss, or from the effect of his long fasting, was soon after seized -with a quartan ague, of which he died on December 4, II39, As Ms death approached, he directed the small remainder of his wealth to be placed on the altar of his church, devoting it to the completion [of the build ing ; but even this he had the mortification of hearing was seized and taken away bv the king's orders. While in the conduct of public business, he is stated to have invariably devoted his mornings to the performance of his epis copal duties, and he grudged no expense in the renovation and ornament of his cathe dral. He was seated at Salisbury more than thirty-two years ; his remains were deposited there, and his memory was re garded with such high estimation that he is usuaUy named vrith the addition of 'Magnus.' (Madox, i. 33, 78, ii. 381; Godwin, 337 ; Angl Sac. ii. 700; Wendover, ii. 183, &c. ; Malmesbury, 686, &c. ; Lord Lyttelton; Lingard, Sec.) 'eOKEBY, Thomas. As the knightly deeds of the holise of Rokeby, illustrious^ both in council and in camp, have been fully recorded in ancient annals and modem verse, the legal honours by which the family was distinguished ought not to be forgotten. Sir Thomas Rokeby was lord justice of Ireland in the reign of Edward III, ; WilUam Rokeby, Archbishop of Dublin, was lord chancellor of that king dom under Heni-j' VII. and VIII. ; Dr, John Rokeby, a famous civilian, became vicar-general of the province of York in the reign of the latter king ; Ralph Roke- ^J, l)y his eminence as a la-wyer, received the dignity of the coif from Edward VI, ; and Thomas Rokeby, -whose career is now to be ti-aced, was elevated to the Eno-Ush bench in the reign of WilUam and Mary, ¦The Rokebys were a very prolific race, and the family was multipUed into nume rous branches, most of whom settied in various parts of Yorkshire, WilUam Roke by of Skiers was honoured in 1661 -with a baronetcy, which became extinct in 1678 ; EOKEBY and his brother, Thomas Rokeby of Bamby,, after havmg had eleven cMldren by Eliza beth, sister of Sir WiUiam Bury of Grant ham, was killed at the battle of Dunbar in 1650. Thomas, the future judge, was the^ second of his sons. Bom about 1632, he was educated at Catherine CoUege, Cam bridge, and took his degree of B.A. in January 1660, becoming a fellow of the coUege at the following Christmas. To wards its new buildings in 1674 he contri buted 20/,, and bound himself to pay 5/, a year during his life towards the discharge of certain annuities to persons who had advanced money for the completion of the works. He qualified Mmself for legal honours at Gray's Inn, was caUed to the bar in June 1657, and became an ancient in 1676. When not engaged m term he took up his residence at York, and engrossed much of the practice of that and the neighbouring counties, being the chief adviser of the Puritans of the north, of whose religious opmions he was a zealous and consistent supporter. He seems to have beenm some way connected vrith the court of CromweU,. for he himself relates (as Dr. Henry Samp son records m Ms Diary) that he was present when the Duke of Creqm was received by Cromwell at the Banqueting House as ambassador from the -French king, and deUvered a letter to Mm super scribed ' To his most Serene Highness OUver, Lord Protector of England, France, and Ireland,' CromweU, lookmg at the address, tumed upon his heel, and put the letter in his pocket vrithout readmg it. The indignant ambassador, on enqmring the cause of this insult, found that the- offence was that the letter was not dfrected ' To our dear Brother, OUver,' on hearing which the great Louis felt it expedient to comply, ( Gent Mag. AprU 1861 , p, 386,) In the last months of the reign of James II, he took an important part in the great movement at York in favour of the Piince of Orange. His kno-wn principles, Ms high character, and probably a desire to con ciliate the Presbyterian party, pomted Mm out for selection as one of the first judges at the revolution. He ¦¦vas accordmgly placed in the Common Pleas on May 8, 1689, his Serjeant's rmg bearing the appro priate motto ' Veniimdo restituit rem,' He soon after received the honour of knight hood. After sitting: for six years and a half in the Common Pleas, he was removed on October 29, 1696, to the King's Bench, where he remained tiU his death, on No vember 26, 1699, He was buried at Sandal, near Doncaster, -where a sumptuous monu ment was erected to his memory in the chapel of Archbishop Rokeby, His excellence as a man, his piety as a Christian, and his uprightiiess as a judge ROKELE -are exemplified by his Diary and the corre- .spondence which has come down to us. He married Ursula, daughter of James Danby, of New Buildmg (formerly Kirby Knowle Castle), near Thfrsk, who brought Mm no issue. (Memoir of Judge Rokeby, 38, 56, in Surtees Soc Public for 1860; LuttreU, i. 529, Ui. 643, iv. 587.) EOKELE, Robeet de, was of a family- wMch, according to Hasted; originally came from Rochelle in France, and was settled in Kent, where they held the manor of Beckenham. In another place, however, lie says that they received their name from the parish of Rokesle (now Ruxley) in that county. The latter seems the more pro bable account ; for it appears that Robert ¦de Rokele had land in Rokesle, which, m consequence of his joining the msurgent ba rons, and being taken prisoner m Rochester Castle in 17 John, was forfeited vrith Ms other possessions. His mother, Margaret de Modingden, negotiated his release, which .she succeeded in procurmg in the follow ing May, on the payment of a fine of flve hundred marks, his two sons, Henry and Richard, becoming hostages for his good behaviour. (Rot Pat. I6I-I99; Rot de Finibus, 696, 604; !Rot. Claus. i. 267.) In_ 18 Hem-y IIL, July 6, 1234, he was ,admitted as one of the king's justices of the bench; but he does not appear to have jomed any of the circuits. He died about 1248, (Excerpt e Rot Fin. U. 40 ; Hasted, i. 529, U. 134.) EOLPE, Robeet Monset (Lokd Cean- woeih), was of a famUy which has held a respectable position m the county of Norfolk for the last three centuries, and Ms ances tors for three generations have been bene ficed clergymen in it. His grandfather, the Rev. Robert Rolfe, rector of HUborough, by his marriage into the Nelson family be came connected with the gaUant admiral, who was flrst cousm of the lord chanceUor's father, the Rev. Edmimd Rolfe, rector of 'Cockley-Clay. His mother was Jemima, daughter of WilUam Alexander, Esq,, and granddaughter ofthe celebrated Dr. Mousey, physician to Chelsea Hospital, He was the elder of their two sons, and was bom at Cranworth on December 18, 1790, After spending some little time at the Bury school he was sent to Winchester, from whence he proceeded to Trinity Col lege, Cambridge, He took his degree as seventeenth wrangler in 1812, and was then elected fellow of Downing CoUege. CaUed to the bar by LincoM's Inn in 1816, he re ceived, after sixteen years' practice as a junior barrister in Chancerj', the honour of a siUc gown in 1832, and entered parliament in the same year as member for Penryn, Supporting there the liberal side of politics, he was appointed solicitor-general on No vember 6, 1834, but was obliged in little RGLLE; 565 more than a month to give place to Sir WiUiam Webb FoUett, on the accession to power of the conservative party. But at the end of six months more he was restored to his place with the retum of the whigs to power, and was then knighted. He con tinued solicitor-general from May 4, 1886, to the end of November 1839; when he was raised to the bench of the Exchequer. Though he had only practised as a barrister in the Comt of Chancery, he had acquired experience in cases at Nisi Prius and crimin al law as recorder of Ipsvrich, an office which he had held for many years. To this is to be attributed the facility -with which he entered on his new duties, and the excellent manner in which he discharged them. During the eleven years that he sat m tho Exchequer he acted, from June 19 to July 16, 1850, as one of the commissioners of the Great Seal, aud on November 3 he was con stituted the thfrd vice-chanceUor. In the foUovring month he was created Lord Cran worth, being the flrst and only instance of a vice-chancellor receivmg the digmty of the peerage. In the next year the act passed for constituting two lord justices of appeal in Chancery; and on October 8, 185I, Sir James Lewis Knight-Bruce and Lord Cranworth were the first two selected for the experiment. Before fifteen months were passed he was called upon to take a still higher office. On the resumption of power by the Uberal party, the Great Seal, on December 28, 1852, was placed in his hands, where it re mained for the five years durmg which they conducted the admmistration. On the accession of Lord Derby m February 1868 he of course resigned his office, and was not replaced in it when Lord Palmerston, in June 1859, became prime minister, his increased age inducmg Mm not to resist the claims of Sir Richard Bethell, after wards Lord Westbury. In temporary re tirement he devoted himself to hearing- appeals both in the House of Lords and the privy council, tUl the end of the session of 1865, when, on the resignation of Lord Westbury, he accepted the Seal for the second time on July 7. The conseivative ministry acceding to power in the foUow ing year, he of course again retfred from office on July 6, 1867. Continuing his legislative and judicial duties till less that a week before his death, he succumbed to the tremendous heat of the weather on July 26, 1868, when from failure of issue the title became extinct. He married Laura, daughter of William Carr, Esq., of Frognal, Middlesex. EOLLE, Henet. The founder of the opulent family of RoUe was a merchant in London, who acquired a large fortune in the reign of Henry VHL, and settled him self at Stevenstone in Devonshfre. To a 566 EOLLE descendant of his second son, George, the barony of RoUe of Stevenstone was granted in 1748, but the title became extanct in 1842. The judge was the grandson of the merchant's fourth son, Henry, whose eldest son, Robert, married Joan, the daughter of Thomas Hele, of Fleet in the same county, and left four sons, the second of whom was the judge. Henry RoUe was born at Heanton- Sachevil in Devonshire, about 1589, and was sent to Exeter College, Oxford. From thence he went to the Inner Temple, where he was called to the bar ; and, practising in the King's Bench, his name is of frequent occurrence in the Reports after Michaelmas Term 1629, the arguments of the juniors being frequently omitted by the reporters. He had used his time well in reporting the cases of James's reign, which were pub lished after his death, and are still in con siderable repute. That he had acquired too some eminence at an earlier period is manifest from his being selected as member of the last parliament,of James L, represent ing KeUington, and of the ffrst three par liaments of Charles I., in which he repre sented Truro, He took the popular side from the commencement of Ms poUtical career, in the first parliament of Charles urging a redress of grievances, and m the second arguing in the case of the Duke of Buckingham that common fame was a suf ficient ground for accusation, (Pari. Hist U, 35, 55,) He subsequently devoted himself wholly to his profession, and was fully engaged in the courte. Four times appointed reader of his inn, he was prevented by the pre vailing plague from performing the duties of that office tiU the last occasion in Lent 1689 ; but during his leisure he employed himself in compiling that 'Abridgment of Cases and Resolutions of the Law,' which has been held up by some of the ablest la-wyers as an example to be followed for its perspicuity and method. In May 1640 he was made a serjeant-at-law. He contributed 100/. in 1642 for the de fence of the parliament against the king, and, siding with the Puritans, he took the covenant, and was in such esteem that he was recommended as ajudge of the King's Bench on the propositions for peace which the two houses made to the king on February 1, 1642-3, (Clarendon, Ui. 407.) After they had assumed the government, one of their first legal appointments, on September 30, 1645, was of Mr. Serjeant RoUe to that office, which he fiUed'for three years, when, on October 12, 1648, the Commons voted liim to be chief justice of the same court. The king's decapitation soon followed, and RoUe was one of the six judges who ac cepted a renewal of their commission on the condition that 'they should proceed EOLT according to the fundamental laws of the' kingdom. He was also nominated a mem ber of the council of state; and, in his charges to the grand jury on his diff'erent circuite, he endeavoured to settle the peo ple's minds m regard to the existmg govern ment. When Cromwell was made protector, the chief justice was appointed m 1664 one. of the commissioners of the Exchequer., (Whiteloeke, 174-397; Style's Reports, 140.)i In that year, bemg surprised at Salisbmy ' by the party of royalists who had seized, the town, he narrowly escaped being hanged, but was permitted to depart with the loss of his commission of assize. His refusal to assist in trying the delinquents when taken, on the ground of his bemg a party con cerned, offended CromweU, who soon found further cause to be dissatisfied with his chief justice, as too honest a man to be relied upon m the impositions he attempted to raise -without the consent of parUament, One Cony having refused to pay the cus toms charged on him, and bemg com mitted by Cromwell to prison, appUed for his Habeas Corpus. His counsel were arbi- traiily sent to the Tower for advocating Ms cause ; and he was obUged to plead for him self. This he did so stoutly and with so much reason that the chief justice, afi-aid of resisting the ruling powers, yet too con scientious to give judgment against Cony, delayed his decision till the next term. In the meantime, fearing that this was only the beginning of simUar Ulegal measures, he applied to the protector for his qmetus, which was wUUngly granted on June 7, 1655, and Serj eant Glynne was put in his> place. (Clarendon, yU. 144, 294.) Sir Matthew Hale, who edited his 'Abridg ment,' in the preface to that work speaks in the highest terms of his character as a judge, enlargmg on his 'great leammg and experience, his profound judgment, his great moderation, justice, and mtegrity, his patience in hearing, and his readmess and despatch m decidmg; and "even royaUsts allowed his honesty on the judicial seat. He survived his retfrement Uttle more than a year, and died on July 80, 1656. He was buried in the church of Shap-wick, near Glastonbury, in Somersetshire, where he had a mansion. His son. Sir Francis RoUe, of Tuderley in Hampshire, represented that county in the parliament summoned to meet at Ox ford m 1681 ; but the famUy of the chief justice failed in two other generations, his great-grandsons dying- without issue, and leavin^the estates to the father of the first Lord RoUe, (Wood's Athen. Oxon. iii,. 416 ; CoUins's Peei-age, viii, 519,) EOLT, John, of Ozlewol'thPark,Wotton- llnder-Edg'e, Gloucestershire, whose retire ment from his recently acquired honours, occasioned by the sudden prostration of his ROMILLY powers, is still the subject of lamentation and regret to the bar and the public, is the son of John Rolt, an architect and mer chant at Calcutta, He was born there on October 6, 1804, His mother was the widow of Mr, Brundson, one of the mis sionaries noticed in 'Masterman's Memoirs,' His parents died very soon after he was sent to England in 1810 ; and, as he was left almost without resources, he was educated at private schools with a view to trade, in which he was employed till 1826, when he became clerk to a proctor in Doctors' Commons. Remaining there for nearly seven years, he boldly entered the other branch of the profession, and was ad mitted to the Inner Temple in 1888. His call to the bar is dated June 9, 1887, havmg been in the interim a pupil of that eminent barrister Mr. Sutton Sharpe. Practising in the equity courts, his merits were so quicMy acknowledged th.it he was made a queen's counsel m 1846. From that date tor twenty years he was one of the most distinguished and most successful leaders at the Chancery bar. During ite progress, after two failures to re present Stamford and Bridport, he obtained a seat m parUament as member for West Gloucestershire in 1857, which he retained till he was raised to the judicial bench. On October 9, 1866, he was appointed attorney-general and knighted ; and in less than ten months was promoted to the dignity of lord justice of appeal, on July 22, 1867, Soon after he was seized with an ilMess so severe that he felt himself com pelled to resign his appointment, and Ms successor, Sir Charles Jasper Selwyn (whose death occurred shortly afterwards), received his patent on February 8, 1868, Sir John's first wife was Sarah, daughter and coheir of Thomas Bosworth, Esq., of Bosworth in Leicestershire ; and his second was EUzabeth, daughter of Stephen Godson, of Croydon, EOMILLY, John (Loed Romillt), is the present master of the Rolls, To him the literary world owes a deep debt of gratitude, not only for the energetic manner iu which he has carried out and completed the great undertaMng so worthily commenced by his predecessor, Lord Langdale, and rendered the pubUc records,, poUtical, domestic, and legal, accessible to all; but also for the ready aid and increased facUitieshe has given to those who are pursuing historical enquiries. The useful calendars of state papers and the mteresting early chromcles which have been, and which continue to be, published imder his direction, the former affordmg an easy reference to a multitudi nous and valuable collection, and the latter addmg gi-eatly to the authentic annals of the kingdom, -will remain a lasting monument of his taste, judgment, and discrimination. ROMSEY 567 He is descended from a French Protestant family which took refuge in England on the revocation of the Edict of Nantes, His father was Sir Samuel Romilly, whose name will be less remembered for his official rank as solicitor-general during the short admi nistration of the whigs m 1806-7, than for his commanding talents as an advocate, as a senator, as the unflinching assertor of the rights and liberties of the people, and as the flrst proposer of those amendments of the law, both civil and crimmal, which, though their value or necessity was disparaged at the time, have since been fuUy recognised and adopted into our jurisprudence. The author cannot refer to his name without re calling the reverence and admiration with which for many years fi-om his youth up wards he regarded him, nor vrithout remem bering, not only the valuable professional assistance, but the kindness which he in variably experienced in his intercourse with him. By his -wife, Ann, daughter of Francis Garbett, Esq,, of Knill Court in Hereford- shfre, he had a large family, of whom the master of the Rolls was the second son. His lordship was bom at the beginning of this century, and completed his education at Trmity College, Cambridge, taking his degree of M,A. in 1826. He had previously entered Gray's Inn, and was called to the bar in 1827. In 1882 he was returned to parliament by the borough of Bridport, a constituency he changed for Devonport from 1847 to 1852, smce which, having in the meantime been constituted master of the Rolls, he has confined his attention to his double duties as a judge and as the official comptroUer of the records of the state, in the performance of the latter of which (for of the former, as of aU existing judges, I purposely avoid any remark) he has gamed universal admfration. His professional life in the interval did not much vary from the career of every successful barrister. After obtaining the honour of a silk gown he was appointed solicitor-general in March 1848, and in July 1850 he became attorney-general, from which in eight months he was raised to the office which he has since so usefully occupied, to which he was appointed on March 28, 1861. On December 19, 1865, he was raised to the peerage as Lord RomiUy of Barry, Glamorganshire. He married Caroline, daughter of the late Dr. WilUam Otter, Bishop of Chi chester. EOmSEY, Nicholas de, performed the functions of justice itinerant several times in 39 and 40 Henry IIL, 1265-6, probably on both occasions, but certainly on the last, taking pleas of the forest only in various counties ; and also in 46 and 53 Henry III. In 52 Henry III, he and Walter de Burges were employed to collect the issues of 568 EOMgEY the bishopric of Wmchester. (Madox, i, 719,) BOMS^EY, Waltee de, had the custody of the forests of Hampshire in 8 Henry IIL, 1224, and it was, no doubt, under thi/S character that he was appointed one of the justices itmerant for that county in the next year, (Rot Claus. i. 605-685, U. 76,) He became sheriff of that county and of Wiltshire in 13 Henry III,, and was after wards fined one mark for receiving moneys in the latter by summons from the Exche quer which he did not accoimt for at the time, (Madox, U, 284.) BOOEE, Giles, bore the same Christian name as his grandfather and father. The former was resident at Rumsey in Hamp shire, and the latter a merchant m London, who became a director of the East India Company, was the associate of literary men, and indulged himself in some very creditable translations of the classic poete. By his marriage with Frances, daughter of Leonard Cropp, of Southampton, he had a nmuerous family. His third cMld, the future j udge, was born on June 8, 1743, and from Harrow proceeded to St. John's College, Oxford. 'There he was an inde fatigable student, and he used to relate his mortification at the only reward he received from the college tutor for the great pains he had bestowed on a copy of Latin verses being the cold remark, ' Sir, you have for gotten to put your tittles to your i's,' Hav ing taken his degrees of A,B, in 1768 and of A,M, in 1765, he was in 1766 elected to a feUowship of Merton CoUege, which he held till his marriage in 1785. Although intended for the legal, it was thought that he preferred the clerical profession, from his devotion to the study of divinity. But his motive for pursuing the latter was to get rid of early prejudices and a tendency to scepticism, and to satisfy himself of the truths of Christianity. The effects of this study and conscientious application were evident in all his future life, producing that character for genuine piety by which he was ever distinguished. The deep im pression they made upon him is shown m a small pamphlet containing ' Thoughte on the Propriety of Fixing Easter Term,' which he published anonymously in 1792. This did not prevent him from preparing for the profession he had chosen, and, hay ing been called to the bar, he joined the Western Circuit, of which he eventually be came the leader. He accepted the dignity of the coif iu 1781, and had the honour of being made king's seijeant in April 1703. Soon after he succeeded in obtaining verdicts at the Exeter assizes against 'William Win- terbotham for preaching two seditious sermons at Plymouth, which, as connected with the French Revolution, were consi dered especially daugerous, and for which EOS the reverend defendant was sentenced tp a large fine and a, Mng iinprisoment. At tha,t troubled period it was Sir Giles's lot to, t§ brought very prommently forward. Hayr ing been, on November 13 in the saipe year, appointed a judge of the Common Pleas, and knio-hted, he delivered in his first cfrcuit a charge to the grand jury at Readmg on the excited state of the coipiT try, and m July 1795 he presided at York on the trial and conviction of Henry Red head Yorke fojr a. conspiracy with others to inflame the people agamst the govemment, for which a severe punishment was in flicted. (State Trials, xxii. 826, xxv. 1049.) Though not considered a deep lawyer, nor very highly reputed on the bench, he was a mild and merciful judge. A story is told of him that a poor girl, havmg from the pressm-e of extreme want committed a theft, was tried before him and reluctantly convicted ; and that, wMle applauding the jury for giving the inevitable verdict, he declared that he so sympathised vrith them in their hesitetion that he would sentence her to the smallest punishment aUowed by the law. He accordingly flned her one shiUing, adding, ' If she has not one m her possession, I wiU give her one for the pur pose.' Towards the end of Ms life he sufi'ered much from illness, which was greatly ag gravated by his grief for the death of his two elder sons. After nearly flfteen years of judicial labours, he died suddenly on March 7, 1808, having gained during the whole of his Ufe the respect of Ms contem poraries for his strict mtegrity, his amiable temper, and his love of Uterature. His wife, Harriet Sophia, daughter of Colonel WiUiam Burrard, of Walhampton, Hante, and sister of Admiral Sir Harry Burrard-Neale, Bart., brought him a large family. EOS, Peiee de, was not improbably a younger brother of Everard de Ros, the grandson of that Peter who assumed, the surname of Ros from his lordship so called in Holderness in Yorkshire, and of whom the present Baroness de Roos is a, lineal descendant. He was one of the justices itinerant in the county of Cumberland in I Richard 1., 1189 ; and in the ninth year of that reign, he, -with several associates, fixed the taUage in the same county. (Pipe RoU, 139; Mador, i. 704.) EOS, Robeet de, was the second son of Robert de Ros, lord of Hamlake in York shire, and of Isabel, the daughter of William the Lion, Kmg of Scotland. His fathei-, on Ms death in II Henry IIL, gave him the barony of Werke in Ivorthumberland, with the castle which he had founded there, and a barony in Scotland, By a writ dated July 6, 1234, he was ROSSLYN associated vrith the justices of the bench ; ^d in. August of that year he ¦was appointed ^ justice on three iters. Three years afterwards he was consti tuted chief justice of the fprests in the northem coimtieSj and so contmued, at least till 28 Henry IH. He then retfred to Scotland, where, with John de BaUol, he had, the guidance of that kmgdom; and being charged with severely and improperly treating Queen Margaret, the wife of Alex ander, King of Scotland, and sister of Henry HI,, 'the latter sent his forces there to re store her to her rights, and imposed a flne upon him of one hundred thousand marks ; but ite payment was eventually remitted. Dugdale goes on to relate that m 22 Ed ward I., 1293, he was summoned to give the king counsel, and that he went to Portsmouth vrith horse and arms to join the expedition to Gascony; and further, that, in 1295, being in love -with a Scotch woflian, he endeavoured to inveigle his kins man 'WiUiam de Ros to the Scots party, which he joined Mmself,;and was concerned in planning a surprise on the English power. RecoUecting, however, that he was of full age certainly in 12 Hem-y IIL, 1228, a.nd that these last events are stated to have oc curred about 1296 or 1297, when he would have been near ninety yeai-s of age, it is difficult to believe that Dugdale has not missed a generation, and that this lover of the Scottish girl was not Ms son. Whichever the last-mentioned person was, he married Margaret, one of the four sisters and heirs of Peter deBriis, of Skelton, with whom he had the lordship of KendaU, which devolved on his son WiUiam, whose family ended in 1369 -with a daughter. (Baronage, i. 546, 555.) BOSSLYN, Eael of. See A, Weddee- BUEN, ^OTHEEAM, John, was admitted feUow of Lincoln CoUege, Oxford, m 1648, as of Mn to the next-mentioned Archbishop Rotheram, the second founder. The family afterwards settled at Luton in Bedfordshire, where the judge was born. His father was the Rev. John Rotheram, -ricar of Bore- ham and rector of Springfleld in Essex, m which county the judge afterwards pur chased the manor of Waltham Abbey. He took his degree of B.A. m 1649 and of M.A. in 1662, and received his legal education at Gray's Inn, where he was called to the bar in 1655, and elected .ancient in 1671. (Fasti 0.von, U. 120, 170; Morant, ii. 88.) Adopting the popular side m politics, he drew the plea which Algernon Sidney put in on his trial ; and m the prosecution of Richard Baxter, when Mr. Wallop had been brutally put down by CMef Justice Jeffreys, Rotheram stood up for some time boldly in defence, but aU to no pur- Being appUed to by order of King ROTHERAM 569 James to know ' whether he was for the dispensmg power,' he answered ' No, he was against it ; for it was both against law and reason.' He was therefore naturally surprised that he was selected for promo tion, ' as he thought it was enough to have hindered any man from being a judge, so freely to declare his opinion as he had done.' So he expressed himself m his ex ammation before the House of Lords in December 1689. His promotion as a baron of the Exche quer took place on July 6, 1688, a week after the trial of the seven bishops. Not- -withstandmg thefr acquittal. King James directed the judges m the circuits that im mediately foUowed to speak against them ; and Archbishop Sancroft afterwards in formed the king that the new baron at tacked them, ' and endeavoured to expose them as ridiculous, aUeging that they did not write English, and it was flt they should be coirected by Dr. Busby for false grammar.' This no doubt was the baron's cunning method of avoiding the poUtical part of the question. (State Trials, ix, 988, xi, 499, xU, 604,) His judicial career was not of long duration, termmating a few months afterwards -with James's flight from the kingdom, and leaving Mm with the title of knighthood and the grade of a ser jeant, to resume ¦ his practice at the bar. Bramston caUs him ' a phanatic ; ' but he seems to have been an honest and zealous advocate, James appomted him high steward of Maldon under the new charter, and his son became recorder of that place, (Bramston, 811,) BOTHEEAM, alias SCOT, Thomas (Aechbishop of Yoek), adopted the name of his native place. His family was named Scot, and resided at Rotheram in York shire, where he was born on August 24, 1423, His parents, though not in an ele vated rank, were sufficiently opulent to send him flrst to Eton and then to Cambridge, where, in 1444, he was one of the first scholars at King's College after its founda tion. He then was elected a fellow of Pem broke Hall, of which he afterwards became master in 1480 ; and he presided over the imiversity for some time as chancellor. Having been selected as one of the chap lains of Kmg Edward IV,, he qmckly ac quired the royal favour, and in one year, 1468, was advanced to the post of keeper of the privy seal, with the profitable appomt ment of- provost of Beverley, and a seat on the episcopal bench as Bishop of Rochesiter. That his talente were not inconsiderable may be presumed from his being sent in the following August as sole ambassador to treat for peace with the King of France, (Rymer, xi. 625.) fie remained at Rochester about four years, when he was translated to the diocese 570 ROTHERAM of Lincoln in 1472 ; and two more years had scarcely elapsed before he -was raised to the high office of lord chancellor. Sir T, D, Hardy (Catal. 56) places his nomina tion shortly after February 26, 1475 ; but there seems to be evidence to warrant his mtroduction nearly a year earlier. The parUament that met on October 6, 1472, was continued by various prorogations till its dissolution on March 14, 1475 ; and dur ing that short period of twenty-nine months no less than three chancellors presided in it. StiUington was chancellor at its open ing ; Laurence Booth prorogued it aa chan ceUor on December 13, 1473, and again on the 1st of the following February; and Thomas Rotherani as chancellor prorogued it on May 28, 1474. The, date of his pa tent mutt therefore have been between February 1 and May 28, 1474. He acted in the same character at another prorogation and at its ultimate dissolution. (Rot. Pari vi. 104, 120, 1.53.) Sir T, D. Hardy refers to some privy seal bills, from which he collects that John Alcock, Bishop of Rochester, held the Great Seal in the foUo-wing year from April 27 to September 28, 1475. There are how ever in Rymer (xii. 6, 14) two documents in which Rotheram, Bishop of Lincoln, is designated as chancellor, dated on June I and August 13, both within that interval ; and a letter from Sir John Paston (Letters, ii. 98) to his brother Edmund, dated at Calais on June 13, 1475, mentions the Bishop of LincoM as then chancellor. Be sides these evidences of his being still in possession of the office, there are a large number of pri-vy seals addressed to him in that character during the whole of the time in which the same documents were also ad dressed to the Bishop of Rochester, some of them, addressed to both, bearing date on the same day. No doubt therefore exists that during the short period in question there were two chancelloes. This un usual occurrence, of which no other in stance can be found, airose from the Bishop of Rochester being appointed in contempla tion of Edward's invasion of France, and of the king's intention that Bishop Rother am should accompany him in the expedi tion as chancellor. The delay of the arma ment for more than two months accounts for this duplication of privy seals from va rious places in England during the months of May and June. On the king's retum from the expedition Bishop Alcock's ser vices were no longer requfred ; and the last privy seal addressed to him is dated Sep tember 28, 1475. Bishop Rotheram then resumed the whole of his official functions, and continued to perform them durino- the remainder of Edward's roign. On the peace of 1476 between England and France the chancellor is reported to ROTHERAM have received from Louis an annual pension of 2000 crowns (Lingard, v, 225), a pay ment to which no disgrace seems to have been attached, as not only many of the ' English nobles, but even the monarch him self, condescended to be pensioners of the French Mng. Rotheram sat as chancellor in the two remaining parliamente of the reign, which met respectively on January 16, 1478, and January 20, 1483 ; and m the interim he received his highest ecclesiastical dignity, as Archbishop of York, on Sep tember 3, 1480. On the death of his royal patton, to whom he was zealously attached, the archbishop continued in possession of the' Great Sefjl as chanceUor for about five or six weeks, that is to say, for nearly half the reign of his infant sovereign, Edward V. The coronation of the unfortunate child had been fixed to take place on May 4, but before that day arrived the Duke of Glou cester had obtamed possession of his per son. To dissipate any fears that might arise from tMs act, the wily duke sent a messenger to the archbishop assm'ing Mm that all would be weU, 'I assure him,' was the answer of the chanceUor, ' be it as well as it -will, it -vriU never be so weU as we have seen it,' Arming his retamers, he forthwith went to the queen m the sanc tuary at Westminster, taking the Great Seal with him. This, after givmg her what comfort he could, he placed mto her hands to the use and behoof of her son, declaring that if they crowned any other king than him, Ms brother, who was then with the queen, should the next day be cro-wned. Although he quicMy repented of this unauthorised surrender of the Seal, and contrived to get it back on the same night, his devotion to the royal famUy was not likely to be overlooked by a man of the duke's character. The error he had committed was taken advantage of to re move him from the chancellorship some time in the month of May 1483. A few days afterwards, pursuing Ms ambitious projects, and to get rid of one who was liljely to impede them, the duke consigned the archbishop to the Tower as a prisoner. His confinement, however, was not of long duration, as he was released by the usurper about the time of his own coronation in the following month. It is certain that Archbishop Rotheram was at liberty on January 2.3, 1484, when King Richard's first parliament met, as he was then appointed one of the triers of petitions. Whatever may have been the inducement for Ms appearance on that occasion, which it is not difficult to under stand, we can conceive the pleasure he experienced in performing the same duty less than two years afterwards in the first parliament of Henry '^TI, (Rot. Pari. vi. ROUBURY 238, 268), and in witnessing the peaceful establishment of the government during the remainder of his life. This terminated, at the age of 76, on May 29, 1600, when he died at Cawood of the plague which then raged, and was buried in a marble tomb he had himself erected in York Cathedral, The universities of Cambridge and Ox ford and the see of York received munifi cent proofs of his bounty, and m his native to'wn he founded a college for a provost, five priests, and six choristers, with three schoolmasters for grammar, singing, and writing, (Drake's Eborac, 446; Godmn, 299, 698.) BOTTBTJEY, GiLBEET de, before he be came ajudge, evidently held some place of consideration in the courts, several instances occurring of his name being added to those of the justices commissioned to take inqui sitions, and of his carrying records into court. His appointment as a justice of the Court of King's Bench occurred in 23 Edward I,, 1295, during the remainder of which reign he seems to have taken a prominent part in the administration of justice. Summoned among his brethren to parliament, he was frequently selected as one of the receivers of petitions, and in the Statute of Champerty, 33 Edward L, he is specially mentioned as clerk of the king's councU, and as recommending the writ of conspiracy, (Rot. ParL i. 29-189.) On the accession of Edward II, he was re-appointed to his seat in the King's Bench, and on March 10, 1816, was re moved into the Common Pleas, Fines were levied before him there from that year till the beginning of 14 Edward II, (Dugdale's Orig. 44) ; and the last summons to council addressed to him is dated No vember 29, 1820. He retired from the court, or died, before May 31, 1321, BOXTCLIFFE, BET.iN, possessed the manor of Colthorpe in Yorkshire. His name does not appear as an advocate in the Year Books ; but there is a letter from him to Sir William Plumpton (Corresp. 2, 259), who had been sherift' of Yorkshire, which plainly shows that he was conversant with the practice of the Court of Exchequer, with reference to the passing- of the accounts of those officers ; and as he states that he has ' labored a felaw of mine to be your attorney in the court, foi- 1 may nought be hut of counsel,' it may be presumed that at that time he either held an office iu the Exchequer too high to appear for a sheriff, or that he practised as an advocate there. He was constituted third baron of the Exchequer on November 2, 1468, 37 Henry VL, and was re-.ippointed when Edward IV. assumed the crown in 1401. In 1463 he entered into a contract with Sir William Plumpton, iu which he is caUed 'Brian EUFUS 571 Roucliffe, of Colthorp, gent, thfrd baron, &c,,' by which Joan, Sir William's grand daughter, then only four years old, is placed under his government, to the intent that John his son and heir shall marry her. The union took place, and led to a" long- litigation after the death of the knight^ who seems to have been an unprincipled character, between John Roucliffe and a son of Sir William by a subsequent marriage. The restoration of Henry VI. in 1470, and the return of Edward IV, in the next year, made no difference in the place which Roucliffe occupied m the court, nor was he advanced till the accession of Richard III, when, on June 26, 1488, he was promoted to the office of second baron. In this he was continued by Henry VIL, under whom he acted for nearly nine years. He died on March 4, 1494, and was buried in the church of Colthorpe, or Cow- thorp, which was built by him, and conse crated in 1468, (Ibid. 8 n, ; Cal, Rot. Pat, 300, 316.) E'UF'US, Geoeeeet (Bishop oe Due ham), is called only Geoffrey in the re maining records of the time. The ' History of Durham' and Bishop Godwin say that he received the cognomen of Rufus, by which he is now generally distinguished, vrithout stating on what account, and nothing is known of his family or himself untU he- became chancellor to Henry I, He succeeded to this office about Christ mas II28, and Ms name appears to a charter to Exeter Cathedral (Monast. ii, 539), which, though without date, as is common in those times, must have been granted between August 1123, when God frey, Bishop of Bath, one of the witnesses, was raised to that see, and the death of Teoldus, Bishop of "Worcester, another witness, which occurred some time in 1124, That he was not removed from his office during the remainder of the reign may be concluded from his witnessing as chancellor numerous mstruments, the last of which was dated 'apud Femeham in transfreta tione regis ' (Madox, i, 36), and was appa rently signed in the autumn of 1134, when the king went for the last time to Normandy, and died there. Geoffrey was raised to the bishopric of Durham on August 6, 1138, Some authors flx his elevation in 1128 ; but the history of Durham in the ' Anglia Sacra ' gives the former year, and the correctness of this is substantiated by the fact that his signature to the Lincoln charter m 1182 is only ' Geoflirey the ChanceUor,' while that to the grant to Alberic de Vere in 1134 is 'Geof frey the ChanceUor, Bishop of Durham,' In the Great RoU of 31 Henry I, there is an entry, from which it has been argued that he purchased the Chancery for 3006/. I3s, 4d, It is there stated that he owed 572, RUEUS that sum, 'pro sigillo.' How far- the word^ used warrant the, presumption that this was a flne which, he had undertaken to pay for an office of which he had been in possession for seven or eight years I have discussed in niy other worl^ (Judges of England)!, 82), It is now impossible ¦to come at the real truth, but the, probabiUties seem to be in opposition to the inference drawn. That roll shows that he then, had the care of the temporaUties of the bishoprics of Coventiy and Hereford, and of the abbey of Chertsey, during their vacancies, and also the custody of various manors and lands then vested in the,ci-own,_ From no less than twenty entries pi his being excused the payment of Danegeld and other taxes, it appears that he had property in fifteen counties, and that the impositions from which he was thus exempted amounted to the then large sum of 46/. 3s, 2d, He does not appear to have been con tinued in his office of chancellor by King Stephen, and he died at the castle of Dur ham on May 6, 1140. (Godwin, 734 ; Le Neve, 347; Madox, i, 56, &c,, U, 472,) BTTFTIS, Gut (Bishop of Bangoe), was presented to the church of Swinestead by Robert de Gant, brother of Gilbert Earl of Lincoln, before the year II62, Some time afterwards, but before 1166, he became dean of "Waltham in Essex, and. was the last who bore that title, King Henry, in 1177, altering King Harold's foundation, by substituting an abbot and twenty regular canons for a dean and eleven seculars. So early as 11 Henry IL, 1164, he was one of the justices sitting in the Exchequer; and from 14 to 23 Henry II. he was ac tively employed as a justice itinerant, his pleas being recorded in at least sixteen counties. On July I, 1177, he was consecrated Bishop of Bangor, to which see Henry no doubt raised him for the purpose of facili tating, the above-mentioned change in the foundation of Waltham. He died about 1190, and does not appear to have acted in a judicial character after his elevation to the bishopric, (Mado.v, i. 44, 123, &c. ; Monast. vi, 57 ; Le Neve, 25,) BTJFTIS, Richaed, or EUFFTJS, was one of the king's chamberlains in 14 Henry II,, 1168, and held the office tUl his death, about 5 John, His name appear as a justice itinerant on the roU of II80, for Oxfordshfre, (Mado.r, i. 137, 681.) But the pleas there accounted for evidently, from their position, are those of a former year; and there seems reason to doubt whether his name has not been erroneously .substituted by the transcriber for that of Richard Giff'ard, who is inserted on the previous roU as justicier for that county, and is omitted on the corresponding entries of this. And this suspicion deriye,9 Greater EUPIBUS weight from the fact that tMs is thjB. only occasion on which Richard; Rufns'& mmp. is so introduced. In I Richard I, he was custoa of the honor of Berkhampstead, and also helllthe manors of the county of Oxford undpr the Mng. (Pipe RoU, 32, 106, 149.) The pro perty which Kmg Henry gave Mm to be held by the, service of the chamber, was in Wiltehire, and of considerable amount, BUFUS, WlLLlAH, often spelled^ Rnffjis, was one of the sons of Ralph de Rufus, whose father, also Ralph, was a Norman knight in the tram of the Conquerw, by the daughter of Asceline de Yvery, He acted as a justice itinerant from 19 to 26 Henry H., 1173-II80 (Madox, i, 128- 701), and was one of the justiciers present at "WestnUnster before whom fines were levied in 1I82-II89, in thelafter of wMch years he is styled dapifer regis, (Hunter's Preface.) This office is supposed to be the same as seneschal or steward ; but if so, from the number mentioned in tMs reign, there must have been several at one time, probably holdmg different grades, -with one above them all. He was one of the ¦wit nesses to the will which the Mng executed at Waltham in II82, (Lord Lyttelton, iy, [14],) He also held the office of sheriff of Devonshire m 22 and 23 Henry, H,, and of the united oounties of Bedford and Bucking ham from 26 Henry 11. (-with an, intermp- tion of a year or two) to 6 Richard I, His death would seem to have been a violent one, and to have occm-red m 6 or 7 Richard I,, for by the roU of the latter year the hundred of Redderbruggin Sussex was fined forty shilUngs ' pro concelamento retatorum de morti WUlelmi Buffi.' (Ma dox, i. 6-14.) His descendante flourished in a long succession under the name of Rous, and the famUy is now lineally represented by Thomas Bates Rous, Esq., of Courtyrala in Glamorganshire. EUPIBUS, Peiee de (Bishop oe Wdj- chestee), was a Poictevin by birth. He was a clerk in the Mng's chamber m the reigns of Henry 11. and Richard I. ; and in that of the former he held the rectory of Dartford in Kent. (Hasted, ii. 327 .) In I John he is called ' clericus noster,' and is mentioned as prior of Loches (!Rot, Chart. 10, 34) ; and so early as 3 John he filled the office of treasurer of Poictiers, and was also archdeacon of the church there, (Rot Pat 1 ; Godwin, 217,) About the same time he was raised to the digmties of arch deacon of Stafford .nnd precentor of LincoM, and was soon after elevated to the episcopal bench, beiug consecrated Bishop of Win chester at Rome on September 5, 1205. Roger de Wendover (iii. 181), in announc ing his election, calls him ' vir equesti'is ordinis et in rebus bellicosis eruditus.' RlJP^us So ;_h!igh was lie in the royal favOHr that •the 'king Cn this occasion presented Mm With two thousand marks. (Madox, H'SSS,) Both bcSfCre and after this evelit he Was in continual attendance on Ms scfvereign in Ms frequent progresses throughdtlt the king dom, teaWy of the -most mmute as well as the more important payments on the king'is : account being made by him. Throughout the king's difficulties he acted as one of'his counsellors, and during his whole (reign re ceived many proofe of his bounty. In 1208 he is named as a justicier, fines being levied before him in the King's Court. (Hunter's Preface.) "when Walter de Grey, the chancellCr, went on a special mission to Flanders, he sent the 'Great Seal to the Mng at Ospringe, on October 9, 1218, by Richard de -Marisco ; and there is an entry on the Patent Roll stating that, on December 22, the Mng de Uvered it to Ralph de Neville, ' sub Domino Wintomensi Episcopo deferendum.' Al though Sfr T. D. Hardy, and after him Lord CampbeU, explain these Words as meaning that Ralph de NevUle so held the Seal because tbe bishop was then custos of the Mngdom, or chief justiciary, their inteipre- tation cannot be accepted, because Peter de Rupibus was not placed in that high position till the following February, and 'because, mdeed, there is no other instance ofthe Great Seal being held under anyone but a chanceUor. In no list hitherto pub lished has the name of Peter de Rupibus been introduced as chancellor or keeper; but, independently ofthe presumption which is raised by the words above used that he held the former office, all doubt of the fact is removed by the entry of two records on the Fme Roll of the year, dated respectively November 21 and 24, 1213 (607, 509), in both of which the title of chancellor is distinctly added to his name. There are also no less than eight charters between October 31, 1218, and January 8, 1214, in clusive, given under his hand (Rot Chart 195-6) ; and though the title of chancellor does not appear in his subscription to these, the omission probably arose from his hold ing the office only temporarily. He retfred from it on the retum of Walter de Grey, who is again spoken of as chancellor in a record dated Januai-y 12, I2I4. (Rot Claus. i, 160,) On February 1, while the king was at Portsmouth ready to embark for Poictou, he appointed Peter de Rupibus justiciary of England to act in his place and keep the peace diuing his absence. (Rot. Pat 110.) In this character fines were levied before him at Westminster in 16 and 16 John ; and there are mandates of his dated as late as October 20, 1214. (Rot Claus. i. 218^ He was present at Runnymede on June 15, 1216, when Magna Charta was signed, but IR'DSSELL ^3 'evidently ncft as Chief justiciary, to 'which office Hiibert de Burgh was a fevv daj'S afterWaMs raised. Ten ^ays after the death df King John 'he assisted 'at the hasty coronation of Henry III, in the abbey cbureh of Gloucester ; and when, two years afterwards, WiUiam MareschaU, Earl of Pembroke, died, the custody 'Of the royal infant was entrusted to his care, A rivafry had for some time existed between him and the Chief jus ticiary, which nowled them into mutual at tempts to ruin each other. In this contest HubeW de Burgh obtained such an as cendency over the king's mind as to procure in 1227 the dismission of the bishop,-who soon after undertook a joumey to the Holy Land, where he remained for nearly three years. But Hubert then becoming unpo pular, the bishop was recalled to court, where, using his influence vrith the king, he soon succeeded in producing the disgrace of his antagonist, and acquiring the chief conduct of the royal counsels. His encouragement of the harsh treat ment received by Lis rival refiects as Uttle to the credit of his generosity, as his ma nagement of the finances and the introduc tion of his countrymen into places of trust did to his wisdom. The EngUsh barons soon became disgusted -with both, and com menced the resistance -which afterwards led to intestine war. He is charged -with pro curing the betrayal and death of Richard Earl of Pembroke, by issuing a charter in the Mng's name, but -without his authority, promising the earl's confiscated lands in Ireland to those who should teke him, dead or alive. The king's eyes were at length opened by the remonstrances of Edmund, Arch bishop of Canterbury, who, pointing out the certain consequences of following such counsels, procured the dismissal of the bishop in April 1234, Being called to account for his admims tration of the Treasury, he took refuge with his nephew, or son, Peter de Rivallis, at the altar of his church, and eventually escaped to Rome, from which he retumed in 1236, He died in his palace at Farnham on June 9, 1238, and was buried at Win chester, _ Experienced from an early period of his Ufe in the duties of office, he acqufred a high character for wisdom and inteUigence, which he seems to have deserved, except where he allowed his personal feeUngs to betray his judgment. However we may disapprove some of the acts of his life, we must aUow him the merit of UberaUty and piety in founding monasteries, biiUding churches, and endowing hospitals, ( Godwin, 217; Dugdale's Orig. 12; AngL Sacii. 306, 606 ; R, de Wendover ; Rapin.) EUSSELL, John (Bishop of Lincoln), ¦574 EUSSELL was born in the parish of St, Peter's in the suburbs , of Winchester, He received his education at Oxford, being admitted a fellow of New CoUege in 1449, and taMng the -degree of doctor of the canon law. In his after-life, probably about 1484, he was elected chancellor of that university, an office which in his time was converted from an annual to a permanent appointment. He held a prebend in the cathedral of St. Paul, and was collated to the archdeaconry of Berks on February 28, 1466. (Rymer, xi. 682, 788, 778, 798.) Having attained considerable eminence at court, he was the only leamed eccle siastic among the four ambassadors who were sent in Februaiy 1470, 9 Edward IV,, to invest the Duke of Burgundy -with the order of the Garter, when he was entrusted -n-ith the duty of making the complimental addi-ess on the occasion. The publication of this address in that year is connected with the earliest history of English typo graphy ; for, although printed at Bruges or Rouen, it is the first specimen of the press of Caxton, In the following February, during the short restoration of Henry VL, he was one of those appointed to treat -with the French ambassadors, and again in Fe bruary 1472 he was sen-t by King Edward to the Duke of Burgundy to conclude a treaty of peace with him, (Ibid. xi. 651, 737.) In the latter commission he is styled secondary in the office of the privy seal, 10 the keepership of which he probably suc ceeded when Bishop Rotheram was made lord chancellor in May 1474, but he is not mentioned with the title till the following year. He retained the office certainly till the end of that reign (Rot Pari. vi. 122, 202), and probably till he was appointed chancellor under that of Edward V, In the meantime he was raised to the episcopal bench as Bishop of Rochester on September 20, 1476, and was soon after entrusted with the government of the king's infant son. From Rochester he was trans lated to LincoM on September 9, 1480, and was one of the executors of King Ed ward's will. In that character, and from his long- con nection with Edward IV., it is natural to suppose that he would feel an interest in the welfare of the new sovereign, and that he would not ad-risedly have taken any part m supplanting him. There is nothmg to show that when he was fixed upon to succeed Bishop -Rotheram in the chancellorship the Protector Richard, Duke of Gloucester, contemplated his subsequent usurpation. Indeed, the contrary would appear from the many acts done tiy him in the name of King Edward V. The patent ofthe bishop's appointment as lord chancellor has not come down to us, but it may be presumed that he received the Great Seal about the middle RUSSELL of May, A speech is' extant among the Cottonian MSS, (Vitell, E. 10), -which, if not delivered, was prepared for delivery by the bishop to the parUament, in which the young king is spoken of in terms of the highest eulogy. The first document which we find vrith his name as chancellor at tached is dated June 2, I Edward V. (Rymer, xii. 185.) We have also an in stance of his exercising his judicial functions in Chancery even in that short reign, a case heard 'before him about June 22 being reported in the Year Book (fo. 6 b), in which it appears that, besides the master of the Rolls, he called to his assistance two justices. Choke and Catesby. Whether the bishop was satisfied with the representations made in support of Richard's title to the crown, or whether he deemed it expedient at that time to over look the objections to them, certain it is that he received the Great Seal from King Richard on June 27, the day after he began his reign. That the king considered Mm a faithful servant appears from a letter dated at LmcoM on October 12, 1483, addressed to the chanceUor, then ill m London, de siring the Great Seal to be sent to him, in which he states his intentions against the Duke of BucMngham, and Ms determma tion to 'subdue his malys.' WMle the Seal remained m the Mng's hands the duke was taken and beheaded, and it wiis re turned to the chancellor on November 26, {Turner's England, iii. 511.) He opened the parUament iu the following January with the customary speech preceded by a text (Rot Pari. vi. 237), durmg which, as the king was present, he would of course avoid, whatever Ms private feelings might be, a,ny but the most complimentary ex pressions. For two years he preserved Ms place; but when the Earl of Richmond was hovering about the English coast some sus picion of his loyaltj' evidently arose, for the king commanded him on July 24, i'185, to deliver up the Seal to the master of the Rolls, who was constituted keeper on Au gust 1, the very day on wMch the earl reached Milford Haven. The real ti-aitor m Richard's coimcil was Morgan Kydwelly, the attorney-general, whose commumca- tions enabled Richmond to take those steps which led to his success. (Turiiei-, iv. 30.) No doubt, however. Bishop RusseU was, or was considered to be, favoiuable to Rich mond ; for not only was he named one of the triers of petitions in that prince's first parliament after he became king, in No vember 1485, but in the June and July fol lowing he was employed in negotiations with the King of Scots and the Duke of Brittany, (Rot Pari vi. 268, 886, 441; Rymer, xU. 285, 303.) He lived in quiet the remainder of his days, and dying in the beginning of January 1494, at his RYDER manor of Nettleham, he was buried in his cathedral. Sir Thomas More describes him as 'a wise man, and a good, and of much expe rience, and one of the most leamed men undoubtedly that England had m his time.' The only doubt upon his character arises .from his continuing in the chancellorship after Richard had shown himself in his true colours. But we must remember that the usurper had so much art, and manners so insinuating, that we may readily believe that it would be long before those about him, whom he was desirous to retam, would credit the reporte to his prejudice ; and we cannot but give some weight to the peril and inutility of resistance in an age when most parties concurred so easily in a trans fer of their allegiance, ( Godwin, 299, 636.) BYDEB, Dddlet, was the grandson of the Rev, Dudley Ryder, a nonconformist minister Uving at Bedworth in Warwick shire, and the son of Richard Ryder, a respectable mercer in the Cloisters, West Smithfield, London, where his elder brother carried on the same business. His mother was EUzabeth, daughter of — Marshall. He was born on November 4, 1691, and commenced his education at a dissenting school at Hackney, whence he was sent first to the university of Edinburgh, and then to that of Leyden, By two lines in the satirical poem the ' Causidicade,' he appears tahave been designed for the mi nistry. The author makes a Puritan can didate for the solicitor-generalship say, — The Cloak and the Band, it is very -vrell kno'wn, I've, like E^d — r, declin'd for the sake of this go-wn. That this had some foimdation seems pro bable from his not choosing the law as his profession till he was twenty-two years of age. He delayed his admission to the Middle Temple as a student tiU 1713, nnd was not caUed to the bar till 1719, Like Lord Talbot, he subsequently removed to LincoM's Inn, where he was called to the l)ench in 1783, and made treasurer in the followmg year. His success in prosecuting his forensic duties was secured by his abilities, his a.ttention, and his punctuality, which met their reward in December 1733, when he was made soUcitor-general, He had been in the early part of that year elected repre- ,sentative in parliament for St, Germains. RYDER 575 In January 1737 hewas appointed attorney- general, and m 1740 was knighted. For more than seventeen years he fiUed this important office, no vacancy in the headship of either of the principal common law courts occurring in the interval. One of the most unpleasant duties he had to per form was that of conducting the trials of the noblemen and others who were con cerned in the rebellion of 1745, (State Trials, xriU, 629-864.) He represented Tiverton in the parliaments of 1735, 1741 and 1747, and was a frequent speaker, principally on subjects connected with his official position, and in defending bills inti-o- duced by the government. None of his speeches were particularly brilliant, but all showed extreme good sense and temperance in judgment. The death of Sir WilUam Lee at length gave the ministers the opportunity of re warding the long services of Sir Dudley, who was accordingly inaugurated as lord chief justice of the King's Bench on May 2, 1764, He presided in that court for little more than two years, but long enough to prove himself so efficient and accomplished a judge that his elevation to the peerage was determined upon, the warrant signed, and a day appointed for him to kiss hands as Lord Ryder of Harrowby; but being taken ill on the same day, he could not attend, and dying on May 25, 1766, the day after, before the patent was completed, the creation of course fell to the ground. That his son's name was not immediately substi tuted was considered by some as a hard ship ; and the omission, which was probably occasioned by his minority, was not supplied tUl twenty years afterwards, when, being ennobled by the same title, he adopted the happy motto 'Servata 'fides cineri,' The chief justice was buried at (jrantham, where there is a handsome monument erected to Ms memorj'. By his wife, Anne, daughter of Nathaniel Newnham, of Streatham in Surrey, he left an only son, who, having been created Baron Harrowby in 1776, was succeeded by his son Dudley, who for his services to the crown in various important offices was promoted to an earldom in 1809, to which was added the viscounty of Sandon in Staffordshire, (CoUins's Peerage, v. 717- Walpole's Memoirs, ii. 46 ; Strange, 1138 • Burroirs S.C. 365, 368.) ' ov< s SACKVILLE, JoEDAN DE, or DE SAUKE- TILLE, so called from a town of that name in Normandy, was descended from Her- brand, who assisted in King WiUiam's inva.sion of England, and retuming home left in this country Robert, his third son, who held various manors in Essex and Suffolk. He was the grandfather of Geof frey, the father of this Jordan, by Con stance, daughter of Sir Edmund Brooke. (Baronage, u. 899 ; CoUins's Peerage, iU. 90 ; Hasted, iU. 74.) Both father and son were involved in the proceedings of the barons against King John, but on the accession of Henry III. their forfeited lands were restored to them, and further favours conferred, (Rot Pat 172; Rot. Claus. i, 305, 313, 316.) Jordan de SaukeviUe's name appears on a fine acknowledged at Westminster in 3 Henry IIL, 1219, he being then, according to Dugdale, a justice itinerant, but on no other occasion is he mentioned as a justicier. Both he and his father were alive in 10 Henry IH. (Rot. Claus. ii. 146), and the time of their deaths is uncertain.Jordan married Maud de Normanvill, and by her he had three sons, from WUUam, the eldest of whom, regularly descended Thomas Sackville, who in 1667 was created Lord Buckhurst, and in 1603 Earl of Dor set. This title was raised into a dukedom in 1720, but all became extinct in 1843. SADINGTON, Robeet de. Although it has been suggested that the names of the two after-named judges Shottindon and Sod- ington may be only varieties of that of Sadington, there is nothing positive to prove that it is so, nor any evidence that they and the subject of the present notice are of the same family. Robert de Sading ton was clearly so called from a place of that name in Leicestershire, and, we con ceive, was the son of John de Sadington, in the household (valettus) of Queen Isa bella, by whose request the custody of the hundred of Gertre in that county was committed to him. (Abb. Rot. Orig. i. 243,) This connection may probably account for Robert's first employment about the court. In 3 Edward III, he was com missioned, with the sheriff of Leicester and another, to sell the com in certain manors which had fallen into the king's hands ; and his name occurs in the Year Books as an advocate from that to the tenth year, during which period he was placed on two or three commissions of enquiry, (Ihid. ii, 29, 107 ; N. Fmdera, ii. 829, 840.) It does not appear, however, that he held the degree oif a serjeant-at-law. He was appointed to the office of cnief baron of the Exchequer on March 20, 1337, II Edward III. ; and Prynne (on 4th Inst 4) says that he was the flrst chief baron whom he flnds summoned to parliament, meaning, we presume, by that specific title. On July 25, 1339, he acted as the locum tenens of William de Zouche, the treasurer, then abroad ; and from May 2 to June 21, 1340, he held the office of treasurer. , During this time he still continued chief baron. His removal from the treasurersMp -was, perhaps, fortunate for him, as he otherwise would probably have been swept away vrith the rest on King Edward's angry return from Tournay in the foUo-wmg November. On September 29, 1343, the Great Seal was delivered to him as chancellor. He held it for about two years. During Ms time there is a curious entry of the seizure, by the mayor and baUiffs of Sand-wich, of nine bulls and numerous letters and pro- .cesses from the Roman court, attempted to be surreptitiously mtroduced mto the kingdom 'in quadam linea tela cerata in- clusos :' and of their being delivered by the chancellor, in 'full Chancery at Westmm ster,' to the chamberlain of the Exchequer to be kept in the treasury, (N. Fcedera, Ui. 25.) There is no trace of Ms being more defi cient or less successful than his contem poraries; and though the cause of his resignation of the Seal on October 26, 1345, is not given, yet, from anjthing that ap pears, it is quite as Ukely to have arisen frem political as from legal motives. His reinstatement as chief baron of the Exche quer on the 8th of the follo-wmg December seems to exclude the idea suggested by Lord Campbell, that he was mefficient as a judge. In the next year he was appointed one of the cu.stodes of the principality of Wales, the duchy of Cornwall, and the earldom of Chester, during the minority of the Mng's son, Edward, Prince of Wales. (Cal. Rot, Pat. 154.) In 1347 he was the head of the commission assigned 'ad judicium feren- dum,' that is to say, to sentence and to execute the Earls of Menteith and Fife, taken with King David in the battle of Nevil's Cross, in which they are described as traitors to Edward de Baliol, King of Scotland. Though there is no distmct entry of his death, it probably took place in the first quarter of 1850. In that year his SADINGTON successor aschief baron, Gervase deWilford, was appointed on April 7. He married Joyce, the sister and heir of Richard de Martival, Bishop of Salisbury ; and John de Sadington, mentioned in 37 Edward IH,, was probably his son. (Ni cholls's Leicestershire, 192.) SADINGTON. See 'Ihomas de Sodington, SAHAM, Richaed db, Dugdale names Richard de Saham as having been consti tuted a baron of the Exchequer in 23 Edward I., 1295, in the place of Master Elias de "Wynton. The Year Book (pt. i, 36), however, accounts for the mistake, for it there appears that Richard de Saham was swom in as baron of the Exchequer in Ireland m Trmity Term of that j'ear, before the chancellor and barons of the Exchequer in England. He was a son of Robert de Saham, of the manor of Saham-Toney in Norfolk, and brother of the under-mentioned WUliam, (Blomefields Norfolk, i. 598,) SAHAM, 'William de, his brother, founded a chantry at Saham-Toney in Norfolk. He was raised to the bench on the accession of Edward I., and continued for many years to act as a j udge of the King's Bench, and to be employed in various itinera tiU 18 Edward I. In that year, although he shared in the disgrace of many of Ms brethren, and was not only removed from his seat, but fined in the sum of 3000 marks ( Weever, 367; Rot Pari. i. 52, 63), he is described in a document (Bib, Cott. Claud, E, VIIL, p. 206) as entirely mnocent, ' in quo dolus seu fraus non est inventus,' and as paying the fine to conciliate the Mng, He was alive in 28 Edward I., when he was defendant in an action brought against him for damage done to property at Huningham in Norfolk, (Abb. Placit 242.) ST. ALBANS, Viscount. See F. Bacon. ST. EDMUND, Rogee de, is the last of the flve justices itinerant who fixed the tallage for Norfolk and Suffolk in 9 Richard L, 1197-8 (Mador, i, 705), and being a clergyman named from that town in Suffolk, was, according to the common practice of the time, added to the ordinary justices for the performance of this duty in his own neighbourhood. He had been previously in the king's service, having been employed in 1194 to collect the aid for the wages of the army appointed to meet King Richard at Tubasuf in Normandy, In 10 Richard I. he was appointed by the king archdeacon of Richmond, and was witness in that character to a charter dated December 19, 1198. ST. EDMUND, William de, is no other wise mentioned than as havingfines acknow ledged before him as a justicier for twelve years, commencing at Midsummer 1288, 17 Henry HL, and ending at Slidsummer 1245, during which period also various entries occur of payments made for -writs ST, JOHN 577 before him, (Dugdale's Orig. 43 ; Excerpt, e Rot Fin, i. 266, 399, 402,) ST, HELENA, John de, held lands of the king at Abingdon in Berkshire, which he forfeited in 17 John. They were no doubt restored to him on the accession of Henry HL, although no record thereof appears. In 9 Henry IIL, however, he was consti tuted a justice itinerant for that county, and in the following year assessed the quinzime there, (Rot Claus. i. 236, 241, U, 76, 247,) ST, JACOBO, Stephen de, is only men tioned as a justicier in a fine le-ried at Westminster, either in 4 or 5 Richard I, (Hunter's !Preface!) ST, JOHN, John de, held the barony of Stanton in Oxfordshire, and in 9 Henry III,, 1226, was appomted one of the justices itinerant in his own county. He died m 14 Henry IH., when Geoffrey le Despenser paid 100/. for the guardianship of Roger his heir, who fell at the battle of Eve sham in 1266, after which none of his de scendante were summoned to Parliament. (Baronage, i. 639 ; Rot. Claus. ii, 75, 76,) ST. JOHN, Olivee (Eael of Bolin- beoke), who was descended from the same family to which the last-named John St, John belonged, is no otherwise famous than for being one of the very few peers (who, Wood says, were ' all of the Presbyterian dye ') remaining with the parliament after Charles I, retired to York, and concurring with the House of Commons in the violent votes and ordmances then passed. It was from this contiaction of choice, rather than from any special ability in him, that he was selected, in 1648, as one of the two members of the House of Lords, to be united with four Commoners, in whom the custody of the new Great Seal was to be placed. They were accordingly appointed commissioners on November 10. He oc cupied this position about two years and a half, and died in possession of it m June or July 1646, The earldom became extinct in I71I, but the barony of St. John of Bletsoe survived, and still flourishes, (Baronage, ii, 898; Athen. Oxon. iii, 134; Journals.) ST, JOHN, Olivee, connected by relation ship with both the preceding, was the son of Oliver, settled at Cayshoe in Bedford shire, a grandson of the flrst Lord St. John of Bletsoe, by his wife Sarah, daughter of Edward Buckley, Esq., of Odell in the same county. ( Wotton's Baronet iv. 178.) Clarendon calls him ' a natural son of the house of BulUngbroke,' and the writer of ' The Mystery of the Good Old Cause ' says that his father 'was supposed to be a bye- blow of one of the Earls of Bedford.' (Pari, Hist, iii, 1600,) The unpopularity of the man, and the circumstances of the times will sufficiently account for these reports, P P 578 ST. JOHN" but the above is the pedigree given by an imprejudiced genealogist, and confirmed by the description in Ms admission as a mem ber of Lincoln's Inn, He was born about the year 1698, and was sent to Queen's College, Cambridge, in August I6I6, Lord Campbell (Ch. Just. i. 460) fathers upon him the ' Letter to the Mayor of Marlborough ' against a benevo lence then in collection, which was made the subject of prosecution in the Star Chamber in April 1615, when he was only seventeen. To haye formed such decided opinion .s, with reasons so clearly stated, and statutes and authorities so precisely quoted, as are found in the letter in question, would be an instance of most remarkable precocity in any youth who had not even commenced his college studies. But the statement -will not bear the slightest inves tigation. There is absolutely nothing in the whole proceeding to lead to a suspicion that the writer of "the letter could have been ' a mere stripling;' but, on the con trary, it is manifest from the letter itself, and from Bacon's well-prepared speech, who would scarcely haye wasted his elo- q'uence on a boy, that he was ' a principal person, and a dweller in that town,' and 'a man Ukely to give both money and good example.' (State Trials, ii. 899.) Instead of the youth who was quietly preparing- for his academical course, the person so de scribed was Oliver, the son of St. John of Lydiard-Tregoze, a seat not far distent from Marlborough, whose relative and namesake afterwards became Viscount Grandison and Lieutenant of Ireland, (Lord Carew's Letters [Camd, Soc], 143.) From the university our student pro ceeded to Lincoln's Inn, where he was called to the bar on .Tune 22, 1626. He received early employment in the law busi ness of the Earl of Bedford, to whom he was distantly related. In consequence of this connection he was really brought be fore the Star Chamber in 1680; both he and the earl, -with Selden, Sir Robert Cot ton, and some others, being charged with publishing 'A Proposition for his Majesty's service to Bridle the Impertinence of Par liaments ' — a piece of irony which was proved to be written by Sir Robert Dudley at Florence in the reign of .Tames I, The government was glad to vrithdraw from this absurd prosecution, by availing iteelf of the birth of the Mng's son as a plea for extend ing mercy to the defendants, (State Trials, iii, 387,) They were consequently dis charged ; but Clarendon (i, 825) says that St, John never forgave the court this 'first assault.' This feeling of bitterness was no doubt increased by his study being searched and his papers seized in 1637, in consequence of being suspected of having drawn the answer of Burton to the information filed ST, JOHN against him in the Star Chamber for a Ubel- lous pubUcation, (Harris's Lives, U, 267,) About 1629 he had married his first wife, Johanna, sole child of Sir James Altham of Mark's Hall, Latton, Essex, and of EUza beth, daughter of Sir Francis Barrington, by Joan, one of the daughters of Sir Henry Cromwell of Hinchinbroke, and aunt both to OUver Cromwell the protector, and John Hampden the patriot. Bound thus more intimately to that party, who were dissatisfied -with the unconstitu tional measures of the court, tMs connection made St, John the natural adviser of Hampden in the celebrated resistance to the payment of ship-money. His argument against the legaUty of that imposition was so leamed and so powerful that he ac quired so much reputation that ' he was called into all courte and to aU causes where the king's prerogative was most con tested.' (aarendon, i. 324.) His firstwife havmg died in childbed, he m 1638 strengthened the tie with the CromweUs by marrying EUzabeth, the first cousin of Oliver, and daughter of Henry CromweU of Upwood. When the king, after a cessation of eleven years, was obUged to call a parUament in April 1640, St. John was elected member for Totnes. (Fasti Oxon. 468.) In the short period of three weeks during which this parliament lasted, though he does not appear to haye put himself forward as a speaker, the journals show that he was named on all the committees connected with popular grievances, and that hewas chai-ged to speak on one of them m the conferences with the Lords. Fmdmg that redress was insisted on before supplies would be granted, the king- dissolved -the parUament, to the disappointment of the moderate, but to the joy of the extreme party. Clarendon re lates (i, 246) that -within an hom- after the dissolution he met St, John, 'who had naturally a great cloud ou his face, and very seldom was known to smile, but had then a most cheerful aspect ; ' and that after lamenting what had taken place, St, John answered him -with a Uttle warmth, 'That it was well; but that it must he worse before it could be better; and that this parUament could never have done what was necessary to be done,' In the new parliament, which met in the following November, St. John agam represented Totnes, and was immediately appointed on several committees, and chair man of that with regard to ship-money. On December 7 he brought up ite reports, on which were foimded the memorable re solutions that not only the impost itself, but all the proceedings to enforce it, and the decision of the judges, were against law. These resolutions were adopted by the House of Lords, after hearing a lumi- ST, JOHN nous address from St, John, which is also remarkable for vindictive sternness towards the judges, (State Trials, Ui, 1262.) On January 29, I640-I, within a fortnight after this speech was delivered, St. John was constituted solicitor-general, (Rymei-, XX, 449,) This promotion arose from a desire to gain over some of the popular party, among whom various places were to be distributed. The Earl of Bedford entered into the plan, and was to be treasurer, and Pym and others were to accept situations of trust. The king readily consented to St. John's appointment, ' hoping that he would have been very useful in the House of Commons, where his authority was then great; a-t least, that he would be ashamed ever to appear m anything that might prove pre judicial to the crown.' But the Earl of Bedford's death three months after, and other circumstances, stoppmg these negotia tions, the Mng found himself vrith a soUoi- tor-general neither abating nor dissembUng his enmity to the court, and who stUl re tained the confidence of his party. The king soon had reason to see how much he had been mistaken in his expec tations. The accusation of the Earl of Strafford by the Commons had been made in the previous November, but the trial ¦did not begin till the 22nd of March ; and St, John, though he was the Mng's officer, and well knew his royal master's anxiety to save the earl, used his utmost efforts to urge on the proceedings, and even dissuaded the Commons from hearing the argument of the earl's counsel on the matter of law. When the Commons found that the offences alleged against Strafford could not be touched by the existing laws, and that he was likely to be acquitted by the Lords, they brought in a bill of attainder, m the promotion of which unjustifiable course St, John was a prominent actor, and in its support addressed the Lords in a speech betraying so much sophistry, brutality, and malice as fuUy to justify Clarendon's con- ¦demnation of it, and the disgust of all un prejudiced men, (Vemey's Notes [Camd, Soc], 49, 65 ; Rushworth, iv. 676; aarendon, i. 407.) In all the violent measures that suc ceeded — the bUI for the contmuance of the parliament, the bill against the bishops, the militia bill, &c. — St, John took the same actively adverse part. The Mng, naturaUy desirous of releasmg himself from his ob noxious officer, offered the place to Hyde ; but he prudently declined it, and dissuaded the Mng from removing St. John at that time, though agreeing that he might have filled it with a better man when the place was actually void. But soon after, the ^breach with the Commons becoming com plete, and no hope remainmg of any altera- ST. JOHN 579^ tion in St John's conduct, the kmg revoke ^ his appointment on October 30, 1643, and put Sir Thomas Gardner in his place. The parUament, however, refused to recogmse the new soUcitor ; and on providmg a Great Seal for themselves, in lieu of that which had been taken to the king by Lord Lyt telton, and appointmg on November 10 two Lords and four of the Commons for ite custody, they named St, John as the first ofthe latter, with the title of 'his majesty's solicitor-general ; ' aud by this designation ¦ he was distinguished until he became chief justice. Whitelocke's statement (71, 88) that in May 1644 he was assigned to be attorney-general is evidently a mistaken account of au ordinance of the Commons, enabling him to do aU acts as effectually as the attorney-general, if present, might have done. (Journals.) St, John was one of the commissioners to treat for a peace at Uxbridge in January 1646, but, as neither party was sincere, the negotiation faUed, In April of that year the self-denying ordinance, by which St, John and the other commissioners of the Great Seal would have been disqualified, was passed by both the houses ; but before the forty days limited by it had expired the parliament voted their continuance in office till the end of the foUovring term ; and this vote was repeated from time to time till October 30, 1646, when they delivered up the Seal to the speakers of the two houses, who were nommated its keepers, ( JVhite- locke, 124, 226,) St, John had, in the previous February, joined in the vote abolishing the Court of Wards ; and now, resuming his functions as solicitor-general, he was ordered to prosecute Judge Jenkms for exercising his judicial duties in defiance of the parliament. But before that sturdy royalist was brought to trial, the Commons had determined to fiU up the vacancies on the bench. They accordingly appointed St, John chief justice of the Common Pleas on October 12, 1648, and, the Lords having concurred, he was sworn in on November 22. (Ibid 194-356.) It was not then the custom, any more than it is now, for the judges to sit in the House of Commons, St. John, therefore, on Ms elevation to the bench, though his seat for Totnes was not vacated, abstained from attendmg parUament, and took no part in the tragic debates of the next two months, which brought Ms sovereign to the block ; and he asserte, in the case which he published in 1660, that, so far from being one of the advisers of the sangumary pro ceedings, he was not even consulted, but 'upon ail occasion manifested his dislike and dissatisfaction.' In this he is confirmed by Thurloe, who acted then as his secre tary, and by the vote which the Commons passed when the Peers rejected the ordi- pp2 580 ST. JOHN nance, that the Lords, and the chief judges ! of each court, whom they had named, should be left out of the commission for the trial. But his denial that he favoured the alteration of the govemment to a com monwealth, and his assertion that he ¦was ever for King, Lords, and Commons, require more credit than can be easily given to a man who had accepted a high judicial office from the opponents of the monarchy, and who, within eight days after they had murdered their king, and after their vote that the office of king was ' unnecessary,' and the House of Peers was ' useless and dangerous,' and that both 'ought to be abolished,' consented not only to remain as a judge under the usurping government, but to be a member of its council of state. That he acted on that council, and was trusted by it, is apparent from his being one of the committee in 1660 to confer -with General Fairfax as to the invasion of Scot land — a conference which led to the ap pointment of Cromwell to be lord-general of the army. ( Whiteloeke, 366-462.) In March I65I he and Mr, Stiickland were sent ambassadors to the Dutch, It is curious that in speakmg of this embassy Clarendon calls him ' the known confident of CromweU,' and WMtelocke designates him ' CromweU's creature ' — an agreement between writers of opposite parties which goes far to show the general impression at the time, and to wai-rant the nickname he received of ' The Dark Lanthorn,' notwith standing his denial of ite justice. In June he retumed vrithout having concluded the treaty he went to negotiate. His residence at the Hague was not unattended with danger. He was treated with indignity by the people, aud with something like in difference by the States ; he received a gross insult from Prince Edward, the Pal- grave's brother ; he was engaged in a per sonal quarrel vrith the Duke of York, the details of which do not tell to Ms credit ; and he narrowly escaped au attempt upon his life, similar to that lately practised by the Thugs in India, The parliament, m- dignant at the slight endeavours made to punish the delinquents, and at the trifling impediments that were every day thro-wn in the way of completing the treaty, re called the ambassadors. On their return St. John took his seat in the House of Commons, and, after giving a detailed ac count of aU their proceedings, they received thanks for their faithful ser-rices, (Ibid. 487-496 ; PezrL Hist iU, 1367,) A resolution that the several judges who were members should be discharged fi-om their attendance in the house whilst they executed thefr offices, which was passed in October 1649, was rescinded on June 27, 1651 , no doubt for the purpose of euabUng St. John to resume his seat, and make his ST. JOHN diplomatic report on July 2, From that time he contmued his attendance, and to- his indignation at the treatment he received in Holland, and the failure of the negotia tion, is to be attributed the adoption in the next month of the ordmance upon which was foimded the Navigation Act passed at the Restoration, prohibiting foreign ships from bringing any merchandise or commo dities into England but such as were the proceeds and growth of thefr own country, an ordinance which was much more inju rious to the Dutch, wholly suppressing their carrying trade, than to any other nation, (Clarendon,vi, 599.) In Septem ber he was one of the four who were sent to compUment CromweU on Ms victory at Worcester, and in October he was ap pointed a commissioner for the affairs of Scotland. In November he was re-elected on the council of state, and was named by the committee for the reformation of the universities, chanceUor of Cambridge. At the meeting caUed by CromweU on the 10th of December to consider what was fit to be done for the settlement of the nation, in which the general agreed -with WMtelocke that the question was whether a repubUc or a mixed monarchical govem ment were the best, and gave his opmion that the latter would be most effectual, St. John declared that 'the government, vrith out sometMng of monarcMcal power, would be very difficult to be so settled as not to- shake the foundation of our laws and the liberties ofthe people,' (Whiteloeke, 516,) Here is notMng to show that he was then opposed to Cromwell, who was feeUng Ms- way towards attaming that power which he afterwards assumed, and who, as soon as he found that some of the party sug gested the selection of one of the late king's sons, put an end to the debate. On the I4th of the pre-rious month St, John had been teller -with CromweU of the majority of two wMch voted that a time should be declared beyond wMch the par liament should not sit, which limit was on a subsequent day fixed for November 3, 1654, (Pari Hist iU. 1375.) He then went to Scotiand, where he was actively engaged -with his colleagues in- arranging the intended union vrith that country. After his return ou May 6, 1652, he was ill for some time, but in April 1658, though it does not appear that he was a party to the violent mode adopted by CromweU of dismissing the parUament, he strongly supported the general's deter mination to put an immediate period to its sittings, Cromwell, however, did not summon him to the convention (called Barebone's Parliament) which met on July 4, and dissolved itself on the 1 2th of the following December, resigning its power to the lord general, who four days after was^ ST. JOHN 'declared lord protector of the common wealth of the three kmgdoms, St, John ¦aUeges that he had nothing to do with this elevation of Cromwell, falling danger ously ill in the previous Cctober, and not recovering tUl the May after the eveut; -and so far from approving it, Thurloe testifies that he expressed himself strongly ¦against it. In further proof of his dislike, he says that, though Cromwell named him on his councU, and appointed him a com missioner ofthe treasury (Whiteloeke, 517- ¦697), he never attended in either capacity, nor received any salary, Accordmg to St, John's account, the cordiality between him and Cromwell had cooled since the latter had assumed arbi trary power, and their intercourse was Umited to formal visits before or after the terms. But when the parUament of 1657 presented their 'Humble Petition and Advice ' to the protector, pressing him to take the title of king, St. John is found as one of the committee that waited upon iim, and as a speaker contending against his scruples, (ParL Hist, iii, 1498.) Crom well's refusal to comply -with this request led to a new arrangement of the govern ment, by which he was confirmed as lord protector, with the additional power of naming his successor, and of caUing not more than seventy nor less than forty persons to sit in what was designated ' the other house,' In the exercise of this power St, John was, one of the quasi peers whom he selected. They had not, however, a long enjoyment of their honours, for within a fortnight after the parliament met the Commons showed so much hesitation in acknowledging this upper chamber that Cromwell dissolved the parUament on February 4, 1658. Within seven months after this Cromwell died, and his son Richard, who was immediately proclaimed his successor, continued St. John as chief justice, and summoned another parliament on January 27, 1659. This parUament did not last three months, dm-mg which the Commons were principally occupied in debates as to their mtercourse with the ' other house,' manifesting all their former jealousy. St, John states that he never would sit as a peer, but it would seem that he had no great opportunity of doing so, for in the very limited period that either parliament sat after the first nomination of the new peers little is recorded of their proceedings. In the following month (May) the army recalled the remains of that parliament which Oliver Cromwell had expelled in 1653, and St. John not only took his place in it, but was named one of the council of state. The old government, ' 'without a -single person, kingship, or House of Peers,' having been re-established, St, John and ST, JOHN 581 Sir John Pickering waited on Richard Cromwell, and obtamed his written acqm- escence in this arrangement, by which he was thus deprived of his short-Uved dignity. The sittings of the Rump Par liament, as it was called, were violently interrupted in October by the same military power that had caUed them together, and a Committee of Safety formed. They were again, however, by the Eud of Monk, rein stated on December 26, St. John attended a meeting on February 17, 1659-60, at Monk's quarters, vrith reference to the mem bers who were secluded in 1648, and was instrumental in restoring them to thei) places a few days after, (Mercurius Po- liticus.) The house dissolved itself on March 16, first passing an act for anew parliament to meet on April 26, Among the qualifi cations proposed for the members was an oath abjuring the title of Charles IL, which St. JoMi declares that he came out of the country on purpose to oppose, addmg that it was he that made the motion to put a period to the Long Parliament. At the Restoration, which soon followed, St, John found Mmselt'in a difficult position. His hai-sli and active proceedings at the commencement of the troubles ; the lead he took against the Mng while holding an office under the crown; the inhumanity of his speech against Strafford ; his partisanship in all CromweU's earlier, if not later, measures; his recent adherence to the principle of a government without a smgle person, king ship, or House of Peers; and even his rela tionship to the two protectors — settmg aside his personal coUision with the Duke of York at the Hague — could not but operate preju dicially against him. In the discussions, therefore, in the House of Commons upon the act of indemnity, he was included among those reserved for such pams, penal ties, and forfeitures, not extending to life, as by a future act should be imposed. To counteract this vote, he pubUshed the case before referred to, which is drawn up with a great deal of art and plausibility, but must be received with an equal degree of caution both as to its statements and its omissions. With the strenuous aid of Thurloe, who had a grateful remembrance of his early patro nage, it had its desired effect upon the Lords, who mitigated the clause against him by the substitution of another (to which the Commons afterwards assented), declariuo- that if he accepted or exercised any office after September I (two days subsequent to the royal assent), he should stand as if ex cepted by name from the benefit of the act. The king, on hearing of his narrow escape, is said to have expressed a wish that he had been added to those excepted. (Pari. Hist. iv, 70, 91, 114 ; Ludlow, 393.) St. John, after residing for a few years in privacy on his estate at Longthorpe, a hamlet 582 ST. LEONARD'S near Peterborough, where he had erected an elegant mansion, retired to the continent under the assumed name of Montagu. It is uncertain whether he ever returned to Eng land, authorities differing as to the place of his death, though all agree that it occurred on December 31, 1673, at the age of 76. St. John's powers as an advocate were certainly great; of his qualities as ajudge there are few means of forming an opinion, for there are no reports of his court during the time that he presided in it. Of his private disposition all authorities concur in describing it as gloomy, reserved, and un- amiable ; but the charge which is made by some, that he was avaricious and died dis gracefully rich, is not supported by sufficient evidence. The Bedford Level was com pleted principally by his exertions, and in commemoration of his services Ms name is still connected with its greatest work, called ' St. John's Eau.' His third wife was Elizabeth, daughter of Daniel Oxenbridge, M.D., of Daventry, and widow of Caleb Cockcroft, of London, mer chant, who after his death married SirHum- phrey Sydenham, of Chilworthy, Somer setshire. By her he had no issue, but by both his other wives he had several children. One of his grandsons was made a baronet in 1716, but the title became extinct at his death in 1766. ( Wotton's Baronet iv. 178.) ST. LEONAED'S, LoED. See E, B. SUGDEN. ST. MAEI.a! ECCLESIA, William de (Bishop oe London), so called from a town of that name in Normandy, held some office in the Exchequer in I Richard L, 1189-90, he and Hugh Bardolf then attesting- some accounts of Henry de CornhiU, the sheriff of London, (Pipe Roll, IL) He is stated to have acted as secretary to King Richard, and appears to have been quickly advanced in ecclesiastical and civil preferment. He held the Uving of Harewood in Yorkshire, and successively became a canon of York and of St. Paul's, and dean of the College of St. Martin's-le-Grand in London, He was appointed sheriff of Surrey in 5 Richard I., and continued so for two years. In 6 Richard I, he paid five hundred marks for the custody of the heir of Robert, the younger son of Robert Fitz-Harding, with aU his inheritance, and the power of mar rying him to one of his kinswomen ; and he had the charge of the abbey of Glastonbury, the honor of WaUingford, and various other lands in the king's hands, (Rot Cancell. 6, &c.) By the Norman Roll of 1195 (i. clxxvi,), it appears that a pension of 35/, 12.S. had been granted for his and his mother's Uves out of the manor of St. M6re Eglise, From the 6th to the 10th year of Richard I, hisname frequently appears as one of the justiciers before whom fines were levied ST, PAUL ( Hunter's Prrface), and in the latter year he was promoted to the bishopric of London, but was not consecrated till May 1199, about two months after King Richard's death. He was one of the 'bishops who conveyed the pope's remonstrance to Kmg John in 1208, and who, on his continued resistance, placed the kingdom under an mterdict. Two years afterwards he pronounced the sentence of excommunication against the king, which was not removed till the year 1213, He was obliged to fly the kingdom and to remain an exile till King John had made his peace with the pope and received absolution. In the meantime Ms castle at Stortford, which WiUiam the Conqueror had given to the see, was entfrely demo Ushed, After his return to England he was present at the grantmg of Magna Charta, in 1215, When he had presided over his see for twenty-two years, he retfred from its duties, by a voluntary abdication, on January 26, I22I ; and after living in seclusion for Uttle more than three years, he died at St, Osyth on March 27, 1224, (Godivin, 179; Le Neve, 177 ; R. de Wendover, Ui. 220-802.) ST, MAETIN, Ralph de, is named m 10 Richard I., 1198-9, as one of the justices itinerant flxing the taUage for the county of Surrey ; and in the same year they are recorded as making amercements m Esses and HertfordsMre. Ralph de Martin, who, in 31 Hem-y IL, 1186, was one of the cus todes of the see of SaUsbuiy, then m the king's hands, was no doubt the same person, and was probably so enfrusted m conse quence of holding some office in the Ex chequer, (Madox, i. 311, 565, 733,) ST. OMEBO, William de, had the cus tody of the castle of Hereford in 38 Hemy in, ( Cal. Inquis. p, m, i, 18) ; and the only entry on the rolls of that reign which proves that he sat on the judicial bench is a grant to him, in the flfty-third year, 1269, of an annual salary of 40/., ' quamdiu placitis prsedictis intenderit.' Although Dugdale thereupon mserts his name in the column of the justices of the King's Bench, it is doubtful whether he was more than a jus tice itinerant. He is not mentioned after wards in the former character ; and the only instance found of his acting in the latter is the taking of an inquisition by him and Sir Warine de Chaucomb at Lin coln in 8 Edward I., 1276. (P-oceed. Arch, Inst. York, 132.) In the previous year he attended at the general council held at Lyons under Pope Gregory X, (Devon's Pell Recoi-ds, Int. xxxiii.) ST. PAUL, John de (Aechbishop of Ddblin), whose family had property in the county of York, was not improbably the son of Robert de St, Paul, lord of the to-wn ship of By ram, who was one of the ad herents of the Earl of Lancaster in the ST. QUINTIN reign of Edward TL. (ParL Writs, ii. p. ii. 1387.) John was a clerk in the Chancery, and is the last named of three of those officers to whom the custody of the Great Seal was entrusted at York,^from January 13 to February 17, 1384, during the tem porary absence of John de Stratford, the chancellor. On April 28, 1837, he was constituted master of the Rolls ; and m 1340 the House of Converts, in Chancery Lane, was granted to him for life. While master of the Rolls, the Great Seal was twice deposited with him and other clerks — viz., from July 6 to 19, 1338, and from December 8, 1339, to February 16, 1340 ; but on the latter day he was appomted sole custos till the restoration of Archbishop Stratford on April 28, He agam held it for a short time on the resigna tion ofthe archbishop m the following June. On the king's hurried return from the siege of Toumay, John de St. Paul was one of the victims of his indignation. He was charged with some malversation in his office, and cast into prison ; but he obtained his release as a clergyman through the in tervention of Archbishop Stratford, He however was deprived ofthe custody ofthe RoUs on December 2, two days after the king arrival in England, (Barnes's Ed ward IIL 217; AngL Sac i. 20,) The royal anger did not long continue ; for though St, Paul was not restored to the mastership of the Rolls, he after a little while was allowed to resume his old position among the masters m Chancery, On the death of the Chancellor Parnmg on August 26, 1343, he was again one of the three to whom the Seal was entrusted till the appointment of Robert de Sadington on September 29, In 1346 he was made archdeacon of Cornwall (Le Neve, 94), and about tbe month of October 1349 was elected Arch bishop of Dublin. He presided there for thirteen years, and died in 1362, (N, Fmdei-a, in. 190, 433 ; Holinshed, vi. 44.) ST. ftUINTIN, Waliee de, is only men tioned as one of the justices itinerant flxing the assize or tallage in Dorsetshire and Somersetehire in 20 Henry IL, 1174, in con junction with Alured de Lincoln, the sheriff, (Madox, i. 123.) ST. VALEBICO, or ST. 'WALEEICO, John DE (a town in Normandy), was the de scendant of a noble family of that name, Ranulph the ancestor of which at the time of the general survey possessed several manors in Lincolnshire, The elder branch failed for want of male issue in 1219, (Baronage, i, 464.) John was probably an officer in the Exchequer ; for in 66 Henry IIL and I Edward I, he was appointed sheriff of the counties of Somerset and Dorset, with a special commission to enquire what debts several sheriffs of those counties and their bailiffs had received, and not SALMON 583 accounted for. He became a baron of the Exchequer about 2 Edward I., 1274. He is not mentioned after 1276, during which a sum of 20/, was allowed for his expenses. (Madox, U, 112, 196, 269, 320,) ST, VIGOEE, Thomas de, was appointed m 9 Edwardi., 1281, to take assizes in dif ferent counties. He was summoned to the parUament at Shrewsbury in II Edward L, and died in the twenty-third year of the reign, leaving property in Wiltshire and Somersetshire, (Ccd. Inquis. ^,va. i. 123; ParL Writs, i. 16, 824.) SALCETO, Robeet de, or DE LA SAUCEY, was the son of Roger de la Saucey, and held the sheriffalty of Northamptonshfre with Henry Fitz-Peter, or de Northampton, in 6 and 7 John, During the troubles in that reign he seems to have been a waverer, for in 16 John he gave hostages for his faith ; in the next year he was employed to ex plain the Mng's affairs to his neighbours in Northampton and Rutland ; and in the fol lowing Ms property was seized, it must be presumed on his open hostility, (Rot. Pat. 47, 104, 128, 168 ; Rot Claus, i. 84, 77, 236.) Soon after the accession of Henry IIL, however, it was restored to Mm ; and in the seventh year of the reign he was engaged in flxing the tallage, and again in 10 Henry III. in assessing the qumzime of his county, (Rot. Claus. i. 306, 640, ii, 147.) He was at the head of the justices itmerant for Rutland in 18 Henry IIL, 1284, beyond which date nothing is recorded of him, SALISBUEY, Eael op. See R, Nevill, W. Cecil, SALMON, John (Bishop oe Noewich), was the son of Salomon and Amicia, as appears from his appointing four priests to pray for their souls in a chapel he founded in the chancel of Norwich Cathedral ; and it may be presumed that the family was not of any eminence, from the bishop's as suming for his arms a rebus of his name — three silver salmons hauriant on a sable field. He is sometimes called John of Ely, having been prior of the convent there. While holding this dignity he was elected Bishop of Norwich, on ,Tuly 15, 1299. Salmon was not employed by Edward L, but he visited Rome in 1806 ; and on the accession of Edward II, he was sent to France as one ofthe ambassadors to demand Isabella, the daughter of King Philip, as the wife of his sovereign. In the third year of the reign he was chosen one of the lords ordainers ; and in the ninth he was among the commissioners to open the par liament then held. He took the part of his sovereign throughout his troublesome reign. On January 26, 1320, 13 Edward H., he was appomted chanceUor in full parliament ; but, though he retained the office for three years and a half, he seems to have been so 584 SALVEYN severe a sufferer from iU health that the business of the Chancery was frequently performed by deputies. His delivery of the Seal to the custodes directed to act for him, on June 5, 1323, when he was confined to Ms bed, may be considered as the date of his ultimate retirement, although the new chancellor was not named till the 20th of August following. He recovered from that sickness, for in the following year he went as ambassador to the court of France, and succeeded in negotiating a peace between the two kings. His health, however, again failing, he died at the priory of Folkestone on July 2, 1325, having presided over his diocese for nearly six-and-twenty years. (Godwin, 488 ; AngL Sac i. 412, 802 ; Le Neve, 210 ; Rot ParL i, 850, 448 ; Blomefields Norwich, i. 497,) SAL'VEYN, Geeakd, had large possessions in Yorkshire, and was appointed one of the four justices of trailbaston for that county in the commission dated November 2-3, 1304, In the foUowing April his name was omitted, but he had been returned knight of the shire in the interval, and was again elected m 35 Edward I, (Pari. Writs, i. 148, 190, 407-8.) The family was founded by Josceus le Flemangh, who came in with the Con queror, and was settled at Cukeney in Nottinghamshire. His grandson Ralph re ceived the designation of Le Silvan from his manor of Woodhouse in that county ; and this was afterwards corrupted to Sal- veyne. Gerard was the son of Ralph Sal- veyn of Duffield in Yorkshire, and Sibilla, daughter and coheir of Robert Beeston of Wilberfoss. He was one of the assessors of the fifteenth for that county, granted in 30 Edward I., and two years afterwards was sent on an embassy to the court of France. In 1 Edward II. he was appointed escheator north of Trent, and held it till the middle of the third year. He was then entrusted with the sheriffalty of York for four years, commencing in 4 Edward II, In the twelfth year he obtained a pardon as one of the adherents of Thomas Earl of Lancaster, and died in the following year. His grandson, Gerard Salveyn, succeeded Mm, and the two united names continued to designate every head of the family for more than four centuries, thirteen in num ber, and is still held by its representative, Gerard Salyin, Esq., of Croxdale in Duriiam, (Inquis. p.m.'i. 202 ; Ahb. Rot Orig. i. 169.) SAMEOED, Thomas de, is first mentioned in 6 John, 120.3, when Mr. Hunter in troduces him in his list of the justiciers before whom fines were levied. As this is the only year in which his name so occurs, he was probably present only as an officer of the treasury of the Exchequer, with which he was evidentiy then connected, and was for many years afterwards eni- SANDALE ployed in a confidential manner by the Mng. Besides several entries of his deliver ing money and plate mto the chamber, there is a mandate directed to him m 16 John to deUver forty thousand marks, flfteen golden cups, a golden crown, and various other valuable articles then m his custody to two persons therein named. Two years afterwards he is quitted of sixty- six sacks of money, which were in the treasury at Corfe, and which ought to contain nine thousand nine hundred marks. (Rot Pat 61, 110, 146.) It appears from the Rotuli Misae of II and 14 John (IIO, 118, 137) that he was at both periods in personal attendance on the king, when several paymente were made through his hands, many of which relate to the royal sports. He had the custody of the abbey of Malmesbury, was governor of the castle of Devizes, and custos of the foreste of Chippenham, Melkesham, and Braden, In 14 John he was sent on a mis sion to Flanders (Rot. Claus. i. 395, 478 ; Rot. Misce, 244) ; and to the last day of the reign he preserved his loyalty to his sove reign. Among the rewards which he received are the manors of Kening, Potema, and Lavington ; the lauds of Saherus de Quincy, in Wiltshire, which were given to him in conjunction with Geoffi-ey de NeriUe ; and, lastly, ten dolia of good wme. (Rot. aaus. i. 41, 123, 280, 263.) He was one of the pledges for the pay ment of that cmious tine of two hundred hens, which the wife of Hugh de Nerille offered to Kiug John for Uberty to Ue with her husband for one mght. (Madox, i.47I,) He died about 6 Henry III, (Rot. Claus. i. 478, 490.) SANDALE, John de (Bishop oe Wnf- ohestee), held an office connected -with the Treasury or Exchequer in 30 Edward I., 1302, when he is mentioned as receiving a crown for Queen Mai-garet (Rot Pari. i. 474) ; ill the following year he and John de Drokenesford are called treasurers (De von's Issue Roll, 116) ; aud he was likewise one of those appointed to assess the taUage m London and Middlesex, &c. In 83 Ed ward I. he became chamberlain of Scot land, an office which he held tiU the end of the reign, being at the same time com missioned to treat with the Scots on the affairs of that country, (Abb. Rot, Oi-ig, i, 164.) Called from Scotland at the accession of Edward IL, he was constituted chancellor of the Exchequer on August 7, 1307, and at the end of the year was one of those directed to instruct the sherifi's of London and Middlesex in arresting the Knights Teniplars, On May 14, 1308, we find him acting as locum tenens for Walter Reginald, Bishop of "\^'orchester, the treasurer, and SAND"WICH continuing to do so till that prelate became chancellor, on July 6, I3I0, when the office of treasurer was placed in Sandale's hands. There it remained untU March 14, 1812, when he was succeeded by Walter de Lang ton, Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, whose locnim tenens he was named in the foUo-wing October, He occupied this sta tion tUl he was appointed chancellor, on September 26, I3I4 (Madox, i. 75, U, 8, &c.), an office which he held till June 9, I3I8. Sandale was an ecclesiastic, and one of the kmg's chaplains. On January 10, 1310, he had been made treasurer of Lichfield, was a canon of York, and is inserted in Le Neve's catalogue of the deans of London. It seems, however, doubtful whether he ever held the latter dignity. During his chancellorship the bishopric of Winchester became vacant, and he was elected to that .«ee in August 1316, but presided over it for little more than three years, (Le iVere, 180, 183, 286,) Soon after his resignation of the Great Seal he was restored to his office of trea- aui-er, which was committed to him on November 16, 1318. (Madox, U. 39.) He held it during the remainder of his life. He died on November 2, 1319, at South wark, and was buried in St. Margaret's Church there, (Godwin, 223; Angl. Sac. i,3I6.)_ ^ I I J His Ufe seems to have been employed in a routine of official duties, of which no further interruption is noticed than a pilgrimage he made to the shrine of St. Thomas of Canterbury a few months before he resigned the Seal. Previous to his elevation to the bishopric, his London residence, as chancellor, was in Aldgate. From Edward I. he received the manor of Berghby in Lincolnshire, and from Edward II, a house in the suburbs of Lincoln belonging to a religious society then dis solved, (Ahh. Rot Orig. i. 166, 195, 197.) It is probable, therefore, that his family was settled in that county, although from ite name it no doubt had its origin in Yorkshire, in which, at his death, he had property in the manor of Whetlay, near Doncaster. (Cal. Inquis. p, m, i, 292,) SAND-WICH, Ralph de, was of a knightly family in Kent, in which county he held the manors of Eynsford and Ham, In 49 Henry III, he was keeper of the wardrobe, and in that capacitj'', during the temporary absence of Thomas de Cantilupe the chan cellor, the Great Seal was placed in his custody on May 7, 1265, under the seals of three clerks of Chancery, In I Edward I, the custody of the vacant bishopric of London was committed to him, and in 5 Edward I, the castle of Arundel, From that year to the ninth he acted as escheator south of the Trent imder the title of ' senes- SAUNDEES 0»-J callus regis,' In 14 Edward I, he was. appointed constable of the Tower of Lon don, and, having held the office to the end of that reign, was confirmed in it on the accession of Edward II, {Abb. Rot. Orig. i. 21, 27-34, 165 ; Madox, i. 270, ii. 108-9.) Dugdale introduces him as a judge of the Court of King's Bench in 17 Edward I., 1289, on the authority of a fine le-ried before him in Michaelmas Term of that year. This, however, would rather seem to place him in the Common Pleas, in. confirmation of which there is a letter dated September 24, 1289, by wMch he was associated vrith John de Lovetot and the other judges of that court as chief jufstice in the place of Thomas de Weyland, then disgraced. As term was about to commence. King Edward no doubt com missioned him, in his character of constable of the Tower, an office theu of great importance, to act ad interim, to prevent an interruption in the ordinary business till the charge was investigated. In this office he continued till February 1290. (Gent Mag. March 1862, p. 267.) In 30 Edward I, he is called 'j ustice de Newgate.' (Rot ParL i. 164 ; Hasted, U. 529, x. 178.) He probably died in 1 Edward II., when John de Crumbwell was appointed con stable of the Tower, SANSETUN, Benedict de (Bishop oe Rochestee), was appointed on March 26, 1204, to the office of precentor of St, Paul's, London, when it was first erected and en dowed with the church of Sording, and he enjoyed it till he was raised to the bi.shop- rio of Rochester, in December 1214, l6 John. (Rot Chart 124; Le Neve, 199, 248.) In 8 Henry III, he was at the head of the justices appointed for the four home counties (Rot. Claus. i. 396, 405), and fines were levied before them at Westmin ster in that character. In May, 8 Henry IIL, he had a donum of twenty marks as resident in the Exchequer, and in the fol lowing November ten marks for his support ' dum moram facit ad Scaccarium nostrum ' (Ibid. i. 596, ii, 8), terms which seem to imply that he then acted as a regular jus ticier. In October 1225 he went on an embassy to France, and dying on December 21, 1226, was buried in his own cathedral, (Ihid. ii. 64, 163.) SAUNDEES, Edmund, commenced his career in the deepest poverty. His asso ciates being selected from the lowest class, his habits in accordance with thefrs, and his elevation being of so short continuance, no endeavours were made during his life to trace his real history. Yet one would think that these very circumstances would have given a peculiar interest to an account of the process by which he first extricated himself from his low condition, ofthe means which he used, and the energy which he 586 SAUNDEES exercised, to acquire that mastery over the intricacies of the law which his Reports exhibit, and of those powers by which he gradually acquired the ear of the court, and attamed the high rank to which he was at last promoted. Roger North (p. 223) is the only con temporary author who gives any description of his career, but the colouring with which he paints it reqmres perhaps some softening. He saj's that Saunders ' was at first no better than a poor beggar boy, if not a parish foundling, without known parents or re lations. ' By his wiU, however, it appears that he was born in the parish of Barnwood, about two miles from Gloucester, to the poor of which place he bequeathed 20/. It leaves legacies to his ' father and mother Gregory ' also, from which fact Lord Camp bell (CJh. Just. ii. 59) fills up the blank by saying, on what authority does not appear, that ' Ms father, who was above the lowest rank of life, died when he was an infant, and that his mother took for her second husband a man of the name of Gregory.' His lordship's suggestion that he ran away because he was 'hardly used by his father- in-law ' seems to be ignored by the confi dence placed in the discretion of his ' father Gregory ' by his will. Roger North's account proceeds thus : ' He had found away to live b}' obsequious ness (in Clement's Inn, as I remember) and courting the attorney's clerks for scraps. The extraordinary observance and dili gence of the boy made the society willing to do him good. He appeared very ambi tious to learn to write ; and one of the attomeys got a board knocked up at a window on the top of a staircase. . . He made Mmself so expert a writer that he took in business, and earned a few pence by hackney-writing. And thus by degrees he pushed his faculties and fell to forms ; and by books that were lent him became an exquisite entering clerk,' This course of education was pursued during the Common wealth, for by the time of the Restoration he had so ady. altered, his labour incessant, and his anxiet)'' greater. His constitution consequently, which had been much damaged by his^ former intemperance, soon utterly gave- way. Before he had been six months on the bench he was seized with apoplexy and palsy, and died on June 19, 1688, at his house on Parson's Green, whither he had removed on becoming chief justice. By his wUl he makes Nathaniel Earle and Jane his vrife (his host and hostess in. Butcher Row) his residuary legatees, 'as^ some recompense for their care of him, and attendance upon him, for many years.' 'While he sat in the Court of Kmg's^ Bench,' says Roger North, 'he gave the- rule to the general satisfaction ; ' and it is- SAUNDERS universaUy allowed that he was abundantly versed in the mysteries and technicalities of law. His Reports, printed after his death, extend from 1666 to 1672, and are esteemed for their simplicity and precision. They are composed in so dramatic a form that Lord Mansfield called him the Terence of reporters. SAUNDEBS, Edwaed, was one of the sons of Thomas Saunders, Esq., of Har rington m Northamptonshire, by Margaret, daughter of Richard Cave, of Stanford in that county. Admitted at the Middle Temple, he was elected reader in 1625, and again in 1583 and 1539, His call to the degree of the coif was in Trinity Term 1640, and he was made one of Kmg Ed ward's Serjeants on February 11, 1547, within a fortnight after the accession. He was successively elected member for Co ventry, Lostwithiel, and Saltash, The Reports of Dyer and Plowden show that he was in fliU practice, and before the end of the reign he had been appointed recorder of Coventry, At the king's death, in July 1653, he was in that city, and by his insti gation the mayor refused to obey the orders sent by the Duke of Northumberland on the part of Lady Jane Grey, and immedi ately proclaimed Queen Mary. (Chron. of Qu. Jane, &c. 113.) This prompt service was not overlooked, for on the 4th of the next October he was raised to the bench as a judge of the Common Pleas, and was knighted by King PhiUp in the following January. (Machyn 's Diary, 342.) Among the trials on which he sat was that of Sir Nicholas Throck morton, but he was little more than a silent commissioner, making only one slight remark. (State Trials, i. 894, 957.) Though these circumstances might raise a doubt as to his being, as Wotton says, the brother of Laurence Saunders, who was burnt for heresy at Coventry in May 1655, the more especially as on the death of Sir WilUam Portman Sir Edward was promoted to the chief justiceship of the Queen's Bench on May 8, 1557, yet two letters remain from him to Lawrence which authenticate the relationship. Although a Roman Catholic, Sir Edward was re-appointed by Queen EUzabeth immediately after Mary's death, but the day before the next HUary Term he was superseded by Sir Robert Catlin, and removed into the Court of Exchequer as cMef baron, a change aiising probably from the feeling that the former place was too importent to be held by one of his reUgious persuasion, but that his services as a judge were too valuable to be alto gether dispensed with. He was present at the trial of the Duke of Norfolk in 1571, but does not appear to have uttered a word. In the business of his court, how ever, this charge cannot be made against SAUVAGE 587 him, for his learning and his industry are amply exhibited by both Dyer and Plowden. He died November 12, 1676, and was buried at Weston-under-'Wethale, under a handsome monument. He married first Margaret, daughter of Sfr Thomas Engle field, judge of the Common Pleas, and widow of George Carew, Esq. ; and se condly Agnes Hussey, - By the first he left a daughter, and by the second he had no child, (Athenee Cantabrigienses, i. 859, 566,) SAUNEOBD, John de (Aechbishop oe Dublin), was a justice itinerant in 3 Ed ward I, (7 Report Pub. Rec, App. ii, 248), but whether of England or Ireland is uncertain. The latter seems the more probable, as he was the kmg's escheator in Ireland from the eighth to the twelfth year, (Abh. Rot Orig. i. 36, 42, 48.) In 1285, 13 Edward I., he was made Archbishop of Dublin, and there is a letter from him to John de Langton, apparently before he was chancellor, and which there fore may have been written either before or after Saunford was elected to the arch bishopric, requesting new 'writs relative to- the process m the plea of Pencriz, to bear the same date as the former, as arrang.ed when he attended at Knaresburgh before Langton and William de Hamilton, (7 Report, ut supra, 247.) As Pencriz is either the collegiate church in Stafford shire or the church in Derbyshire, it would appear that Saunford was then acting in a, judicial capacity in England, but there is nothing positively to decide the question, A contention arose between the arch bishop and William de Luda, Bishop of Ely, in 21 Edward I., in consequence of a man of the former having been killed by a servant of the latter. (Rot. Pari i. Ill, 152.) The date of the archbishop's death was probably 30 Edward I., as his successor, WilUam de Hotham, was then appointed. SAUVAGE, Geoeeeet le, held property in the counties of Warwick, Stafford, Derby, and Worcester, and on the death of his father, of the same name, in 1222, 6 Henry IIL, was excused his flne for admission, at the intercession of Hugh le Despencer, whose daughter, Matilda, he married, (Rot. Claus. i. 494, ii, 94 ; Ex cerpt, e Rot. Fin. i, 205.) In the foUowing year he was custos of the forest of Saver- nake in Wiltshire, in which county he was also a justice itinerant in 9 Henry IIL Dugdale (Orig. 42) notices fines levied before him at Westminster in 7 Henry HI., and fi-om that time till Easter, 10 Henry III, (Rot Claus. i. 528, ii. 76.) He died in 1230, when Hugh le De spencer paid fifty shUlings for the custody of his lands and the wardship of his heir. SAU-yAGE, JamIis le, was the rector of the church of St. Peter at Hotham, or Ocham, probably WoMng in Sun-ey, and 588 SAVILE probably on that account was joined to the justices itinerant of the home counties in 3 Henry IIL, I2I9, He was chaplain to Hubert Walter, Archbishop of Canterbury and chancellor, and was oue of the execu tors of his wUl. (Rot Pat 26 ; Rot Claus. i, 60-1.) On that prelate's death, in 1205, the king nominated him as custos of the archbishopric durmg the vacancy, and made him one of his own chaplains, (Rot. Claus. i. 46, 47, 71.) SAVILE, John, belonged to the ancient family of Savile, long settled in Yorkshire, which was represented in the reign of Edward 1. by two brothers, John and Henry. From John descended the Marquis of Halifax, a title which became extinct in 1700. From Henry descended a baronet whose title expired in 1689, and Hem-y Savile of Bradley Hall in Stainland, in the parish of Halifax, who by his wife Eliza beth, daughter of Robert Ramsden, was the father of three sons, John, Henry, and Tho mas, the two elder of whom became emi nent in their respective vocations, John as abaron of the Exchequer, and Henry for his profound learning and his valuable publica tions — the memory of the latter being- perpetuated in the university of Oxford by his endowment of two professorships in geometry and astronomy, which are dis tinguished by his name. John Savile was born at Over Bradley in 1545, and after studying at Brazenose Col lege, Oxford, entered the Middle Temple, where he advanced to the office of reader in 1586. That he was a regular attendant in the Common Pleas and Exchequer (in the latter of which he probably practised) is apparent from his reports of cases decided in those courts, which commence in Easter Term 1680. He was about this time steward of the lordship of Wakefield, and was called on November 29, 1692, to take the degree of a serjeant-at-law. In less then five years afterwards, on July 1, 1598, he was raised to the bench as a baron of the Ex chequer, being recommended by Lord Bur leigh, though described by him as a man of small living. (Peck's Desid. Cur. b. v. 24.) He sat in that court for the remamder of his life. King James renewing his patent m 1603 and knighting him, with the addi tional grant in 1604 of king's chief justice in the county palatine of Lancaster. (CaL State Papers [1608-10], 133,) In 1599 he had been named as a commissioner ' de schismate supprimendo' (Rymer, xvi. 386) ; and in Michaelmas Term 1606 he joined with his colleagues in giving judgment for the crown in tbe great case of impositions, (State Trials, ii. 382.) Tbis was one of the last legal duties he performed, Ms death occurring on February 2, 1607. His body was buried at St, Dunstan's-in-the-West, in Fleet Street, London, but his heart was SAY deposited in the church of Methley in York shire, where his ancestors were interred, and over it a magmficent monument was afterwards erected. He was fond of historical studies, and was one of the first members of the Society of Antiquaries. An intimacy existed be tween him and Camden, his letter to whom pointing out a variety of mistakes in the 'Britannia' is extant. His benevolence was equal to his leaming, and there was scarcely a manor of his in Yorkshfre in which he did not leave some charities behind Mm. He married four wives — 1, Jane, daughter of Richard Garth, of Morden m Surrey, Esq.; 2, EUzabeth, daughter of Thomas Wentworth, of Elmshall in Yorkshire, Esq., and relict of Richard Tempest, of Bowling, Esq. ; 3, Dorothy, daughter of Lord Went worth of the South, and reUct of Sir Wil liam Widmerpool and Sir Martin Forbisher; and, 4, Margery, daughter of Ambrose Peate, of London, and relict of Sfr Jerom Weston. He had issue by the flrst two of these only, Henry, his son by his ffrst -wife, was created a baronet in 1611, but the title died with him in 1682, From John, Ms son by Ms second wife, descended Sir John Savile, who was installed a knight of the Bath in 1749, and created Baron PolUngton in 1753, and Earl of Mexborough in 1765, both in the Irish peerage, the third possessor of which titles stiU enjoys the family estetes of Methley, (Athen. O.von. i. 773; Biog. Peerage, iv, 81 ; Wotton's Baronet i. 163.) SAXBY, or SAXILBY, Edwaed, was placed on the bench of the Exchequer on November 28, 1549, 8 Edwai-d VL, when the patent merely describes him as ' late clerk in the Remembrancer's Office.' His re-appomtment at the commencement of the reigns of Queens Mary and Eliza beth is recorded, and on September 80, 1662, the date of the patent of Thomas Pymnie, his successor, he is mentioned as lately deceased. No other event of Ms private life is loio-wn than his marriage -with Elizabeth, daughter of — ¦Fisher, of Long- worth in Oxfordshire, and reUct of WUUam Woodclifl'e, Esq., citizen and mercer of London, lord of the manor of Wormley m Hertfordshire. (Gent May. Nov, 1839,) SAY, Geoeeeet de, is inserted by Dug dale among the judges of the King'sBench in 1321-2, 15 Edward IL; but, for the reasons previously given under the account of WilUam de Dyve, great doubt existe as to the fact. This is almost conflrmed by the additional circumstance that, though a dis tinguished member of au ancient and noble family, there is no proof that he was seated in that court. Geoffrey de Say was descended from Picot de Say, a Shropshire baron in the reign of the Conqueror. His father, Wil- SCARDEBURa - liam, who had large possessions in Kent, besides some in other counties, died m 28 Edward I., 1295, leaving him an infant of fourteen years of age. He and his wife Idonea, the daughter of WilUam de Ley- boume, attended the coronation of Edward IL, in 1308 ; and he was flrst summoned to parUament as a baron in 1313. He was frequently called upon to perform military services, but was never, as far as appears from the records, employed judiciaUy. It is extremely probable, however, that among the numerous commissions issued for the trial of the adherents of Thomas de Badles mere, there should have been one for his county of Kent ; and that he, as a baron of that county, should have been named m it, and thus 'be entitled to the description of justiciarius regis, which Gervas of Canterbui-y gives to him, and by which every person so employed would be then designated during the contmuance of the commission. He died in I82I-2, the very year named by Dugdale as that of his judicial appoint ment, leaving a son, also Geoffrey, only seventeen years old, who succeeded him; but his male descendants faUed m 1382, and the barony is said to be in abeyance among the representatives of Idonea and Joane, the two aimte of the last baron. In 1447, however, the grandson of Sir William Fiennes, who had married the said Joane, was summoned to parUament vrith the title of Lord Say and Sele, to which was added that of viscount in 1624. The -riscounty became extinct in 1781; but the barony still survived, and was carried through females into the famUy of Tvristleton. (Lelands Collect, i. p. ii, 275 ; Barcmage, i, 511 ; Pari. Writs, ii. p, ii, 1402 ; Nicolas's Synopsis.) SCABDEBUBG, Rogee de, as abbot of Whitby, headed -the list of justices itinerant appomted for the county of Northumberland m 10 Henry IIL, 1226, He was born at Scarborough, and was elected to the ab bacy in 1222, having previously acqufred great veneration during a long residence in the ceU at Middleburgh Chm-ch, He was a man of considerable abilities, and, durmg the twenty-two years that he presided over the monastery, much advanced its interests and increased its revenues. He died in 1244. (Rot. Claus. ii. 151 ; Charttcm's Whitby, 169-203.) SCAEDEBUEGH, Robeet de. It has been generally believed that Robert de Scardeburgh, the justice, and Robert de Scorburgh, the baron of the Exchequer, were one and the same person, from the names Scord, Scorb, and Scharde frequently occurring among the advocates m the Yeai- Books of Edwai'd II, and Edward IIL, and disappearmg after the sixth year of the latter reign. It is certain, however, that SCARLE 589 they were two persons, although the latter was sometimes called by the former name, and that the flrst derived his name from Scarborough, in the North Ridmg of York sMre, while the last obtained his from Scorbrough, in the East Riding, Their disappearance as advocates from the Year Books arises from their both recei'riug judicial appointments nearly at the same time — Scardeburgh m Ireland, in 1831-2 ; and Scorbmgh in England, in 1382. Robert de Scardeburgh stands at the head of a commission of assize into the ¦islands of Guernsey, Jersey, Sark, and Alderneyjin 5 Edward III, (Ahb. Rot. Orig. ii, 67) ; and at the close of that year, 1331,. he was made chief justice of the Common Pleas in Ireland, m which character he is mentioned two years afterwards. In 8 Edward III, his serrices were transferred to the Court of King's Bench in England, of which he was constituted a judge on September 14, 1334, (CaL Rot Pat. 113, 117, 120,) He was in a commission of array for York m 13 Edward III, (N, Fmdera, U. 105) ; and on September 6 in that year, 1339, he changed his seat in the King's Bench vrith John de Shardelowe, for the latter's place as a judge of the Common Pleas. In this court, however, he remained Uttle more than a year, resuming his seat in the King's Bench on January 8, 1841, and retaining it for nearly four years. He was then, in 1344, restored to his former position of chief justice of the Common Pleas in Ireland (Cal Rot Pat. 136, 149) ; and in the same year two new seals were for the flrst time provided, by the advice of the council, for sealing the judicial writs of the two benches there, the custody of which was granted to him, with the fees ap- pertaming to the duty. (Abh. Rot. Orig. li, 166,) His history terminates here, for his name is not agam mentioned, SCAELE, John de, was so called from a place of that name in LincolnsMre, in which county some of his family -were located in the reign of Edward HI, (Abb. Rot. Orig. ii, 121, 166,) He was a clerk of the Chancery, ofthe higher grade, as early as 6 Richard H,, 1882, from which year till 1897 he was always one of the re ceivers of petitions in parliament, of which he also acted as clerk for the eight years between 9 and 17 Richard II. (Rot, Pari iii, 133-337,) On July 22, 1394, he was raised to the office of keeper of the Rolls, and held it about three )'ears and two months, during which he several times acted as keeper of the Great Seal, and it was in his possession when Archbishop Arundel was removed on November 23, 1396, On September 11 in the foUowing year he resigned the master ship of the RoUs, and resumed- his position ¦590 SCARLETT as clerk in the Chancery, as appears from his witnessmg under that title a charter to the city of Norwich, dated February 6, 1899, (Blomefields Norwich, i. 118,) After the arrest of King Richard he was appointed chanceUor ; and Sir T, D, Hardy gives September 6, 1399, as the date of the first privy seal bill addressed to him, so that he held the office for twenty-flve days of this unfortunate king's reign, being the whole of its nominal remainder. He was of course not removed when Henry IV, was seated on the throne, but he occupied the post for little more than one year and flve months under that king, delivering up the Seal in full parliament on March 9, I40I, He con tinued, however, one of the king's council for the rest of his life, (Acts Privy Council, i. 126-197.) In the December following his retire ment he received the archdeaconry of Lin coln, which he enjoyed about a year, his death occurring about April 1403, (Le Neve, 156.) His residence m London was in Chancery Lane, on the site which is now known as Serjeante' Inn. It is sometimes called ' ' Tenementum ' and sometimes ' Hospitium Domini Job, Skarle,' and belonged to the Bishops of Ely, SCAELETT, James (Loed Abingee), belonged to that branch of the family which iu the seventeenth century was settled in Sussex, His immediate ancestor, Thomas Scarlett, of Eastbourne, migrated to Ja maica, where his brother Captam Francis Scarlett had established Mmself soon after Cromwell's conquest of that island in 1665, and sat in the first assembly, Thomas be came possessed of large estates there, and his descendants were men of considerable wealth, Robert Scarlett, the fourth in lineal succession from Thomas, by his mar riage with EUzabeth Anglin, a great-great- granddaughter of Henry Laurence, who was president of Cromwell's council, had several sons, two of whom attained high legal honours — one, th e subj ect ofthe present sketch, as chief baron of the English Ex chequer; and the other, the youngest son, Sir WUliam AngUn Scarlett, as chief justice of Jamaica. James Scarlett, who was the second son, was born in Jamaica in 1769, and was soon sent to England for the purpose of education. He was entered at a very early age as a fellow commoner of Trinity College, Cam bridge, and took Ms degrees of B.A, in 1790, and of M,A, in 1794, In the meantime having entered the Inner Temple, he was called to the bar on July 28, 1791, His marriage in the next year with Louisa Hen rietta, daughter of Peter CampbeU, Esq,, of Kilmory m ArgylesMre, shows that he did not rely wholly on Ms success at the bar for the support of a family ; but his early in- I SCARLETT dependence did not render him indolent, or prevent him from pursuing assiduously those studies which would prepare him for the conteste into which he was about to enter. He joined the Northern Circuit and the Lancaster sessions, and for nearly a quarter of a century was doomed to remain as a junior counsel undecorated by a silk gown. But long before that period had elapsed his extraordinary merits and intel lectual powers were appreciated both on the circuit and in the courts at Westmmster, His extensive legal knowledge, his steady attention to the work before him, Ms quiet management and prudent judgment m the conduct of Ms case, soon mspired cUents -with entire confidence in his advice, and while yet in a stuff gown it was no uncom mon thing to see Mm entrusted -with a leadmg brief In his argumente m banco he was remarkable for his mgenmty and acuteness, and for the pecuUar power he had, by subtle distinctions, of extricating the point m dispute from the mvolvmente that surrounded it. It was considered that he had too great an infiuence over the judges, and it was said of him that 'he had invented a machine, by a secret use of wMch in court he could always make the head of a judge nod assent to his proposition.' This striking success rendered it impos sible any longer to refuse him the accus tomed distinction, and in 1816 he was called -vrithm the bar as kmg's counsel. From that time for the next eighteen years he enjoyed such an ascendency m the courts that it became an actual race be tween Utigants which should secure his serrices in the impending contest, and the loser felt that one of his best chances of success was snatched from him. His m- fluence over juries was wonderful — some caUed it magical ; it was not obtained by any extiaordiuary eloquence, for he seemed carefully to avoid any rhetorical flourishes, but it was produced by laymg before them in clear and simple language such a well-digested exposition of the case of his cUent as made it appear that he himself was satisfied of its justice, and that they had no choice but to endorse his opimon by their verdict. There was no apparent effort in his argument, no -riolent expres sion in his address, no attempt at brUUant periods ; but the impression was effected by an easy, gentlemanly, and colloqmal appeal to 'their imderstandmgs — perhaps in some degree heightened by his handsome person, his musical voice, and pleasmg countenance. Yet, when the occasion demanded it, neither energy nor eloquence was wanting. Coleridge, in his 'Table Talk ' (June 29, 1833), says, ' I think Sfr James Scarlett's speech for the defendant, in the late action of Cobbett v. The Times for a libel, worthy of the best [ages of SCARLETT Greece or Rome, though to be sure some of his remarks could not have been very palatable to his cliente.' Whether the case was trifling or important, he took the same pains for his client, and seemed to be equally interested in the result. One of his gi'eatest merits was that when he was engaged in a cause his services might always be relied upon. He disdained to adopt the vicious practice of some barristers, then far too common, of wandering about from court to court, and taking contempo raneous briefs in all, to the damage of those whose retainers and even whose briefs they had accepted, and many has been the time when Mr. Scarlett, deserted by those employed in the same cause, has borne the brunt of a long day's investiga tion sole and unaided. He occasionally expressed Ms indignation against what he deemed dishonesty in practice or conduct with great severity, and soon after he became a Mng's counsel an action was brought against him for a lashing animad version he had admimstered to an attomey at the York assizes, A verdict was given in his favour, which was afterwards con firmed by the full court in London, on the ground that for words spoken by a counsel 'pertinent and relative to the matter m dispute ' an action could not be maintained. With the natural ambition to enter par liament, he contested the borough of Lewes tvrice, m I8I2 and 1816, both times un- successfuUy, But in 1818 Lord Fitz- wiUiam provided him -with a seat as the representative of Peterborough, In 1822 he stood a contest for the imiversity of Cambridge, but was again defeated. He afterwards sat for Maldon, then for Cock ermouth, and lastly, at the flrst election after the first Reform Act, for the city of Norwich, In the senate he was not so successful as in the forum. The easy style which commanded the attention of juries was not altogether suitable to a more ¦enlightened and critical audience, and failed to produce any deep impression. In poUtics he ranked at first as a moderate whig, and supported Sir Samuel Romilly in his effi)rts towards the amelioration of the criminal law. He also introduced a propo sition for the improvement of the Poor Laws, which, though not then encouraged, was the groundwork of future legislation. When something Uke an amalgamation of parties took place on Mr, Canning's be coming prime minister in April 1827, Mr. Scariett, -with the consent of the whig leaders and the approval of his patron Earl FitzwUUam, accepted the office of attomey-general on the 27th of that month, and was as usual kmghted. Before the end of the year the death of Mr, Canning, and the failure of Lord Goderich, his sue-. cesser, brought that ministry to an end. SCARLETT 591 and on the Duke of WeUington assuming the administration Sir James retired from his office in January 1828, to resume it, however, in June 1829, when Sir Charles Wetherell, his successor, resigned in disgust at the liberal measures proposedby theduke. With the accession of King William IV. came the triumph of the whigs, in Novem ber 1830, and the consequent removal of Sir James, who from his first entrance into office had been gradually approachmg those conservative, but liberal, principles which for the whole remainder of his life he con sistently maintained. His permanent change of opimon was no doubt confirmed by the coldness, and what he deemed the ingra titude, of the leaders of the whig party, who forgot that he accepted office at their request, or at least with their ajpprobation. During the time that he executed the functions of attorney-general he lost some of his popularity by his prosecutions of the ' Atlas ' and ' Morning Post ' for libels ; but he amended the law relating to them by an act modifying the provisions of the six acts against public libels. To h m the profession is indebted for several improve ments in the administration of justice. He got rid of the movable terms, and placed their commencement and their close upon fixed days in the year ; and he prepared the bill for the abolition of the Welsh judi cature and for enabling the judges of West minster Hall to administer justice on circuit throughout the Principality; at the same time extending the number of the judges from twelve to fifteen. Joining in a bold opposition to the various measures of radical reform that were then introduced, and largely increas ing his fortune by his undisputed ascend ency in the courts, he awaited a change in the administration with the certainty of then receiving- the reward of his labom-s. That change was delayed till 1834, when Sir Robert Peel became minister. Sir James Scarlett was then, on December 24, constituted lord chief baron of the Exche quer. In the ne.xt month he was created Baron Abinger of Abinger in Surrey, an estate he had purchased, being the flrst chief baron who received wMle m that office the honour of the peerage. His reputation as a judge did not equal Ms fame as an advocate. He had too much the habit of deciding which of the two parties in a cause was in the right, and arguing in his favour; while juries, who had been accustomed to be led by his pleadmgs as a counsel, refused to submit to his dictation as ajudge. The consequence was that he frequently lost verdicts which, had he sho-wn lesa bias, would have been conformable to his opinion. He presided in. the Exchequer for nearly ten years, and attended the Norfolk Circuit in the spring 592 SCORBURGH of 1844, apparently in full health and vigour. But after sitting in court at Bury St, Edmunds, and going through the business of the day with his accustomed clearness and skill, till seven o'clock m the evening, he was two hours after struck with paralysis, wMch left him speechless, and in five days terminated his life, on April 7, His remains were removed for interment at Abinger. _ His first wife, after producing to him three sons and two daughters, died in 1829, and left him a widower for fourteen years. In 1848, the last year of his life, he married, secondly, the daughter of Lee SteereSteere, Esq., of Jayes in Surrey, and the widow of the Rev. H. J.Ridley, of Ockley, by whom he left no children. His eldest daughter married Lord CampbeU, and before he attained that title was honoured with a peerage in her own right as Baroness Sti-atheden. His eldest son enjoyed the title after him tiU 1861, and was succeeded by the present, the third, baron. The chief baron's second son. Sir James Y'^orke Scar lett, K.C.B., has acquired great fame as a soldier ; and ,his youngest son, Peter Camp bell Scarlett, has gained considerable dis tinction as a diplomatist. SCOEBUEGH, Robeet db, took his name from Scorbrough in the East Riding of Yorkshire, and was sometimes called by the name of Robert de Scardeburgh. Under the name of Scorburgh he had a licence in 17 Edward II. to assign a lay fee in Bever ley aud Etton; and on his death, in 14 Edward IIL, he is described, under the name of Scardeburgh, as possessing the manor of Scorby, and also property in Stamford Bridge and Etton, both of which are in the East Riding, and m the neigh bourhood of Beverley and Scorbrough, (Abb. Rot Orig. i. 274, U, 136.) No ques tion, however, can be entertained that Robert de Scorburgh and his contemporary, Robert de Scardebm-gh, were not, as has been asserted, the samejindividual. Robert de Scorburgh's connection with the law appears from Ms being employed on special commissions in Yorkshire m 16 and 20 Edward II, (Pari Writs, U, p, U, 1406) ; in both of which he is called Scorburgh, and is evidently added to the regular i udges, as a serjeant is in the present day. In 18 Edward II, he was appointed also on a commission of enquiry, his name being then spelled Scoreburgh, Again, in 2 Ed ward III. there is a petition to parliament by the people of ' Scartheburgh,' relative to a trial before Robert de Scoresburgh and his companions, justices of Oyer and Terminer in that to'wn ; and in the fourth year he was amongst the justices itinerant into Derbyshfre, as Scorburgh. (Rot Pari i. 420, ii, 28.) He was raised to the bench of the Ex chequer on November 2, 1332, 6 Edward SCOTT IIL, the record calUng him Scorburgh, by which name he received knighthood in thfr same year, (Dugdale's Orig. 102,) He is also so named in the following year, in the record commissioning him to treat -with the Eari of Flanders (iV. Foedera, ii, 876), while at this time his contemporary Robert de Scardeburg was chief justice of the Common Pleas in Ireland. After this we hear nothmg of him till his death in 14 Edward IIL, when it ap pears, by the document above referred to, that his property was committed to the- custody of "Wolfand de CUstere, because Thomas, his son and heir, was an idiot. SCOTHOU, William de, to whom no- reference whatever is made, except m Dug dale's list of justices itinerant for Kent m 22 Edward IIL, 1348, probably took Ms name from a parish so called in Norfolk, A Peter de Scothow was retumed member for Nor-wich in 12 Edward H, SCOTEE, Rogee de, was possessed of Coringham and several other manors in Lincolnshire. In 1309, 3 Edward H., he and Edmimd Passelegh, designated as ser- j eants, were appomted to transact the king's busmess of pleas, and were dfrected to appear at the Exchequer on Michaelmas- day to do as the king and his councU should order. On July 17, 1310, 4 Edward H., he was constituted a baron of the Exchequer, and in the same year was the ffrst named of three justices of assize for six counties, of which Lincoln was one. His tenure of" office was very short, for he died before March 3, 1312, when his successor, Walter de Nor-wich, received his patent. He left a -wife, caUed hoth Agnes and Elizabeth, and an only daughter, named Elizabeth, who died a minor, SCOTT, William. The name of Scott was so common even at tMs early period that it is difficult to speak -with certamty of the family of this WilUam Scott. If H, Phillips, in his ' Grandeur of the Law,' ( 1684), is right in saying that Sfr Thomas Scott, then of Scott's HaU in Kent, was descended from him, it would seem that the original name of the famUy was Baliol, and that WiUiam, the brother of John Baliol, King of Scotland, who fi-equently -wrote his name as William de Baliol le Scot, after the contest for the crown in the reign of Edwai-d I, had terminated in his brother's overthrow, politically dropped his patronymic, and retained only the national addition he had assumed. In the reign of Edward UI. this family was seated in the parish of Brabome m Kent, and it was not tUl Henry VI.'s time that they removed to Scott's HaU, a manor in the neighbouring parish of Smeeth,' (Hasted, yiU, 5,) William Scott was a pleader m the courts from 8 Edwai-d IIL, and was made one of the king's Serjeants in the eighth year. On SCOTT March "18, 1337, II Edward IIL, he was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas, but was removed into the King's Bench on May 2, 1339, and was promoted to the chief justiceship of that court on January 8, 1841. He stiU held that office at his death in 20 Edward HL, 1346, though Dugdale by mis- teke transfers him to the Common Pleas as chief justice there in 1342. (Abb. Rot. Oi-ig. ii, 179,) One Humphrey Hunney, probably a dis contented suitor, having complamed that the chief justice had awarded an assize con trary to law, was imprisoned, judged, fined, and ransomed for the offence. (State Tricds, ii. 1024.) His descendants numbered among them many eminent in offices of ti-ust, as well in the state as in the county; and the next- noticed John Scott, chief baron, is said to have been of the same family, which was not extinct at the end of the last centui-y, SCOTT, John, is said by Phillips, in his ' Grandeur of the Law,' to have been a de scendant from the above William Scott, but no means are suppUed for tracing the pedigree. An apprentice of his name is mentioned in the "Year Books in 20 Henry VIL, 1504, who probably was the same person who on January 8, 1513, 4 Henry VIIL, had a grant in reversion to be chief baron of the Exchequer, then held by Sir William Hody. (Cal State Papers [1509-14], 470.) His name does not occur as a judge in any of the reporters ; and his accession to and con tinuance on the bench is only to be inferred from the fact that a new chief baron, John Fitz-James, was appointed in Fe'bruary Dugdale mentions a ,Tohn Scott who re ceived a patent as third baron on May 15, 1628, being six years after the appointment of John Fitz-James as chief baron. If this be the same man as John Scott the chief baron in reversion, he must either have not taken the place under the patent, or have been removed to make way for Fitz-James, and replaced in an inferior seat on the bench at this time ; but history is totally silent on the subject, and the name of Scott was so common as to defy the endeavours of the most industrious to determine whether this third bai-on was or was not the same indi vidual. He is named two years afterwards as one of the commissioners to enquire into the possessions of Cardinal Wolsey in Sur rey, (Rymer, xiv. 402.) SCOTT, John (Eael op Eldon), was the grandson of William Scott of Sandgate in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, who exercised the trade of a 'fltter' of coals, and was the owner of several ' keels ;' and the son of WilUam Scott, who pursued the same occupation, was a fi-eeman of Newcastle, and member of the Hoastman's Company SCOTT 593 there, which consisted of the first trades men in the place. He married Jane, the daughter of Henry Atkinson of Newcastle, by whom he had thirteen children, the fourth of whom, and eldest son, William, became judge of the High Court of Ad miralty, and was created "Lord Stowell in I82l; and the eighth of whom, and third and youngest son, was John Scott, the lord chancellor, John Scott was born in Love Lane, Newcastle, on June 4, 1751, He was first sent to the Royal Grammar School there, where he made great progress under his excellent master, the Rev. Hugh Moises. The anecdote book, which he wrote late in life for the amusement of his grandchildren, contains many of his adventures while tliere, and the floggings inflicted upon him, which in; this deUcate and effeminate age would be called indecent and cruel. In May 1766, Ms father, who had intended to bring him up to his own business, was persuaded to send him to Oxford by his eldest son WilUam, who had by this time become fellow and tutor of University College, There he was mstructed under the tuition of his brother, and was elected to a fellowship in 1767, He took his degree of B.A. in 1770, and in I77I, being then under twenty, gained Lord Lichfield's prize for English prose, the subject being ' The Advantages and Disadvantages of Foreign Travel,' On November 19, 1772, he was guilty of the apparent indiscretion of running away with Elizabeth, daughter of Aubone Surtees, Esq., a banker at Newcastle ; and though the couple were quickly forgiven by their parents, they felt for some years the effect of their impru dence. The husband was, of course, obliged to give up his fellowship, and, resigning his hope of a provision in the Church, to support himself and his -wife on the very small provision made for them. Adopting the law as his alternative, he entered the Middle Temple on January 28, 1778, and in the foUowing month took his degree of M.A, During his three years of probation he spent no more time in Lon don than was necessary for the keeping of his terms, but was employed in assisting his brother as tutor at University CoUege, and in acting as deputy Vinerian professor to Sir Robert Cham'bers, While so engaged, he pursued his legal studies with so much perseverance and energy that Ms health was seriously endangered, rising every day atj four in the morning, and reading at night with a wet towel round his head to prevent him from falling asleep. At the end of 1775 he removed to London with his family, now increased by an infant son, and took up his abode in Cursitor Street.. He had the advantage of spending the mterval before Ms call to the bar in the 594 SCOTT office of Mr. Duane, where he acquired a perfect knowledge of conveyancing. That of pleading he obtained with no other instruction than naturally resulted from his own industry in copying precedents. On February 9, 1776, he was called to the bar, and removed into Carey Street, and in November foUowing his father died. Though by that event his circumstances were slightly improved, his business for some time gave him no addition. In the first year his whole receipt amounted to half a guinea, and though he went the Northern Circuit, few briefe were entrusted to him. But he made fi'iends with the leaders, and gained some experience by observing- how they managed their causes. He at first attended the common law courte, but soon fancying that Lord Mans field did not encourage young lawyers who were not educated at Westminster and Christ Church, he left the King's Bench, and joined the Chancery bar, then not exceeding twelve or fifteen in number. There his progress was so little encou raging that he had almost determined to retire to his native town as a provincial counsel, and had even taken a house there, not without hope of being elected recorder in the event of a vacancy. His prospects, however, were materially altered by a decision which Lord Thurlow pronounced in the case of Ackroyd v. Smithson, in accordance -with an argument which he had made, against not only the opimon of Sir Thomas Sewell, the master of .the Rolls (Broicn's Chanc. Cases, i. 505 ; 2 Jarman's Powell, 77 et seq.), but even contrary to the expectations of his own cUent. He soon after had the good fortime, by one of those accidents which occasion aUy happen, to be very suddenly engaged as leading counsel in the Clitheroe election case, for which he had but four hours to prepare. He exhibited so much abUity that Sir James Mansfield and Mr. Wilson, both afterwards judges, strongly encouraged him to remain in London, the latter offer ing to insure him 400/. the next year. From that time his success was no longer doubtful in Westminster Hall, and his practice on the circuit, which it was then the custom of Chancery men to attend, was equally increased, aided by some im portant causes in which he had the good luck to lead and to be triumphant. At Carlisle, however, he had no business tiU, by the absence of another counsel, he was engaged to defend an old woman for an assault, and succeeded by a joke in getting her off -with only nominal damages. This immediately procured him briefs to the amount of seventy guineas, where he had not received one for seven years before. He had now taken up his residence in Powis Place, and afterwards removed to SCOTT No, 42 Gower Street, where he lived about thirteen years before he went to Bedford Square, He was a favourite -with Lord Thurlow, who proved his friendship by purposely refusing him a commissionership of bank rupts, and thus forcing him to work. He received a patent of precedence on June 4, 1788, when he was elected a bencher of his inn. In the same month he was, through Lord Thurlow's recommendation, elected member for Lord Weymouth's borough of Weobly. In the succeeding session of parUament Mr. Fox brought forward his famous East India BUl, wMch Mr. Scott strenuously opposed, and the defeat of which was the dismissal of the Coalition Ministiy. The storm that followed ended in a dissolution, Mv. Scott, in the new parliament, again represented Weobly, and soon acquired such au ascendency hy his argumente m support of Mr, Pitt's mmistry as even to compel Mr, Fox's admiration and respect. In March 1787 he was appointed chan ceUor of Durham by Lord Thurlow's brother, the bishop ; and in June of the next year he was selected by Mr. Pitt as soUcitor-general, when he was knighted. One of his first duties on the reassemhUng of parliament was to support the measures consequent on the Mng's iUness, m the per formance of which he so greatly signaUsed himself that he received the Mng's personal thanks. So high was his reputation at this time, and so extensive Ms practice, that he was enabled in 1792 to invest 22,000/, m the purchase of Eldon, an estate in the southem part of the county of Durham, and to devote the whole of its rents to ite improvement From this estete he afterwards took Ms first title of nobility. Early in the next year (Februai-y 13, 1798), in the midst of the anxieties consequent upon the French Revolution, he succeeded to the office of attorney-general, and upon Mm devolved the difficult diitj' of coucerting and carry ing into effect the measures necessary to coimteract the seditious principles that were then too prevalent m this country. Revo lutionary agitators formed themselves into associations, which, under the pretence of seeking a reform in parliament, had more serious objecte in contemplation, tending to the deposition of the king. To repress these was the great object of the minister; and to this end it was determined to pro secute the leading instigators. The subse quent trials of Hardy, Home Tooke, and Thelwall, who, by the eloquence of Erskine and the leaming of Gibbs, narrowly escaped conviction for high treason, succeeded in satisfying the public of the danger of these societies, and eventually in putting a stop to the seditious agitation; and Sir John SCOTT Scott, though much abused by one party for his attempt to establish what they termed ' constructive treason,' was as much applauded by the other for the energy and -learnmg, humanity and courage, with which he conducted the several prosecutions. Before, however, the agitation had subsided, it became necessary to intioduce bills for further security in this and the succeeding parUament of 1796, to wMch he was re- tumedfor Boroughbridge instead of Weobly, The preparation and support of these jneasures devolved principally on the at torney-general, as well as several prose cutions for seditious writings and other political offences. In .Tuly 1799 his official labours termi nated by the death of Sir James Eyre, chief justice of the Common Pleas, to which office he claimed the right of succession, Tt was accorded to him on two conditions — ¦ ¦ one, by Mr, Pitt, that he should accept a peerage, so that his services in parliament might not be lost ; and the other by the king, that he should not refuse the Great ¦ Seal when he should be called upon to accept it. He was swom of the privy I coimcil on July 17; on the I8th he received his patent as Baron Eldon; and on the I9th he was appointed lord chief justice of the Common Pleas, Though he held that office less than two years, he more than fulfilled the expectations of those who could appreciate his powers. In the •exercise of his judicial functions he ex hibited none of the doubt and hesitation w^hich were ascribed to him in his subse- ¦quent career ; but both before and after the death of his colleague, Mr. Justice BuUer, he sustained the high character of his court liy his excellent decisions. When Mr. Pitt resigned, on the subject ¦of the Catholic question, Lord Eldon, in performance of his promise to the king, accepted the Great Seal on April 14, 1801, but, owing to the temporary illness of his majesty, did not resign the chief justiceship till May 21, discharging the duties of both offices during the interval. Before the close of the year he was appointed high steward of the university of Oxford, of which his brother. Sir William Scott, was ^t that time the representative in par liament. During the ministry of Mr, Ad- ¦dington and his successor, the chancellor was treated -with the utmost confldence by the king, whose occasional attacks of ilMess gave great embarrassment to the govemment, which were not diminished by the differ ences which existed between tlie Prmce of Wales and his father. On Mr. Pitt's re sumption of power in 1804 Lord Eldon was contmued in his office, and retained it till the death of that great minister, on January 28, 1806, which made way for Lord Cranville's and Mr. Fox's ministry. SCOTT 595 caUed 'All [the Talents,' He then, on Fe bruary 7, resigned the Great Seal into the hands of Lord Erskine. Ere fourteen months were expired that admmistration was dismissed on the Catho lic question, and Lord Eldon resumed his seat as lord chancellor on April 1, 1807. He held it undisturbed for the next twenty years under the premierships of the Duke of Portland, Mr. Perceval, and Lord Liverpool— a period pregnant -with the most important events in the political and domestic history of the country. The malicious attack upon the Duke of York ; the duel between Lord Castlereagh and Canning, causing the break-up of the Duke of Portland's ministry; the negotiations followmg, and the pluck of Mr. Perceval in undertaking the premiership, all occurred during the flrst three years, and naturally occasioned him much anxiety, which was not dinunished by Lord Granville's defeat ing him by about a dozen votes in the con test for the chancellorship of Oxford. But he found comfort in his disappointment in the conviction that had the Duke of Beau fort, who stood upon the same interest, retired as at flrst was intimated, he would have had a triumphant majority oyer his poUtical rival. In November 1810 the parliament opened without the usual commission, the Mng being- visited by an attack which prevented him from affixing the sign-manual, and which unfortunately could not be subdued as the former one had been, but lasted for the ten remaining years of his life. This led to a renewal of the conflicts of 1788-9, relating to the restrictions to be put upon the regency, in the conduct of which Lord Eldon was treated with the bitterest acri mony by Lord Grey and the e.xpectant ministers. The prince regent not only, to the surprise of the whigs, kept the tories in office during the year limited for the re strictions imposed upon him, but, to their infinite disgust and disappointment, still continued to repose his confidence m the old ministers when that year had expired. Lord Eldon was thus confirmed in his position, but had to submit to the attacks in the House of Commons of Michael Angelo Taylor on the aUeged delays in the Court of Chancery, and in the appeals iu the House of Lords, A more serious visi tation soon followed in the assassination of Mr. Perceval, the prime minister, by Bel- Unghani, on May 11, 1812, This had nearly broken up the ministry; but the negotiations with the whig party failing, the prince regent was compelled, not un willingly, to go on with them; and the glorious successes of the British arms under the DiUre of WeUington, which led to the restoration of the Bourbon Mng to France, established them firmly in the confidence Qq2 596 SCOTT of the country. In the corn-law riots of 1816 the mob broke into Lord Eldon's house in Bedford Square, and he himself narrowly escaped by retiring into the gar den of the British Museum, Returning thence, not with 'a band of fifty chosen men,' but with a corporate guard of four, he drove back the mob, showing the greatest bravery and presence of mind, and capturing two of them vrith his o-wn hands. In the same year Bonaparte's escape from Elba obliged the government to make extra ordinary efforts, leading to the crownmg victory of Waterloo, and resulting in Bona parte's deUvering himself up to England, and his final detention in the island of St. Helena. On the death of George IIL, on January 29, 1820, the prince regent as king for the third time placed the Great Seal in the hands of Lord Eldon. In the folio-wing month he escaped assassination by the timely discovery of the Cato Street con spiracy to murder all the ministers at a cabinet dinner given by Lord Harrowby. Soon after followed the queen's trial, in which his conduct as speaker of the House of Lords was the subject of unmixed praise ; and he was so fuUy convinced, from the evidence produced, that she was guilty of the crime charged in the preamble to the bill, that he moved the second reading in a powerful speech. Though the bill was prudently withdrawn, the queen's tempo rary popularity soon subsided, and was not restored by her unadvised and unsuccessful attempt to take part in the king's corona tion. Previous to that solemmty the king insisted, much against Lord Eldon's inclina tion, on promoting him to a higher rank in the peerage ; and he was accordingly created Viscount Encombe and Earl of Eldon on .Tuly 7, 1821, the viscounty being named from his estate in the Isle of Purbeck in Dorsetshfre, purchased by him in the year 1807, where he spent all his vacations. For the first seven years of the new reign Lord Eldon retained his place under the same prime mimster. Lord Liverpool, no otherwise disturbed in his political feelings than by the pressure of the Catholic claims, and the gradual advance of radical opinions. He was, however, personally annoyed by the captious attacks that were annually made upon him and his court m the House of Commons, by those who, seeing the powerful influence he exercised in the state, were desirous of forcing him to resign. But these attacks produced the contrary effect, and prompted him boldly to repel them, and to refrain from insisting on a retirement which for several years he had repeatedly pressed upon the government, but which, at one time from the representations of his colleagues that his secession would break up tbe ministry, and at another from the SCOTT personal solicitation of the king, he had been induced to withdraw. When, however, Lord Liverpool was seized -with an affliction ' which terminated his political existence, and the govemment was re-organised under Mr, Canning, Lord Eldon felt that he could no longer continue as the colleague of a minister who adopted opinions vrith respect to the CathoUc question in direct opposition to those he had himself all along advocated. He therefore, on April 30, 1827, resigned the Seal, which he had holden for the space of a quarter of a century, minus little more than a month. His successor was Lord Lyndhurst. .^ At the time of his retirement he was in the seventy-sixth year of his age, but he did not then whoUy withdraw fi-om the poUtical world. During many of the eleven- years that he survived he took an active but ineffectual part in opposing the nume rous innovations that were' mtroduced mto the legislature. To his strictly conscien tious, if mistaken, feelings, the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, the Emancipa tion of the CathoUcs, and the Reform Bill were pecuUarly distressing. He saw nothing that would result from the two latter but the most calamitous effecte upon the con stitution, and during the time he lived after them he had not much reason to alter his opinion. The former of them only led to new demands from the CathoUc agitetors, and amidst the various mischiefs and par tialities of the latter of them, the solitery benefit it conferred was the shortemng the period of elections. He looked ¦with scarcely less disgust at the various speculative al terations m the law that were from time to time propounded. He had removed fi-om Bedford Square to Hamilton Place, and there and at his mansion at Encombe he continually resided, -with occasional jom-neys to his property in Durham. His Ufe ter minated on January 13, 1888, in Hamilton Place, by a gradual decay of bodily strength, but in the preservation of his inteUect and spirits to the last. His remains were re moved to Encombe for interment m the family vault which he had built at Kmgston for the reception of Lady Eldon, whom he lost in 1881, after a union of fifty-nine J'ears, Living in the reigns of five succe.isive sovereigns, one the longest in the annals of England, enjoying high office in the state for the long period of fifty years, it would have been a miracle if, whatever were Ms deserts, he should wholly have escaped censure. But even the small party which delighted to attack Mm were obUged to acknowledge his superior merite. They ad mitted his eminent talents, his extensive learning, the wonderful readiness of its application, and the justice of his decisions. They could not deny his patience in listen- SCOTT ing to the argumente of counsel, Ms cour- teousness to the bar, and his conciliatory ¦demeanour to all ; but thej'- charged him with a habit of doubting everything, and attributed to it all the delays of thfe Court ¦of Chancery. This disposition to hesitate was a judicial defect with which he was undoubtedly chargeable ; but the most candid and best informed of his adversaries in politics could not help aUowing that it .arose from an over-anxiety to do strict jus tice to the litigants. The epigrammatic turn of the following lines shows how his slo'wness was estimated in comparison with the ' quick injustice ' of his vice-chanceUor, Sir John Leach : — In Equity's Iiigh court there are Two sad extremes, 'tis clear ; Excessive slo-wness strikes us there. Excessive quickness here. Their source, 't-wixt good and evil, brings A difficulty nice ; The flrst from Eldon's virtue springs, The latter from his Vice. This habit of dubitation was grossly ex aggerated solely for party purposes. A hope was entertained by his political an tagonists that the personal annoyance he suffered would induce his resignation, and the consequent defeat of the ministry of which he was one of the main supporte. Few indeed were the cases in which they' coiUd make their charge good ; and he not only justified, but continued the practice, upon the principle that extreme care to give a right decision prevented not only the annoyance and expense of appeal in the case before him, but also future litigation on the same class of subjects. The consequences were such as he anticipated; and the judg ments of Lord Eldon are not only treated ¦with the greatest respect, but regarded as of the higliest authority. There is little justice in attributing to him the delays of Ms court and the increase of arrears, since the complaints were mere repetitions of the same outcry which had been heard against the Court of Chancery for hundreds of years — aggravated by the increase of population and the spread of commerce, both neces sarily leading to a multiplication of litiga tion to an immense degree. Even with tbe stupendous exertions of Lord Eldon (and they exceeded those of any former chan cellor) he could not with the most extra ordinary despatch keep pace with the per petual advances made upon the list of causes set down for his hearing ; and it was at length found necessary to give him assis tance in clearing off some of the arrears by appointing a vice-chancellor. To this pro posal the most violent opposition was raised by the adverse party ; yet they themselves, -vyhen they came into power, added four more judges to the same court — namely. SCROGGS 597 two additional vice-chanceUors and two lord justices of appeal — thus proving the injus tice of their atteck upon Lord Eldon, and acknowledging that the business of the court could not be despatched by the efforte of a single individual. Of his profound knowledge and superior excellence as a judge it is not surprising that the testimony of such men as Mr. Charles Butler, Lord^St, Leonard's, Lord Lyndhurst, and a hosf of others, should be expressed in the strongest terms ; but that his principal opponents, Lord Brougham, Sir Samuel Romilly, and more of the same party, at the very moment of their atteck, should speak of him in the same eulogistic manner, proves the universal acknowledg ment of his merits. Without being brilliant as an orator, his speeches were highly effec tive fi-om his reasoning powers; and with out being remarkable for wit, he had a great deal of quiet humour, and was pecuUarly happy in hi s retorts and repartees. By the courtesy of his demeanour, by the solidity of his judgment, and by the straightforward consistency of Ms conduct he acquired the respect of the Peers, among whom, while he presided, he gained the utmost ascendency. By the bar and the officers of his court he was beloved beyond any other head; and in his private life he was the kindest and most ami.able of men. None who had the happiness of being con nected -with him, or the pri-rilege of practis ing under him, but must regard his memory with affection and veneration ; and as he was to the last hour of his life, so he will be for the time to come, recogmsed as the unfiinching supporter of the constitution. Of his six children two daughters only survived him, one of whom married George Stanley Repton, Esq,, and the other the Rev, Edward Bankes. His eldest son, John, left a son, who succeeded his grandfather as second earl, upon whose death his son, also John, became the third and present earl. SCOTT, Thomas. See T. Rothebam. SCEOGGS, William. The last four of the chief justices of the King's Bench in the reign of Charles II. — Scroggs, Pemberton, Saunders, and Jeffreys — may be cited as re markable proofs of the general profligacy of the period, each having been elevated to his high position notwithstanding the notorious looseness of his early life. The obloquy which is attached to the name of Scroggs may serve as a wammg to every man to avoid obsequiousness to those from whom favour flows. An apostate, from party spirit, ambition, or personal interest, to prmciples he had once strongly advocated, -will ever be repudiated by both parties and defended by neither. If there are any good points in his character they will be miscon strued or misrepresented ; and if there is 598, SCEOGGS the least blot in his escuteheon he will be sure to haye all his faults observed, Set in a note-book, learn'd and conned by rote, To cast into his teeth. Such was the fate of Sir William Scroggs, whose extravagant zeal for each of the con tending parties, as he supposed one or the other to be in the ascendant, led to the usual consequence — his fall between both ; his name bemg blackened so universaUy that scarcely any writer shows the sUghtest tenderness to his memory, except Anthony Wood in his ' Athenas" Oxonienses ' (iv. 115). Even his lineage does not escape calumny, and his reputed low birth, which in the height of his popularity would be mentioned to his credit, is blazoned as an addition to his disgrace when the tables are turned. How true Sir William Dugdale's asser tion that his father was ' a one-eyed butcher near Smithfield Bars, and his mother a big fat woman with a red face like an ale-wife,' may be, can only be collected from the fact that the squibs written against the chief justice made per petual aUusion to his father's business, and from the failure of any account oi^ his ancestors or family, A. Wood says that his father was of the same name, and that he was born at Deddington in Oxfordshire. But in whatever business his father had been engaged, it is clear that he was a man of some intelligence, and must have ac quired a comfortable fortune, inasmuch as he showed his desire and his power to give his son a good education by sending him to tl^e university of Oxford, Entered at first at Oriel College iu 1689, when at the age of 16, he soon after removed to Pembroke College, where he took the degree of ,B,A. in 1640, and of M.A. in 1648, He entered Gray's Inn in February 1640, but was not called to the bar till June 1653, the delay perhaps arising from the disturbed state of the country. He was enabled about 1662, either by his practice or his patrimony, to purchase the estate of Southweald in Flssex, which had formerly had Lord Chancellor Rich and Lord Chief Justice , Anthony Browne for its owners, (Morant, i. 111.) A bold front, a handsome person, an easy elocution, and a ready wit are strong recommendations for a young barrister. The possession of these introduced Scroggs to some connections at court, who would not be scandalised by the irregularity of his life. He is described as a great voluptuary and debauchee, and so noted for the coarse ness of his language and the looseness of his habits as to be despised by all good and respectable men. About this time he became counsel for the city of London ¦ and by the] profession of excessive loyalty,' SCROGGS together with his interest at court, he» obtained the honour of knighthood. He is- designated by his title in a petition which. he preferred in April 1665, alleging that, it being his duty to walk before the lord. mayor on certain days of solemnity, but being unable to do so from wounds sus tained in the cause of the late king, he had been therefore suspended from his place, and praying redress, (Cal. State Papers' [1664-5], 310.) In April 1668 he was^ assigned as counsel for Sfr WilUam Penn,. and in June 1669 was summoned to take the degree of the coif, and in the very next term promoted to be kmg's serjeanL (North's Lives, 161; State Trials, yi. 876; 1 Siderfin, 435.) Roger North perhaps speaks too strongly when he says that Chief Justice Hale detested him ; but that estimable judge could have little regard for a man of Scroggs's character, Bemg arrested on a King's Bench warrant for assault and battery, the chief justice and the whole court refused him the privUege of a serjeant, on the ground that the proceeding was not against him only, but against Mm and another, (2 Levinz, 129 ; 3 Keble, 424,) Lord Danby was his principal patton^ and to his infiuence Scroggs entirely owed his next advances, as he had no reputation in his profession. On October 23, 1676, a seat on the bench of the Common Pleas was given to him, and nmeteen months afterwards Sir Richard Ramsford was discharged to make way for Mm as lord chief justice of tlie King's Bench, to which he was appomted on May 81, 1678. The Reports are so silent as to his previous professional career that the three years during which he presided in this court may be almost said to contain the whole his tory of his legal life. It presents such a combination of ignorance, arrogance, and brutality as fuUy to justify the censure almost universally pronounced upon the judicial appointments of the latter part of this reign. The Popish Plot was first sterted soon after his advancement, and, from a mis taken idea of the inclmations of the court, he thought he should be doing an accept able service to the Mng by taking a strong- part against the supposed participators in. it, at the same time that he was msuring, for himself an immense popularity amongst ite deluded believers. When the infamous- promoters were detailing their narrative before the Commons he was sent for, and, in reply to the speaker, declared he would use his best endeavours, for he feared the face of no man where the king and country were concerned. (Bramston's Auto biog. 179.) Withdrawing into the speaker's chamber, he took the informations, issued his warrants, and threw himself at once into the ranks of ite most zealous advocates. SCROGGS On the trials he gave public credit to the testimony of the witnesses, explamed away their palpable contradictions, browbeat and threatened those who came forward with opposing evidence, inflamed the juries, who were too ready to act on his suggestions, and barbarously insulted the unfortunate victims. Even in the flrst state trial before him, that of Stayley, he had the inhu manity to caU out to the prisoner on the verdict of guUty being pronounced, ' Now you may die a Roman Catholic, and when you come to die I doubt you -will be proved a priest too.' On another occasion he ex claimed to three convicted prisoners, ' And now much good may their thirty thousand masses do them,' 'rhe seventh volume of the ' State Trials ' is almost wholly occu pied with those arising out of the Popish Plot, in which Titus Oates, WiUiam Bed- low, and the chief justice so infamously distmguished themselves. In the trials of Coleman, of Ireland and two others, of Reading, of Whitehead and four others, and of Langhorn (whom he afterwards acknowledged to be innocent), he pursued the same course ; but in the next, that of Sir George Wakeman and three others, there was a sudden alteration. He there threw discredit on the witnesses he had before encouraged, pointing out their several contradictions, and, though the evidence was much the same as that by which the others had suffered, summed up in such a manner as to obtain au ac quittal. The former trials had extended from November 20, 1678, to June 14, 1679 ; that of Wakeman occurred on July 18 fol lowing, and 'the occasion of the judge's conversion,' Roger North (E.ramen, 568) says, ' was this. The lord chief justice came once fr-om Windsor with a lord of the coimcil (Chief Justice North) in his coach, and, among other discourse, Scroggs asked that lord if the Lord Shaftesbury (who was then lord president of the council) had really that interest with the king as he seemed to have ? No, replied that lord, no more than your footman hath with you. This sank into the man, and quite altered the ferment, so as that from th.it time he was a new man.' Luttrell (i. 17, 19, 74) tells us that gross bribery with Portugal gold was said to have influenced him on this trial, but the result was that he at once lost the popularity which he so eagerly sought, and, instead of the applause he had been accustomed to receive, he was on one side daily assaUed vrith abuse and lam poons, m which he was commonly desig nated by the nickname of ' Mouth,' — ' their work is done, Down must the patriots go, and Mouth must run,' — whUe his gross partiality and brutal con duct in the former trials were exposed on SCEOGGS 599 the other. In addition, he had raised two inveterate enemies, the witnesses Oates and Bedlow, who, not having yet lost their power and being still believed by the mul titude, were not so easily cowed. As the parliament which had supported all thefr inventions had been dissolved, they exhi bited before the king and council ' articles of high misdemeanours' against the chief justice, charging him with browbeating them, depreciating thefr evidence, and mis leading the jury ; also with setting at liberty several persons charged with high treason, with imprisoning loyal subjects for prmt- ing books exposing the errors of Popery, and refusing to take bail, and vrith various other things tending to the disparagement of the witnesses, and the encour.igement of Roman Catholics ; to which they added charges against the chief justice of cursing and swearing, drunkenness, and corruption in the sale of licences to print the different trials. To all these charges Scroggs, not having the fear of parliament before him, answered with contemptuous impudence, and on the hearing before the king and council ou January 1680 ran down his accusers with such severity and wit that the complaint was dismissed. The chief justice's triumph was not of long duration. A new parliament met towards the end of the year, and the attack against him was renewed before a more willing audience. He and the other judges of the King's Bench had in the previous Trinity Term defeated an intended pre sentment against the Duke of York for not going to church, by suddenly discharging the grand jury. This the Commons made the principal ground of impeachment, add ing similar charges to those before made, and another for issuing illegal warrants to a messenger of the press. On carrying the impeachment to the upper house in Ja nuary 1681, the peers refused to commit the chief justice, or to address the king to suspend him from the execution of his office. This parliament being dissolved a few days after, on tho meeting of the new parliament at Oxford in the following March Scroggs put m his answer, which was merely a plea of not guilty ; but a dis solution also of tbis parliament, the last in Charles's reign, before the end of the month, put a stop to the proceedings. The king however felt that prudence required the removal of ajudge so universally obno.xious, and accordingly Sir Francis Pemberton was appointed on April II to fiU his place. His dismissal was made as easy to Mm as pos sible, bemg accompanied with a pension of 1500/, to himself, and a patent of kmg's counsel to his son, also Sir WUliam. After a retirement of two years and a half he died on October 25, 1683, of a polypus in his heart, and was buried in Southweald 600 SCROPE Church. By his wife, a daughter of Mat thew Black, Esq., he left a son, the above Sir WilUam, and two daughters, one of whom was married to Sir Robert Wright, the notorious chief justice in the next reign, aud the other to a son of Lord Hatton, (State Trials, vi. vii. viii. ; Pari. Hist, iv, 1224, 1261, 1274; North's E.vamen, 80, 206, 667; Burnet, 44S, 468.) SCBOFE, G-EOEEEEr' LE, descended from a Norman family which in the reign of Henry II, had baronial possessions in Glou cestershire, and in that of Edward I, large estates in Yorkshire also, was the son of Sir William le Scrope, a knight distin guished both in tournaments and the field, by his wife Constance, daughter and heiress of Thomas, the son of Gillo de Newsom upon Tyiie, In the parliament held in January 1816, 9 Edward II. , he is mentioned as suing for the king; anda grant was made to him of 20/. for his expenses, in the liberate of which, according to Dugdale, he is called serjeant. In that character he was evi dently summoned to the councils and par liaments of the seven subsequent years, and was also occasionally added to some judicial commissions for the trial of offen ders. Dugdale has inadvertently inserted his name in the Ust of judges of the King's Bench in 9 Edward IL, though he has taken no notice of such a fact in his sketch of him in the 'Baronage,' There is no doubt, however, that this is an error, as he is described as one of the king's seijeants m 14 and 16 Edward II,, and as attornatus regis in the former year (Ahb. Placit. 351), in the wardrobe account of which, also, there is an entry of the payment of 13/. 6s. 8d 'To.Geofiry le Scrop, king's seijeant, staying near the person of -the king by his order, when journeying through divers parts of England in the months of April, May, and June, in the present four teenth year, of the king's gift, for his ex penses in so staying.' (Archeeologia, xxvi, 346.) In 14 and 16 Edward H. he was employed in negotiating with the Scots, (N. Fmdera, U, 434-524.) It was not till September 27, 1328, 17 Edward IL, that he was raised to the bench, when he was constituted a judge of the Common Pleas, and fines were levied be fore him till the following Hilary Term. (Dugdak's Orig. 45.) On March 21, 1;J24, he was promoted to the chief j ustice.ship of the King's Bench ; and he presided in that court till the end of tbe reio-n. He was certainly removed from the office on the accession of Edward IIL, which not improbably arose from a suspicion of his being a partisan of the Despencers and Bal dock the chancellor. Whatever was the reason of his non-appointment, he soon succeeded in clearing himself by the testi- SCEOPE mony of the peers, and was reinstated on February 28, 1828, 2 Edward IH. His services were so highly appreciated by his sovereign that they were frequently em ployed in diplomatic engagements, which obliged him for a time to resign his place in the court. Thus, when Edward went to France in May 1829, 3 Edward HI., Robert de Malberthorpe and his brother, Henry le Scrope, were successively substituted for hini till December 19, 1380, when he was re-appointed. Again, Richard de Wilugh- by held his place from March 28 till Sep tember 20, 1382, 6 Edward III, ; and, on a third occEision, Richard de Wilughby took his seat on September 10, 1833, in conse quence of Geoffrey le Scrope bemg about to go on a foreign embassy. But in Fe bruary 1334 the King's Bench was ordered by the parliament at York to stay in War wickshire after Easter next, ' for that Sir Geoffrey le Scroop, chief justice, is busie in the king's weighty affairs, whose place to supply Sir Richard Wilughby is appomted,' (Hot ParL U, 377.) Dugdale quotes a patent of July 16, 1334, 8 Edward UI., by which Scrope was con stituted second justice of the Common Fleas, in the place of John de Stonore, -srith an exemption annexed from being called upon to go out of the kingdom against the king's enemies against his -wiU. (Cal Rot. Pat. 118,) As no fines appear to have been levied before him, he probably did not long remain in that court, and certainly was not one of its eight judges enumerated by Dug dale (Orig. 39) 'in 11 Edward IIL It was perhaps about this time that he resumed Ms place as chief justice of the King's Bench, which he certainly held on AprU 4, 1388, when the nomination of two new j udges was directed to Mm in that charac ter. He is mentioned iu the Book of Assizes in the same year, and ultimately resigned his office before the following Oc tober, a payment bemg then made to Mm as 'nuper capitalis justiciarus.' He was employed by both his sovereigns to treat with the Scots, and by Edward III. to assist in the negotiations relative to the marriages between his sister Eleanor and the Fi-ench kmg's eldest^ son, and be tween John, the son of the Earl of Kent, and a daughter of one of the French nobles. After his retirement from the King's Bench he was engaged in many other diplomatic missions ou behalf of the kiug, in one of which he is styled ' secretarius noster.' ; But it was not only as a lawyer and negotiator that he was distinguished; he made himself equally prominent as a knight and a soldier. At the tournaments held at Northampton, Guildford, and Newmarket, at the first of which he was knighted, he gained great distinction. He accompanied the king in the invasion of Scotland, and SCROPE -displayed his banner and pennon at the .affair of Stannow Park, He was one of the royal retinue several times in Flanders .and France, with a train of two knights .and forty men-at-arms ; and he served at the siege of Tournay in July 1340, 14 Edward HI. An anecdote is related of a character istic revenge which he took of Cardinal Bernard de Monte Faventio, during those wars, for some insulting remarks he had made to the king in reference to the ¦strength of the French, He brought him one night into a high tower, and pointing to the frontiers of France, in fiames for ¦several leagues, he said, 'My lord, what thinketh your eminence now? Doth not this silken line wherewith you say France is encompassed seem in great danger of being cracked, if not broken ? ' The car dinal was struck speechless, and dropped down apparently lifeless with fear and sorrow. Besides many valuable grante from both Edward II, and Edward III. in reward for his services, he was in 14 Edward IIL created a banneret, and had a grant of 200 marks per annum for the support of that dignity, (Report on Peerage, i. 364.) He did not long survive this last honour, but died in the same year at Ghent iu Flanders, His body was removed to Coversham, where it was buried in the church of the abbey, under a tomb on which his effigy was placed. He married first Ivetta, daughter of Sir William Roos, of Igmanthorp ; and se condly, as it is believed, Lora, daughter and coheiress of Sir Gerard de Furnival, and widow of Sir John Uflete. By the latter he had no children, but by the for mer he had flve sons and three daughters. His second son. Sir Thomas, died during his father's life ; his third and fourth sons. Sir 'William and Sir Stephen, distinguished soldiers, were both present at the battle of Cressy ; and his^ youngest son, Geoffrey, be came a priest, and held some dignities in the Church, His eldest son. Sir Henry le Scrope, who was governor of Guisnes and Calais, was summoned to parliament as a baron in 1342, and was generally called Lord Scrope of Masham, His descendants held the title till I6I7, when on the death of the nmth lord ¦without issue it fell into abeyance among his three sisters, (Baronage, i. 657; Pari. Writs, ii, 1409 ; Nicolas's Scrope and Grosvenor Controvei-sy.) SCEOPE, Henet le, was the eldest son and heir of Sir William le Scrope, and Constance his wife. Like his brother, the last-mentioned Geoffrey, he was distin guished both as a knight and a lawyer. His name appears as an advocate in the Year Book of I Edward H., and in the SCROPE 601 next year, on November 27, 1308, he was raised to the bench of the Common Pleas, Fines were levied before him in that cha racter till Trinity, 10 Edward II, (Dug dale's Orig. 44), and during the same interval he frequently acted as a judge of assize and on various criminal commissions. He was promoted to the office of chief justice of the King's Bench on June 16, 1317, which ho retained for above six years, and was then superseded, about Sep tember 1828, by Hervey de Staunton, who after a few months made way for Henry's brother, Geoffrey le Scrope, Some con fusion often arises in tbe reports in the Year Books from the difficulty of distin guishing which brother is referred to. The cause of his removal is nowhere re lated, nor whether it was at his own request. That it was occasioned by no dissatisfaction on the king's part may be inferred from his being constituted, in the same year, custos of the forests beyond Trent, an office which he still retained at the commencement of the next reign, (Abb. Rot. Orig, i, 271 ; Rot. ParL U. 10; N. Fmdera, ii. 678.) Within a few days after the accession of Edward III. — viz., ou February 6, 1327 — Sir Henry le Scrope had a patent consti tuting him second justice of the Common Pleas, the flrst instance of such a designa tion 'being adopted, and the fines acknow ledged before him extended to Hilary in the third year. It was not, however, till October 28 in that year, 1329, that he changed his position for that of chief jus tice of the King's B^ncli, to which he was then re-appointed during the temporary absence of his brother, Geoffrey le Scrope who, upon his return, superseded him on December 19 in the following year. His judicial services, however, were too valuable to be lost, for on the same day he was made chief baron of the Exchequer, and he continued on that bench during the remainder of his life. There are, it is true, two patente bearing date respectively the 18th and I9th of November 1388, 7 Ed ward IIL, by the former of which he is constituted chief justice of the Common Pleas, and by the latter chief baron of the Exchequer, From this we can only infer that the removal into the Common Pleas was without his consent, and the restora tion to the Exchequer at his solicitation, the more especially as WilUam de Herle, whom he was to have superseded in the former court, was immediately replaced. Besides the numerous royal rewards for his good services from both kings, he was also made a knight banneret His death occurred on September 7, 1336, leaving very considerable possessions in Middlesex, Leicestershire, Hertfordshire, Rutlandshire, and Bedfordshire, but chiefly in the county of York, He was bmied in 602 SCROPE the abbey of St, Agatha, at Easby, near Richmond, in the latter county, of which he was esteemed the founder, having pur chased the property of the family of the Earl of Richmond, and been a large con tributor to the house. His wife's name was Margaret, but there is a doubt whether she was the daughter of Lord Roos or of Lord Fitz-Walter, She afterwards married Sir Hugh Mortimer, of Chelmarsh in Shropshire, and of Luton in Bedfordshire, and lived till 1357. They left three sons, all of whom were minors at the time of their father's death. William and Stephen, the two elder, died without issue before 19 Edward IIL, in which year the inheritance devolved on the third son, the next-mentioned Richard, the first Baron Scrope of Bolton. (Baron age, i. 654 ; Monast. vi. 921 ; Nicolas's Scrope ancl Grosvenor Controversy.) SCEOPE, Richaed le, was about eight years old at the death of his father, the last-mentioned Sir Henry le Scrope, in 1336, 10 Edward III. He was the youngest of three sons, and ultimate heir to his father's extensive property. From his earliest youth ho devoted himself to arms, and was only eighteen when he accom panied the king on his invasion of France, and partook of the glory of the battle of Cressy on August 20, 1846. In the follow ing October we find him so signalising himself at the battle of Nevil's Cross, where the Scots were completely van quished, as to be knighted on the field ; and during the remainder of that year and part of the following he assisted at the siege of Calais, which surrendered into the king's hands on August 4, 1347. In 1350 he was present in the sea-fight near Rye, when Don Carlos de la Cerda was signally de- fea,ted by King Edward and the Black Prince, and twenty of his ships taken ; and during the succeeding years his name ap pears in the array of his sovereign both in the French and Scottish wars. In 1359 he began the connection with John of Gaunt, Earl of Richmond, which lasted the remainder of the Ufe of that celebrated man, serving under him in the army which then invaded France (N. Fm dera, iii. 412), and made its way almost to the waUs of Paris. In 1866 he accom panied his patron, who had been created Duke of Lancaster, into Spain, and distin guished himself in April of the foUowing year at the decisive victory of Najarre, which restored Don Pedro to the Spanish throne, and on the renewal of the war with France in 1869 he filled his usual place by the side of the duke. During the progress of his miUtary career in 1364 he had been selected by his own county of York as its representative in parliament; and on January 8, 1371 he SCROPE was summoned to the upper house as a. baron. On March 27 of that year he was invested with the responsible office of treasurer, the king selecting him when the Commons petitioned that the great offices should no longer be fllled by the clergy. He retained this place for four years and a half, retirmg in September 1875 ; but during the interval, in July 1873, he again formed part of the Duke of Lan caster's retinue into France, and in March 1375 was joined with Sfr John Kynvet to- act as attorney for the duke during his absence from England, (Ibid, 1026.) In the last year of Edward's reign he was one of the commissioners for the preservation of the truce with Scotland, and for the pro tection of the Marches, On the accession of Richard II, he was. appointed steward of the household, in which character he addressed the Commons^ in the first two parUaments of the reign, (Rot. Pari. iii. 5.) But a great honour was reserved for him ; for on October 29, 1378, the Great Seal was deUvered to him as ch.anceUor of England, He remamed in this office only eight months, during which we find him chargmg the judges and Ser jeants in parliament to give their opinion on certam points of law, Retirmg from the chancellorship on July 2, 1879, and re suming his mUitery duties in Scotland under the Duke of Lancaster, he received the appomtment of warden of the Western Marches. In the parUament of 1881 he is spoken of on November 18 as 'lors noveUement crees en Chanceller d'Engleterre.' It is curious, however, that, accordmg to the re cord on the Close Roll, Bishop Courteneye, the late chancellor, did not give up the Seal till November 30, and Richard le Scrope did not receive it till December 4, Thus was he a second time chancellor ; but he did not keep his place above seven months, his straightforward honesty in ducing Mm to remonstrate with his royal master against giving inconsiderately away the lands that fell to the crown. The king, incensed at the interference of his minister, is said by Walsingham to have sent messenger after messenger to demand the Great Seal, which the chanceUor refused to give up to any other person than the king himself. The entry on the record seems to support this relation, and plainly evi dences a hasty proceeding. It alleges that, the king being desirous that Scrope should be exonerated from the office, the Seal was delivered up to him, ut debuit, and though he was not as yet provided with a chan-, cellor ; but being unwilling that the affairs of the kingdom should be retarded for want of a Seal, he delivered it to certain com- mis.sioners to be kept at his will. This occurred on July II, 1382. SCROPE. The kmg's irritation, however, seems soon to have subsided, smce Scrope was m the same year appointed to negotiate a truce with Scotland. Although between fifty and sixty years of age, he exhibited no diminution of his military ardom-; but was present, with his old patron the duke, at the capture of Edmburgh in 1884, and joined King Richard's expedition against Sootiand m the following year. It was then that he challenged the right of Sir Robert Grosvenor to bear the arms 'Azure, a bend or,' This was the third dispute of a similar nature in which Scrope had been engaged. At the siege of Calais in 1347 his right to the crest of a crab issuing from a ducal coronet was challenged ; but with out effect, as he ever afterwards continued to bear it. Again, in Paris in 1860, a Cornish sqiure, named Carminow, disputed his right to the arms on his shield, when both parties were adjudged to be entitled. The third controversy, with Sir Robert Grosvenor, which lasted four years in the Court of Chivalry, and terminated in Scrope's complete triumph over his op ponent, is the subject of a most interesting work by the late Sir Harris Nicolas, to which we are indebted for most of the materials from which this accoimt has been drawn up, (See also Rymer, vii, 620-1,676,686.) During the remainder of Richard's reign Scrope was a regular attendant on his parliamentary duties. In 1386 he was ap pointed one of the king's permanent coun ¬seUors, and had the courage to defend Pole, Earl of Suffolk, his brother-in-law, when impeached by the Commons. In 1387 he was one of the commissioners on the trial of NeviU, Archbishop of York, TresUian, and others ; and conducted him- self_ with such prudence and moderation during the following years, that when the parliament of 21 Richard IL, 1397, reversed the proceedings of that of 1386, and im peached those who were impUcated in them, Scrope, though one of the number, was declared innocent by the Commons, and a patent of pardon was granted to him. The Duke of Lancaster died in February 1399 ; and none can contemplate without pity the feelings which must have embar rassed the aged knight, when he watched on the one hand the mad and foolish con duct of his sovereign, and saw on the other the insidious and treasonable proceedings of his patron's son. He took no active part in the contest ; and on the deposition of Richard, although Ms eldest son, the Earl of Wiltshire, had lost his life for his adherence to the royal cause, he was sum moned to Hem-y's first parliament, and was among those peers who assented to the late king being placed in imprisonment ; a vote to which, under the circumstances. SCROPE 603 he could scarcely object, quaUfied as it was by the words ' sauvent sa vie,' The scene in the parliament a few days afterwards must have been most affecting, when, on the attainder of his son being confirmed, he rose m his place, his eyes streaming -with tears, and ' implored the usurper that the proceedings might not affect the inheritance of himself or his other chUdren ; and after admitting the justice of the sentence, and deploring the conduct of his son, the un happy father was consoled by Henry, who deigned to assure him that neither his in terest nor those of his children then Uving should suffer from it ; for that he had al ways considered and still deemed him a loyal knight,' The only other instance of his mixing in public affairs after this event was his presence in parliament in January 1401, when the Earls of Kent, Huntingdon, and Salisbury were attainted of high treason. (Nicolas, 30, 39; ParL Hist, iU. 427, 463, 459.) He lived little more than a year after words, his death occurring on May 30, 1403, at about the age of seventy-five. His remains were deposited in the abbey of St. Agatha, near Richmond, where those of Ms father rested. His will is in the 'Testamenta Vetusta' (i, 156.) The union of such qualities as he pos sessed both as a soldier and a states man are seldom to be found in one man. Throughout his long military career he was highly distinguished for his valour, and the talents and sagacity he exhibited in his civil employments were equally remark able. Though connected with all the in- tiicate proceedings of the unfortunate reign of Richard II. , he steered clear of the shoals on which his contemporaries stranded, and, preserving the esteem of all classes to the close of his life, he weU deserved the cha racter which Walsingham gives him, that he was a man who had not his fellow in the whole realm for prudence and integrity. Some authorities say that he was twice married, but others doubt whether he had more than one wife. She was Blanche, th& daughter of Sir William de la Pole, and sister of Michael Eari of Suffolk, The name of his second wife is variously stated by those who assert that he had one — some calling her Margaret, daughter of Sir John Montford, and others describing her as a daughter of — Spencer, By Blanche he had four sons, the eldest of whom, WU liam, after being created by Richard H. Eari of WUtshire in 1397, and knight of the Garter in 1398, was for his attachment to his benefactor beheaded without trial in 1399, and his honours and estates were forfeited to the crown. (Baronage, i. 661.) The second son, Roger, succeeded his father ; the thfrd, Stephen, was an adherent of Richard H,, but afterwards was received. €04 SCEOPE into Henry's confidence ; and the fourth, Richard, Archbishop of York, was beheaded for conspiracy against Henry in 1405. _ The barony of Scrope of Bolton con tinued through eleven generations. The last holder of it, Emanuel, was created Earl of Sunderland on .Tune 19, 1627 ; but dying -without issue in 1640, the earldom became ¦extinct, and the barony devolved on the re presentatives of the daughter of his grand father. It has been hitherto, however, ¦unclaimed. The Bolton estate was be queathed by the earl to 3Iary, one of his natural daughters, whose second husband, Charles Paulet, Marquis of Winchester, was created Duke of Bolton in 1689, a title which became extinct in 1794. The pre sent barony of Bolton was granted in 1797 to Thomas Orde, who had married a na tural daughter of the fifth duke, and who took the name of Paulet. (Scrope and Grosvenor Controvei-sy, ii. 17-39.) SCEOPE, John, had possession of the Great Seal for the limited period of three weeks, but, though short his career and trifling his services in this capacity, his merits were afterwards rendered highly conspicuous in another sphere. He was the son of Thomas Scrope of Wormsley in Oxfordshire, a mansion which had formerly been the seat of Colonel Adrian Scrope (a scion of the noble family of Scrope, barons of Bolton), who took a prominent part on the pai'liament side iu the Great Rebel lion, holding among other important offices that of governor of Bristol, and sitting in the High Court of Justice which condemned Charles I., for which he suffered death as a regicide at the Restoration, John Scrope received his legal education ¦at the Middle Temple, where he was called to the bar in 1692, After practising for sixteen years, he was in May 1708 ap pointed a baron of the Exchequer in Scot land, and while enjoying that office the removal of Lord Chancellor Cowper oc curred, on which the Great Seal of England was placed in the hands of three commis sioners, one of whom was Mr. Baron Scrope, They received it on September 26, 1710, and "held it till October 19, when it was deUvered to Sir Simon Harcourt as lord keeper. So ended Baron Scrope's judicial character in England ; but in Scotland he ¦continued to exercise the functions of a baron of the Exchequer till he was selected as joint secretary to the Treasury, when he ¦entered parUament at the general election in 1722 as member for Ripon, Iu the new parUament on the accession of George IL in 1728 he was chosen for Bristol, his native city, and in those of 1735, 1741, and 1747 he represented Lyme Regis. His se natorial exertions were confined to matters connected with the revenue, and his term of office comprehended the whole period SEGEAVB during which Sir Robert Walpole was first lord of the Treasury, With that minister he was closely alUed, and when on Sir Robert's fall a secret committee sat to enquire into his conduct for the previous ten years, Mr, Scrope, who was called upon to give evidence as to the disposal of above a million of money which had been tiaced to his and Sir Robert's hands as secret service money, refused to take the oath offered to him, and declared that he was authorised by his majesty to state 'that the disposal of money issued for secret ser vice, by the nature of it, reqmres the utmost secrecy, and is accounted for to his majesty only, and therefore his majesty could not ' permit him to disclose anything on that subject,' The Commons took no notice of his refusal, and he enjoyed his place for ten years after his pati'on's dismissal. Tmdal says of him that he ' was perhaps the coolest, the most experienced, and most s.agacious friend the minister ever had.' He died on April 9, 1752, at a great age, lea-vmg no issue. His estate of 'Wormsley is still in the possession of the descendante of Henry Fane, who married one of his sisters and coheirs, and whose eldest son became the eighth Earl of Westmore land. (CoUins's Peerage, iii. 302; LuttreU, vi. 304, 633 ; ParL Hist. xU. 823 ; Tindal, XX. 188, 544.) SECIfLEE, Alexandee le, of a family established in Herefordshire, was probably the son of Nicholas le Seculer, who assessed the taUage of that county in 19 Henry IH. Alexander was constituted, as the king's ' beloved clerk,' one of the barons of the Exchequer in Easter 1265, 49 Henry HI. (Madox, ii. 56), after which date no further mention of him occurs. SEFEED (Bishop of CHiCHESTEE),who, from being a canon, was appointed arch deacon, of Chichester, was from 19 to 23 Henry IL, 1173-117", employed as a justice itinerant iu several counties. (Ida- dox, i. 43, 700.) He was then advanced to the deanery, and appears to have held both dignities in October 1180, when he was raised to the bishopric of that see. (Le Neve, 65.) The cathedral aud epis copal palace having been, with great part of the city, destroyed by fire on October 19, 1187, he rebuilt aud restored them to their former splendour. He was present at the coronation of King John on May 27, 1199, and died on Mai-ch 17, 1204. (Godwin, 502.) SEGEA'VE, GiLBEET DE, was the second son of the under-named Stephen de Segrave, by Rohese, the daughter of Thomas le Despenser; but his elder brother, John, dying in his father's Ufetime, he succeeded to the property on his father's decease in 1241. 'Dugdale (Orig. 21) states that he was a canon of St. Paul's ; but if so, unless SEGRAVE that dignity was held by civilians, he must have obtained a dispensation from his holy orders (which he perhaps did on his brother's death in 1231), as he married Amabilia, the daughter and heir of Robert de Chaucomb, (Excerpt e Rot. Fin. i, 462,) In 15 Henry iH, he had a grant from Simon de JMontfort, lord of Leicester, of the town of Kegworth in Leicestershire, and a short time after he was constituted fovemor of Bolsover Castle. In 26 Henry IL, the year folio-wing his father's death, he was made justice of the forests south of Trent, and governor of Kenilworth Castle, He was raised to the bench at West minster in 35 Henry IIL, I25I, and was one of the justiciers appointed to hear such pleas of the city of London as were wont to be determined by the justices itinerant. He is not noticed in a judicial character after January 1252. Two years afterwards he was sent on a mission into Gascony, on his return from which, in company with John de Plessetis, Earl of Warvrick, and other nobles, they were, in spite of the Kmg of France's letters of safe conduct which they bore, seized and imprisoned at Pontes, a city in Poictou. Although ulti mately released, his sufferings there im paired his health and caused his death, which happened shortly before November II, 1254, 89 Henry IIL, when his lands were taken into the Mng's hands, as usual on that event. (Ibid, ii, 198,) He was succeeded by his son, Nicholas de Segrave, The barony failed m the male line in 1353, but survived in Elizabeth, daughter of Baron John, who married John Lord Mowbray, Thefr son Thomas was created Earl of Nottingham in 1.383, and Duke of Norfolk in 1400, in which titie this barony continued merged till the death of John, the fourth duke, in 1476, and on the death of his daughter Ann without issue it fell into abeyance between the representatives of Margaret and Isabel, sisters of John, the second Duke of Norfolk, the present Earl of Berkeley being heir of the former, and the Barons Petre and Stourton being heirs general of the latter, (Nicolas's Synopsis ; Baronage, i, 671,) SEGEA'VE, Stephen de, was the son of Gilbert, son of Hereward, who assumed the name of his lordship of Segrave in Leicestershire, of which county he acted as sheriff during several years in the reign of Richard I, In 6 John, Stephen was excused a part of his father's debt to the crown, for the love the Mng bore to Hugh le Despenser, whose sister Rohese he married. (Rot de Finibus, 422,) In 8 John he was one of the two 'custodes placitorum coronas ' (Abh. Placit. 65), and in 16 John he was sent into Jthe county of Worcester to forward the king's affairs. His loyalty during the barons' wars was SEGRAVE 605 rewarded by a grant ofthe lands of Stephen de Giint, and oi" the manor of Kinton in Warwickshire, for which he afterwards procured a weekly m.irket, (Rot Pat 128 ; Rot Chart 223 ; Rot Claus. i, 428,) He had m his youth been brought up as an ecclesiastic, but had changed his clerical profession for that of arms. No doubt, however, he added to the former, as was then usual, the study of the law, and con tinued his attention to it, for though there is no account of his forensic progress, his interest or ability soon raised him to the bench. In 2 Henry IIL, 1218, fines were levied before him as a justicier at West minster, and he had a grant of one hundred shUlings as his fee at two several periods in the year. (Dugdale's Orig. 42 ; Rot. Claus. i. 350, 865,) There are records of fines in which his name occurs from this date till Michaelmas, 14 Henry IIL, and during the whole of that time and in the two following years he was frequently em ployed as a j'ustice itinerant in the pro vinces, holding from the tenth year the highest place in the commissions to which he was attached. In a judgment of him and Ms companions pleaded in a cause of a subsequent year, they are called 'justiciarii de Banco,' but whether its date was before or after he was chief justiciary does not appear. (Abb. Placit. 128.) During the former period he w,is en trusted with other important commissions. In 3 Henry III, he was sent on an embassy to the legate ; in the next year he was appointed governor of Sauvey Castle in i Leicestershire ; and for the three following- he acted as sheriff of the counties of Lm coln, aud of Essex and Hertford, and as constable of the Tower of London, with an allowance of 50/. per annum. (Rot Claus. i. 396, 469, &c.) He was made sheriff of Buckingham and Bedford in 12 Henry HI,, and then of War-wick and Leicester and Northampton for his life, and he was joined with the chancellor in the adminis tration of affairs durmg the king's absence in Poictou in 1280. (4 Repmt Pub. Rec, Apji. ii. 162 ; 5 Report, App. ii, 63.) He had united himself with the party of Peter de_ Rupibus, Bishop of Winchester, aiding his efforte against the justiciary Hubert de Burgh, and had taken every opportunity of ingratiating himself with King Henry, His immediate success was evidenced by the above appointments, and by other grants of great extent and value. When the bishop had succeeded in pro curing the discharge of Hubert de Burgh, his office of chief justiciary was, on July 29, 1232, given to Stephen de Segrave (R, de Wendover, iv. 245), together with the_ government of all the casties fi-om which his predecessor had been removed. The acquisition of this post might be an 606 SEGRAVE object of honourable ambition, but his efl'orts to irritate the monai-ch against the fallen favourite, and to aggravate the charges against him, deserve another desig nation. His ministry was not a fortunate one, and in the next year he had the ill- luck to be present when the king was defeated before Grosmont, and to be one of those who were surprised in their beds and compelled to fly almost naked from the field. His support of the pope's exactions, and his adherence to the Bishop of Winchester, were sufficient to cause his unpopularity, one effect of which was the burning of his mansion at Alcmimdberry, while he was with the king in the neighbouring to-wn of Huntingdon, (Ibid 278, 297.) This occurred in the early part of February 1284, and it was probably in compensation for his loss that, on March 2, the king granted him an exemption from the forest laws in this manor. But within a very few weeks he shared in the fall of the disgraced bishop, and in the middle of the foUo-wing April was ejected from the high position he had occupied for so brief a period. (Ibid. 299.) Being shortly afterwards summoned with the rest of the discarded ministers to render an account of his stewardship, rather than meet his accusers he retired to the abbey of St. Mary at Leicester, where he resumed the clerical tonsure which he had formerly relinquished. He, however, eventually thought flt to appear on .Tuly 4, under the protection of Edmund, Archbishop of Can terbury, when, after the king had angrily attributed to his counsels the disgrace of Hubert de Burgh and the exile of the nobles of the kingdom, he was given till Michael mas to prepare his defence. The times becoming more quiet, and milder counsels prevaiUng, he was, in the following Fe bruary, aUowed to make his peace with the king, on paying a flne of one thousand marks. (Ibid. 312, 314, 325.) Although in one of his flts of flckleness the king recalled him to court after three years' absence, made him justice of Chester in 21 Henry ill. (Baronage, i. 672), and for a time listened to his counsels, he was never restored to Ms former elevation. His death happened in the abbey of Leicester, in which he had become a canon regular, before October 13, 1241, qn which day his lands were, as usual on such events, seized into the king's hands, (E.vcerpt. e Rot. Fin. i. 366.) Evidently a man of energy and enterprise, his grasping and timeserving disposition threw suspicion over all he did; and the popular hatred that he incurred by his en couragement of the king's extravagance, and the expedients he used to supply it, blinded the people to such of his acts as • SEGRAVE were meritorious. But, excepting the harsh ness with which he urged the persecution of Hubert de Burgh, no imputation of cruelty or even severity can be made against his conduct asa judge either before or after hewas raised to the highest post; while his grants to the abbeys of Stoneley, Combe, and Leicester, and his subsequent retire ment to the latter, are evidences of his pious disposition. After the death of Ms flrst -wife, Rohese, daughter of Thomas le Despenser, he mar ried Ida, the sister of Henry de Hastings, who, six years after his death, was fined 600/. for marrying Hugh Pecche. (Ibid. u. 6, 17.) _ By his first wife he had two sons, the elder of whom, John, dying ten years before him, he was succeeded by his second son, the last-mentioned Gilbert, SEGEA'VE, Hugh de, was one of the branches of the illustrious house of Segrave, and is first noticed in the records by the confirmation, in 43 Edward HL, of Queen Philippa's grant to him (styled a kmght) for life of the offices of constable of the castle of Brustwyk, and of keeper of the forests of Kingswood and Filwood in Gloucestershfre. (Ahb. Rot. Orig. U. 304.) In 46 Edward HI. he was one of the commissioners to treat with the Flemings, and held the same diplomatic character in the last year of Edward's reign, (N. Fmdera, iU. 932, 1076.) On the accession of Richard H. he was selected as one of the kmg's couijcU, and m the third year was appointed stewai^d of the household. (Cal. Rot Pat. 208.) In that and the following year he was one of the ambassadors employed to tieat -with France, and to negotiate the Mng's marriage -with Anne, the sister of tbe emperor. (Rymer, vU, 161, 229, 281.) Two days after the brutel murder of Archbishop Sudbury the Great Seal was placed in Segr.ave's hands, on June 16, 1881, to be held as keeper until the king could more conveniently appoint a chan cellor; and he performed all the duties pertaining to the office for eight weeks, till August 10. On the same day he was made treasurer in the room of Robert de Hales, another victim of the popular fury. In that year also he had a grant of the manor of Overhall in Essex, to hold by the service of making ' wafres,' and attending on the king at his coronation. (Cal. Rot Pat. 205.) In the parliament that met in November he opened the business on the part of the king, Ou July 11, 1382, when the king angrily took away the Seal from Richai-d le Scrope, Segrave again received it as the head of a commission of three, and they continued to hold it tiU September 20, a period of ten weeks. SEINGES Segrave continued treasurer till January T7, 1386, about which time his death ¦occurred, (Cal. Inquis. p. m, iii. 84.) SEINGES, Richaed de, was probably an ¦officer in one of the departments of the Curia Regis, being united -with Hubert de Burgh as his deputy in the sheriffalty of Hereford for three years, commencing 3 John, (Rot Cancel 106, 360.) He had the custody of the castle of Wilton, which, in 6 John, he was ordered to deliver to William de Cantilupe (Rot. Pat 46) ; and in the same year he was fined one hundred shillings iu respect of a false oath taken in •an assize of novel disseisin between Cecil ¦de Felsted and Hugh de Windsor, who was in his custody, (Rot. de Finibus, 287.) The offence, however, does not seem to have been very flagrant, as two years after wards a great many flnes were levied at St. Edmunds, Cambridge, and Bedford, before Humfrey, archdeacon of Sarum, and him. In 8 Henry IIL, 1219, he appears as one of the justiciers before whom fines were levied :at "Westminster, and in 1226 he was sent with other justiciers to try certain male factors m Norfolk. (Rot. Claus. ii. 169.) SELBY, Ralph de, is described with the addition ' Magister,' showing that per sons in orders were still appointed to the •office of baron of the Exchequer, his patent to which is dated October 24, 1393, 17 Richard IL Little more is to be found ¦concerning him, unless he were the Ralph Selby 'in utroque jure Doctor' who was made master of King's College, Cambridge, m the fourteenth year. (Cal. Rot Pat. 221.) He is mentioned as of the council of the king iu 21 Richard II. (Proc Privy Council, i, 75), but evidently retired or died soon after, as his name does not occur ¦on the Liberate Roll of the first day of the reign of Henry IV,, directing the pay ment of the salaries of the barons for the previous half-year, SEL'WYH', Chaeles Jaspee, late Lord Justice of Appeal, whose recent death has been universally regretted, was born in Church Row, Hampstead, Middlesex, on October 13, 1813. His father, WilUam Selwyn, of whom hewas the youngest son, attained great eminence in the law as a reporter in the Court of King's Bench from 1814 to 1817, as recorder of Portsmouth and queen's counsel, as instructor of the Prince Consort in the laws and constitution of the kingdom, and as the author of an abridgment of the law of Nisi Prius, of such standard reputation that it passed through nine editions. His mother was Letitia, daughter of Thomas Kynaston, Esq,, of Witham, Essex, the grandfather ¦of the present head-master of St. Paul's ¦School in London. His two brothers at tained high positions in the Church, one as successively Bishop of New Zealand and of SETONE 607 Lichfield, and the other as canon of Elv and Margaret Professor of Divinity, Charles was educated first under Dr. Nicholson at Ealing, then at Eton, and next at Trinity College, Cambridge, where he took his degrees of B.A, and M.A. in 1836 and 1889, FoUowing his father's profession, he entered Lincoln's Inn, and was called to the bar in January 1840. He practised with such success in the Court of Chancery that he was made queen's counsel in 1856, and having in the previous year been appointed commissary of his university, he was elected one of its representatives in parliament in 1859, In that assembly he took an active part in the debates upon the engrossing topics of the day, in speeches that were both intelligent and effective, as a churchman and con servative. In July 1867, while yet member for the university, he received the appointment of solicitor-general and was knighted. Soon after, a vacancy happemng in the Court of Appeal by the resignation of Sir John Rolt, he was selected to fill it on February 8, 1868. Before the end of that month, his able senior, Lord Cairns, being invested with the Great Seal as lord chancellor, the va cancy was filled up by Vioe-Chancellor Sir WiUiam Page Wood (now Lord Hatherley), who would of course take the second seat in the court. But Sir Charles Selwyn, modestly feeling that it would be unbe coming in him, so recently placed on the judgment seat, to take precedence of a judge who had already presided over a court of equity for fifteen years, nobly in sisted that Sir WiUiam Wood should take the senior place, a course of conduct which gave no surprise to those who knew his character, and which increased the respect and admiration with which he was gene rally regarded. His judicial dignity was of short dura tion. Before eighteen months had elapsed he died at his house at Richmond in Surrey on August II, 1869, from the effecte of a painful operation. He was buried at Nun- head Cemetery, He married flrst Hester, daughter of J, G, Ravenshaw, Esq., chairman of the old East India Company, and widow of Thomas Dowler, Esq., M.D. ; and secondly Ca therine RosaUe, daughter of Colonel G. S. Green, C.B,, and widow of the Bey, Henry Dupuis, vicar of Richmond, SETONE, Thomas de, is named in the Year Books for ten years before he was raised to the bench. He was one of the Mng's serjeante in 19 Edward IH,, when he appUed to the coimcil, on behalf of the community of the bishopric of Durham, to forego the iter there for that year ; and he obtained his prayer on their paying 600 marks for the favour, (Abb, Rot Orig. ii. 608 SE-WELL 177,) Dugdale places him as a judge of the King's Bench in 28 Edward IIL, and of the Common Pleas in 29 Edward IIL, without any date of appointment to either. He may, however, have been mistaken, as the authority he quotes is the Liberate Roll, in which the word 'bancum' sometimes applies to both courts. He was certainly a judge of one of them in April 1354, 28 Ed ward IIL, for he was one of the triers of petitions in the parliament then held (Rot ParL ii. 264) ; and he was a judge of the Common Pleas in Michaelmas 1365, 29 Edward IIL, for flnes were then acknow ledged before him : and it appears probable that he was appointed to this court between the previous Hilary and Trinity Terms, as the Ust in the Year Book omits his name in the former, and includes it in the latter term. In 30 Edward III. he recovered damages from a woman for calling him ' traitor, felon, and robber ' in the public court. (Lib. Assis. 177.) On July 5, 1357, he was made chief justice of the King's Bench; but it would seem, from the words ' ad tempus ' in the mandate, that it was at that time a mere temporary appointment ; and, from the fact that his name appears on fines up to Mid- ,siimmer, 33 Edward III., we may infer that he acted up to that date as a judge of the Common Pleas also, especially as in the same year he is designated by the latter title, when he was admitted of the king's secret council. Thus it was not till after wards that he was permanently fixed m the presidency ofthe King's Bench ; but there is no doubt that he then held it till the thirty-eighth year, when, on May 24, 1360, Henrv Green was appointed his successor. (Dugdale's Orig. 45; Ccd. Rot Pat 171.) SEWELL, Thomas, was the son and heir of Thomas Sewell, of West Ham, Essex, Esq., and was called to the bar by the Middle Temple on May 24, 1784. It is told of him that in his youth he was ' bred up under an attorney, and afterwards engaged in the laborious business of a draughteman in Chancery,' and that ' he was called to the bar, where he procured a considerable practice,' making at the time he was made master of the Rolls ' between 3000/. and 4000/. per annum.' In 1754 he was appointed one of the king's counsel. He was a member of the two parliaments of 1754 and 1761, representing Harwich in the former, and Winchelsea in the latter, A story is told that on the debate relative to the illegality of general warrants he spoke in favour of an adjournment of the debate, because it would afford him oppor tunity to examine his books and authorities, and he should be prepared to give an opi nion on the subject, 'which at present he was not,' Appearing on the adjournment in his gi'eat wig, as his custom was, he said SHAD-WELL that ' he had turned the matter over as he lay upon his pillow, and after ruminating and considering upon it a great deal, he- could not help declaring that he was of the- same opinion as before,' On which Mr, Charles Townshend started up and said ' he was very sorry that what the learned gentleman had found in his nightcap he had lost in Ms periwig,' On the death of Sir Charles Clarke he was very unexpectedly offered the place of ' master of the Rolls, which he accepted on December 12, 1764, to the surprise of the bar, as his professional income greatly ex ceeded that attached to the office. He was thereupon knighted. He presided most effi ciently in his court for twenty years, but in the latter part of his career he suffered much from those infirmities the anticipa tion of which no doubt influenced his de termination to quit the laborious duties of a leading barrister. His offers of resigna tion were ineffectual, the terms he required being too high to be gr.anted. He therefore died ' in harness,' on March 6, 1784, and was buried in the RoUs Chapel, He married twice. His flrst wife was Catherine, daughter of Thomas Heath, of Stansted Mountfichet in Essex, M.P. for Harwich ; and his second was Mary EUza beth, daughter of Dr. Coningsby Sibthorp, of Canwick in LincoMshfre, professor of botany at Oxford, He had issue by both marriages. (Coi-r. of Loi-d Chatham; Gent. Mag. liv. 237, 257 ; Notes and Queries, 1st S. VU. 388, 521, 621, ix. 86, 2nd S. x 396; Manning and Bray's Surrey, i. 498, iii. 196, 304.) SEYTON, RoGBE DE, who was of the clerical profession, is not mentioned till AprU 1268, 52 Henry IH., from which date fines were acknowledged and pay ments made for assizes before him tiU the end of the reign. (Dugdale's Orig. 44.) On the accession of Edward 1, he was continued in the Common Pleas, and was constituted chief justice of that court in Michaelmas of the second year, in which he also stands at the head of the justices iti nerant. As the last fine acknowledged before him is dated on the octaves of 'Tri nity, 6 Edward I., 1278, the period of his death or retirement may be fixed about that time. In the same year he was suc ceeded by Thomas de Weyland, SHAD-WELL, Lancelot, was the eldest son of Lancelot ShadweU, Esq., of Lin coM's Inn, and Elizabeth, third daughter of Charles Whitmore, Esq., of South ampton, His father was a barrister of high reputation and immense practice as a real property lawyer, from whom he naturally inherited his great love of that branch, and the excellence in it which he afterwards exhibited. He was bom on May 3, 1779, and was educated at Eton, from whence he SHADWELL removed to St, John's College, Cambridge, where he exercised that industry, without wMch no success is to be attained, to so good an effect that ou his taking his degree of B.A, in 1800 he was honourably placed as seventh wrangler, and Mghly distin guished himself in classics by obtaining one of the chancellor's medals. With such results he was nearly sure to succeed in passing the very strict examination for a fellowship in the college, to which he was accordingly elected, and he proceeded M.A. in 1803, to which was added in 1842 the honorary degree of LL.D. Following his father's footsteps, he en tered the society of Lincoln's Inn, by which he was called to the bar in 1808, and in Uttle more than a year lost his feUowship by marrying a sister of Sir John Richard son, the judge of the Common Pleas. After a very successful practice in the Court of Chancery as a junior barrister for eighteen years, he was honoured with a silk go-wn m 1821. He then acquired a considerable lead, but submitted to a serious loss m a pecuniary sense, by honourably confining himself to the lord chanceUor's court, and not foUovring the practice, which was then too commonly adopted, of taking briefs in the other equity courts ; not being able, according to his own expression, ' to induce Mmself to think that it is consistent with justice, much less with honour, to under take to lead a cause, and either to forsake it altogether or give it an imperfect, hasty, and divided attention — consequences that mevitably result from the attempt to con duct causes before two judges sitting at the same time in different places.' In 1826 he entered parliament as mem ber for Ripon, a borough in which he had the opportunity, of which he fully availed himself, of doing much good, as the manager of the large property of Miss Lawrence, the principal owner. In the year to which his senatorial career was confined he applied himself to remedy ! some of the evils attendant upon the exist- [ ing laws of real property, by limiting the periods during which titles might be dis puted. Time was not given him to bring I his suggestions to a successful issue, but i many of them have since been adopted, j He was appointed vice-chancellor of England on November 1, 1827, and pre sided in his court for twenty-three years, during which he twice filled the office of second commissioner of the Great Seal — the first time from April 23, 1835, to January 16, 1836, in conjunction with Sir Charles Pepys (afterwards Lord Cotten ham), the master of the Rolls, and Mr. Justice Bosanquet ; and the second time from Jime 19 to July 15, 1850, his col leagues being Lord Langdale, the master of the RoUs, and Mr. Baron Rolfe (after- SHAPTESBUEY 609 wards Lord Cranworth). Whether as vice- chancellor or lord commissioner, he was a universal favourite both with the bar and the publicforthe courteousuess of his demeanour and the kindness of his nature. No one who ever advised with him as a barrister or sat under him as a j udge can remember a word of harshness coming from his lips, or can forget the patient way in which he listened to the arguments of counsel or the pleasant mode in which he delivered his judgments. Yet there was no want of decent gravity in his manner, nor of solidity in his decisions. They exhibited the legal learning he had early imbibed, and proved his eminent qualifications for the j udicial chair. His handsome person and sweet yet manly countenance impressed all in his favour, and his active habits, with the custom he had of bathing every day, what ever the weather, gave him a robust appearance that promised an extreme length of Ufe. So fond was he of the water that it was said, with what truth we wiU not decide, that he once granted an injunction during the long vacation while immersed in that element. But he was not destined for the long life that his healthy aspect promised. Soon after the termination of the duties of his la.st commission he was seized with an illness which terminated fatally at his residence at Barn Elms in Surrey ou August 10, 1850. The estima tion in which he was regarded by his brother judges may be judged from the affecting language used by Vice-Chancellor Knight-Bruce on opening his court at the beginning of the next term. Addressing the attorney-general. Sir John Romilly, he said, ' It has been impossible for me to enter the court to-day without a renewal of sorrow for the loss of one so lately taken from us, by whom for so many years this chair was filled, and from which it is almost startling to hear another voice than his. In these feelings I am sure the bar participate. We have lost at once a friend dear to us all, and a judge distinguished for his great knowledge of the law that he administered — distinguished for various acquiremente — ¦ distinguished for judicial patience — ever " swift to hear and slow to decide " — pure and blameless in Ufe — an example of courtesy, gentleness, and ame nity — who never said a word intended to give pain, nor ever harboured an unkind thought, or one acrimonious feeling — "fiere et meiiiinisse relictum est!" Sir Lancelot's first wife died after brinnry II. also mentions pleas before him under the name of Richard,. archdeacon of Poictiers (Madox, i. 4, 123, 129, 143-0), but it has reference to arrears due on pleas of former years. On' October 6, 1174, 20 Henry II,, he was consecrated Bishop of "NMuchester. Of this see, as well as that of Lincoln and also of the abbey of Glastonbury, he had been the custos while they were in the king's hands,. TOMLINS In II76 he was appointed chief justiciary of Normandy, and on the retirement of Richard de Luci in 1179, the same high office in England was entrusted to him jointly with the Bishops of Ely and Norwich, and they were respectively placed at the head of three of the four circuits into which England was then divided by the council of Windsor. (Dugdale's Orig. 20.) Ranulph de Glanville succeeded them in the foUo'wing year, in consequence, as some state, of a remonstrance from the pope disapproving of ecclesiastics being so employed. That he acted, however, after this in the judicial business of the court is evident from his name appearing as one of thejusticiers before whom flnes were levied in 28 Henry IL, 1182, (Hunter's Preface.) To his see he gave the manors of Hamm and Groel, and after presiding over it above fourteen years, he died in December 1188, and was buried in his cathedral, (Godivin, 216; Lord Lyttelton, ii, 416, 434, iu, 138.) TOMLINS, Richaed, was the son and heir of Edward Tomlins, of Todinton in the county of Gloucester, and was adniitted at the Inner Temple in May 1606, after which no more is recorded of him till he was assigned as counsel to assist Bastwick and Burton in their complaint of the cruel sentence pronounced against them in the Star Chamber, (State Trials, ni. 701, 709.) He was not long in being rewarded for his exertions. In consequence of the illness of Baron Trevor, the only judge of the Court of Exchequer who adhered to the parliament, and Cursitor Baron Leeke having joined tbe other barons at Oxford, a ditticulty arose in September 1645 as to who was to receive the customary presen tetion of the sheriffs of London, and to attend the other ceremonies usuaUy per formed on the 30th of that month. The Lords, therefore, on the day previous recommended Mr. Christopher Vernon as Leeke's successor ; but upon sending to the Conmions for their concurrence, they unani mously substituted the name of Richard Tomlins, who was thereupon sworn into the place of cursitor baron quamdiu bene gesserit. He was resworn on the death of the king, and kept his place through all the succeeding changes, his name being recorded in the Exchequer Books of Hilary Term 1653-4, on the assumption of the protectorate by Oliver CromweU, and of Michaelmas Term 1668, on tbe succession of Protector Richard, (Lords' Journals, vU, 606 ; Commons, iv. 292 ; Whiteloeke, 174, 175, 383.) He must have been a garrulous humorist, to judge from a speech printed as having been addressed by him to the sheriHs of London m 1669, on their coming to the Exchequer to be sworn. Its absurdity is TOTINGTON 667 too great to be supposed to be a faithful transcript of his words ; but it is doubtless a true representation of his style and manner, taken by some auditor who was amused with the address, and who describes him as ' Baron Tomlinson,' He was then, as he says, a very old man, and he either died or was displaced at the Restoration, when Thomas Leeke, who was cursitor baron before him, resumed his office, TOEELL, William, held some office in the court so early as 4 Henry IL, 1158. (Pipe Rolls, 144.) His name occurs in fines of 28 Henry IL, 1182, as one of the persons before whom they were acknow ledged in the Curia Regis at Westminster. {Hunter's Preface.) He is not, however, named ou any other occasion with a judicial character. It may be possible, therefore, that he was not a j usticier, as in this early period of the adoption of fines it is not- unlikely that the officer who filled up the instrument may have thought it necessary to insert the names of all who were pre sent, whether attending judicially or offi cially. His position was certainly a prominent one, since the sheriffalty ofthe two counties of Gloucester and Hereford was entrusted to him in 29 and 30 Henry II. Yeovil and Odecumb in Somersetshire belonged to him, and by the Great Roll of 1 Richard I, it appears that he died about that time, (Pipie Rolls, 147, &c.) TOENOUEA, Adam de, was one of four justices itinerant who, in 3 Richard I., 1191-2, imposed a fine of fort}' shillings on the hundred of Edelmeton (Edmonton) for a murder, and for not appearing on the first summons. (Madox, i. 544.) TOTINGTON, Samson de (Abbot of St. Edmund's BuEv), though introducedneither by Dugdale nor Madox into their lists of justices itinerant, is expressly stated to liave filled that office by .loceline de Brake londa, who was his chaplain, and may be called his biographer. 'The precise date is not mentioned, but in the arrangement of the chronicle the fact occurs between 1182 and 1 187. In the ' Monasticon ' it is asserted that he was made one of the king's justi ciaries in 6 Richard I., but no authority is cited, nor is there any other evidence of the fact, Samson de Totington was so called from a place of that name in the hundred of Weyland in Norfolk, of which he was a native. He became a monk in the abbey of St, Edmunds in 1166, and in process of time was appointed master of the novices, and afterwards sub-sacrist. At the death of Abbot Hugo the king adopted a curious mode of electing his successor, the result of which was the appointment of Samson. The wisdom of the choice was soon appa rent. By his prudence and energy the. 668 TOUTHEBY affairs of the convent were extricated in a short time from the disorder into which the weakness and indolence of his predecessor had plunged them. He repaired the dilapidated buildings, visited his manors, and cleared ott' the debt which pressed on the revenue. He repressed the irregularities of the monks, successfully resisted tbe encroachments of the knights and townspeople, stood up in every way for the rights of his house, whether against prince or peer, and yet found favour in the sight of his sovereign. In a short time after his election the pope appointed him a judge ' de causis coyno- scendis,' and not long afterwards he was constituted by the king one of the justices itinerant. Jooeline dwells with pride on the admir.ation which his judicial powers excited, and relates that one of tbe suitors cursed his court, where, he complained, neither gold nor silver would avail to con found his adversary. Osbert Fitz-Hervey (himself a judge) said, ' That abbot is a shrewd fellow ; if he go on as he begins, he will cut out every lawyer of us.' In 1 188 he was desirous of joining those who had assumed tbe cros,5, but King Henry found him so useful in the kingdom that be would not permit his departure. The fall of Jerusalem affiicted him so heavily that he put on hair garments and abstained from flesh duiing the rest of his life. In the year 1190 he procured the banishment of the Jews from St. Edmund's Bury. During King Richard's absence he sup ported the royal authority against Prince John, and when Richard was detained in Germany he oft'ered to go in search of him, and actually, when his prison was dis covered, -went to him with rich gifts. He obtained many privileges for his house from Popes Lucius IIL, Urban III., and (Uement IIL, and illustrated his rule by founding tbe hospital of Babwell, or St. Saviour's, repurchasing from the crown the manor of Mildenhall for a thousand m.irks, and building the schools of St. Ed mund's Bury. Little is mentioned of his proceedings in the reign of King John, ex cept that he received that monarch at the abbey soon after his coronation, and again in 1203. His death occurred on December 30, 1211. (Chron. JoceL de Brakelonda, [Camdpn Soc] ; Dm/dale's Monast iii, 104.) TOUTHEBY, GiLBEET de, was an advo cate of considerable eminence. His name frequently appears in the Year Books during the reign of Edward IL, and in the first two years of Edward III., often ab breviated 'Toud.' In 9 Edward II. he was employed in prosecuting and defending the king's suits, being at that time a king's serjeant-at-law. The next year he was summoned among the legal assistants to TRACY parliament ; and so continued to be during the remainder of the reign. He is first' mentioned in a judicial capacity as one of the justices appointed in Lincolnshire in March 1318, and most of his future com missions were in that county. It is evi dent that these occasional employments as a judge did not prevent his pursuing his profession as an advocate ; for we not only find him engaged in cases as a serjeant-at- law in 14 Edward IL, but on the accession of Edward III. his stipend for prosecuting and defending the king's causes was re newed to him. He certainly acted as a justice of assize under the latter king ; but there is no mention of him later than the third yeiir, (Rot ParL i. 352, 370, 438, ii. 402 ; Purl Writs, U. p. U. 1518.) TO-WNSHEND, Rogee, whose family was estabUshed at Rainham in Norfolk so early as the reign of the first Henry, was the only son of John Townshend of that place, by Joan, daughter and heir of Sir Robert Lunsfoi'd, of Rumford in Essex, and of Battle in Sussex. He studied the law at Lincoln's Inn, and was elected a governor in I Edward IV., 1461, and reader in 1468 and in 1474. His name occurs in the Year Books from Hilary 1465 ; and in 1472, tbe year after the final exclusion of Henry VI, from the throne, he represented the borough of Calne in parUament; but, notwithstanding his eminence as a lawyer, he was not called to the degree of the coif till October 1477, In the last week of the short reign of Edward \., June 1483, he was appointed one of the king's Serjeants. (Rymer, xii. 186.) His patent was of course renewed in the foUo-wing week by Richard IIL, by whom he was made a judge of the Common Pleas about January 1484. Although he was thus evidently patronised by the usurper, it was the policy of Henry VIL, on his accession, to make no changes in tbe administr.ation of justice, so that he was not only retained on the bench, but received the order of knighthood pre vious to the coronation.- According to Dugdale (Orig. 47), the last fine acknowledged before him is dated at Midsummer 1493, and the genealogists have generally placed his death in that year (probably on that account); butthe Year Books contain ample eridence that he continued to sit in the court for every sub sequent year till Michaelmas 1500, after which his name disappears. He married Anne, daughter aud coheir of Sir Williain de Brewse, of Wenliam Hall in Suftblk ; nnd their lineal descendants are now represented in the House of Lords by the Marquis Townshend and Viscount Sydney. TEACY, Henet de, possessed the barony of Barnstaple in Devonshire, including Tavistock and various other manors, suc^- TEACY ceeding to it on the death of his father, Oliver de Tracy, in 12 John, In 17 Henry III,, 1232, he was placed at the head of the justices itinerant into Comwall, no doubt as a resident nobleman only, as no other instance occurs of his ap pointment to that office. An assize of novel disseisin, &c., was, however, directed to be taken before him in Devonshire in 41 Henry III. (Excei-pt e Rot. Fin. ii. 253) ; and in 45 Hemy III. his name appears among the barons of the Exchequer. (Madox, ii. 819.) In the former year he ¦ was made governor of the castle of Exeter, He died at a ffood old age, about 2 Edward I., 1273. (Baronage, i. 622; Rot Pat John, 101 ; Rot Claus. i. 137, 283, 405.) TEACY, Robeet, was the eldest son of Robert, second Viscount Tracy in Ireland (descended from the above Henry de Tracy), by his second wife, Dorothy, daugbter of Thomas Cocks, Esq., of Castle- ditch in Herefordshire, He was born in ,1665, and was called to the bar by the Middle Temple in 1680, In July 1699 Khig William made him a judge of the King's Bench in Ireland, but soon translated him, on November 14, 1700, from that country to be a baron of the Ex chequer iu England, In less thau two years he had a second removal to the Common Pleas, in Triuity Term 1702, soon after the accession of Queen Anne, Here he re mained for four-and-twenty years, during which period he was selected both by that queen and by George I. to be one of the commissioners ofthe Great Seal on vacancies in the office of lord chancellor — viz., from September 14 to October 19, 1710 ; and the second from AprU 16 to May 12^ 1718. He resigned his place on the bench on October 26, 1726, on the plea of ill health, but he lived nine years afterwards in the enjoyment of a pension of 1600/. a year. He died on September 11, 1735, aged eighty, at his seat at Coscomb in the parish of Didbrooke, Gloucestershire. He is described as ' a complete gentleman and a good lawyer, of a clear head and honest heart, and as delivering his opinion with that genteel affability and integrity that even those who lost a cause were charmed with his behaviour.' This character, as it was written at the time of his death, may be re garded, with some allowance for its affected phraseology, as substantially true, especially when the Duke of Wharton in one of his satires declares that he will be constant to his mistress until the time When Tracy's generous soul shall swell •with pride, (Smyth's Law Off. Ireland, 100 ; Lord Ray mond, 605, 769, 1420 ; Luttrell, iv, 707, v, 184, vi. 638.) He married Anne, daughter of William TREBY 669 Dowdeswell, of Pool Court in Worcester shire, and had, besides two daughters, three sons— Robert, Richard, and WiUiam. An alleged descendant of the latter claimed the title of Viscount Tracy in 1843 ; but the House of Lords, aftervarious hearings, which extended to 1849, were not satisfied with the evidence in support of his claim. TEAVEES, John, was of a Lancashire family, and member for that county in 83 Edward I. Under Edward II, he was fre quently employed in it as commissioner of array, assessor of the aids, and custos of the lands forfeited by Thomas E.arl^of Lan caster, In 2 Edward III, he was eno-ao-ed with the seneschal of Gascony and the con stable of Bordeaux in treating with certain German princes; and on March 2, 1829, he was a judge of the Common Pleas, He is mentioned in the Year Book of the reign as late as Michaelmas 1333, About that time he was appointed constable of Bordeaux, and died within four years after, (ParL Writs, i. 868, ii, p. ii. 1520, Ccd. Rot Pat 103, 105, 118; Dugdale's Orig. 46, 143, 271,) ;i 1 , TEEBY, Geoege, was the son of Peter Treby, a respect.-ible gentleman of Plympton in Devonshire, by his ¦wife Joan, daughter of John SnelUngs, of Chaddlewood, Esq, He was born in 1644, was placed at Exeter College, Oxford, in 1661, and was entered of the Middle Temple. Having been called to the bar in 1671, he was soon regarded as a rising man, and was chosen as representa tive for Ms native town in both the parlia ments of 1679, in the latter of which he acted as chairman of the committee of se crecy relative to the Popish Plot, and was selected as oue of the managers to conduct the impeachment of Lord Stafford as a piirticipator in it. In December 1680 he was elected recorder of London, and was knighted, and was also made a bencher of his inn. When the city charters were at tacked by the quo warranto two years after wards, he stood up boldly and ably in their defence, and of course was removed from his place when judgment was given against them, to make way for the court favourite, Sir Thomas Jenner. (State Trials, vii. 1308, viii. 1099.) He sat in the last pariiament of Charles II., which, meeting at Oxford, was allowed to continue its deliberations for no more than a week in March 1081 ; and from the single pariiament called by James IL he was excluded. Refusing to give countenance to that kmg s claim to dispense with the penal laws he declined to plead for the plaintiff in the sham action brought by Sir Edward Hale's coachman against his master, and was natu rally, bothforhis legal abiUtyand his known liberality, selected as one of tbe counsel to defend the seven bishops. When the king alarmed by the threatened approach of the 670 TEEBY Prince of Orange, deemed it prudent to re store the city's charters, Sir George was requested to resume his office of recorder, -butfor two months declined to do so, until on the prince's arrival he was induced to consent. He took his seat on December 10, 1688, and four days after delivered an ad dress of congratulation to the prince, which was the subject of general admiration. (Luttrell, i. 380, 446.) To the Convention Parliament in the following month he was returned by his old constituency of Plympton. In the early discussions of that parlia ment he took a leading part iu proposing, and in the conference with the Peers in sup porting, the resolution declaring the abdi cation of the king. On some symptoms of mutiny in the army, he advised the house not to waste their time in discussions, but at once to oppose force with force. When Sir Henry PoUexfen was appointed attor ney-general in February 1689, Treby was made solicitor, but succeeded to the former post in May. The town of Plympton re turned him again to William's second par liament of March 1690 ; and he was still a member of it when he was constituted on May 3, 1692, lord chief justice of the Com mon Pleas. At this time he resigned the recordership of London, which he had, con trary to the usual practice, continued to hold notwithstanding his official position ; and he was complimented by the common council with a present of one hundred guineas, (Ibid.. 606, 522 ; Pari. Hist. iv. 40, &c.) In 1700 he held the Great Seal with his two brother chiefs from May 5 to 21, and seven months afterwards his career was terminated by his death on December 13, at his house in Kensington Gravel Pits. He was burled in the Temple Church, (Luttrell, iv. 446 ; Lord Raymond, 666, 627.) His excellence as a lawyer is universally admitted ; and his various arguments on the question of monopolies, in defence of the city charters, and in the bankers' case (in which he differed from his colleagues), suf ficiently attest the extent of his learning. His high character as a judge, besides being lauded by Evelyn (iii. 386), receives the best confirmation from the following Unes in an ode on his death (State Poems, iv. 365) :— Great -without pride, and ¦witliout -wrinkles wise, Obliging -without art, and just without disguise, "Wise in his counsels, humble in discourse, Good without noise, and pleasant without force. Easy of acoess, willin.cc to bestow, Regarded virtue, and forgot his foe. He wrote tbe annotations in the margin of Dyer's Reports, .and was the author of seve ral occasional pamphlets. His first wife was Dorothy Westcott ; his second, Dorothy, daughter of Ralph Gr.inge, E.sq., of the Temple; and his third, Mrs. Brindley, who brought him a fortune of TEESILIAN 10,000/, His eldest son by his first wife became secretary at war, and his grandson master of the household to George IL and a lord of the Treasury, The family still survives, and resides at Plympton House, built by the chief justice's son. (Athen. Oxon. iv. 499 ; Ncible's Granger, ii. 166; Luttrell, iii. II.) TEEMAYLE, Thomas, was descended from a family seated at Sand, in Sidbury in Devonshire. He was a member of the Middle Temple, and the Year Book dates his appearance in court from Easter, 12 Edward IV., 1472 ; he took the degree of the coif in Trinity Term 1478, and was made king's serjeant in November 1481. During the short reign of Edward V. he was united -with .Judge William Jenney in the commission of assize on the Oxford Cir cuit. His promotion as a justice of the King's Bench took place on July 16, 1488, 3 Henry VII. ; and there is evidence, in Keilwey's Reports, of his acting as late as Hilary Term 1507. (Risdon's Devon, 34; 9 Report Pub. Rec, App. U. 2.) TEESILIAN, Robeet, was in all proba bility a Cornishman, He possessed several manors and extensive lands there (Cal Inq. p, m. iii, 106), and was an advocate at the assizes of the county in 43 Edward HI,, 1369, (Liber Assisarum, 278, 279.) Be was educated at Oxford, and was elected fellow of Exeter College about the year 1354, He appears to have been a king's serjeant in the first year of Richard IL, at the end of which, May 6, 1878, he was constituted a justice of the Court of King's Bench, where he sat as the only puisne judge for four years. He was promoted to the office of chief justice on June 22, 1381, a week after the murder of John de Cavendish, and the first duty to which he was called was the punishment of the insurgents. Some of the worst were those who had risen in Hertfordshire, and forcibly compeUed the abbot of St, Alban's to grant them various immunities. To that town he accompanied the king, and the mode of trial he adopted was somewhat novel. He forced one jury of twelve to present the ringleaders, accord ing to a list previously prepared ; a second jury was next empanelled, who confirmed the finding of the first ; and then the same course was adopted with a third jury. No witnesses appear to have been examined, but every party chai-ged was condemned on the personal knowledge of these thirty- six men. (Newcome's St. Albans, 263.) The executions here and in other counties are described as being most numerous, andTre- silian's cruelty as having had no parallel till the campaign of Judge Jeffreys three centuries afterwards, Knighton, a contem porary chronicler, states that whoever was accused before him, whether guilty or TRBSILIAN . innocent, was sure to be condemned ; and •other writers have extended the number of the sufferers to fifteen hundred. (Lingard, iv. 182 ; Rapin, iv, 26.) The excited state of the country might perhaps justify some stringent proceedings ; "but both he and others, engaged in putting down the rebellion, seem to have been con scious that they had greatly exceeded any warrantable licence ; inasmuch as, in the parliament of the following November, au act of pardon and indemnity was deemed expedient for those who had acted ' -with out due process of the law.' No complaint appears to have been made againsthis judicial conduct in civil matters, but in his political career he was not so fortunate. Instead of using the influence of his position to check the royal extravagance and folly, he became, by countenancing whatever was agreeable to the king, a fa vourite at court, and a partisan of Robert de Vere, Duke of Ireland. The effect of this misplaced confldence was soon visible in the disordered state of the revenue, and the adoption of unpopular taxes to supply its deflciencies. Not only did the people murmur, but the houses of parliament found it necessary to put a stop to the maladmi nistration of de Vere and his associates. One of these, the Chancellor de la Pole, was impeached in the first instance, and his conviction was followed by a statute placing the management of the state and the control of the revenue in the hands of eleven permanent commissioners, at the head of whom were the king's uncles, the Dukes of York and Gloucester. Although this com mission was solemnly confirmed by the king's letters patent, dated November 19, 1386, the parliament was no sooner dis solved than de Vere and the rest of the king's friends, representing to him his de pendent state, urged him to take active measures to release himself from the thral dom m which the obnoxious ordinance had placed him. The king's chief advisers, besides de Vere and TresiUan, were Alex ander Neville, Archbishop of York; Michael de la Pole, the late chancellor; and Sir Nicholas Brambre, au alderman of London. After endeavouring in vain to tamper with the sherifts of the several counties to insure the election of subservient members for the next parliament, they summoned all the judges to a council at Nottingham on Au gust 26, 1387, and by violent threats com pelled them to attach their signatures to a series of questions and answers, which had been already prepared by Chief Justice TresiUan, the purport of which was to de clare the 'new statute, ordinance, and com mission to be derogatory to the royalty and prerogative of the king ; ' that all the persons concerned in procuring and making it were tiaitors, and ought to be punished TEESILIAN 671 with death ; and that the judgment against Michael de la Pole was erroneous and revocable. So awkwardly, however, had they con certed their plans that the whole plot came speedily to the knowledge of the lords commissioners, who forthwith appealed the archbishop, de Vere, de la Pole, TresiUan, and Brambre of high treason. This occurred on November 17, 1387, when the king pro mised to summon a parliament in the fol lowing Februiiry, that justice might be done. During the interval the archbishop, de Vere, and de la Pole found safety m flight ; not, however, without some futile attempts on the part of de Vere to resist the commissioners by force of arms. Tre siUan also in the flrst instance fled, and might have escaped but for his own infatu ation. His place as chief justice was filled up on January 31, 1388, by the appoint ment of Walter de Clopton; and on Fe bruary 3, the parliament having met, the five lords who acted as appellants — viz., the Duke of Gloucester, and the Earls of Arun del, Nottingham, Derby, and Warwick — de livered in no less than thirty-nine articles of impeachment, charging the accused with encroaching to themselves ro3'al power by enslaving the king and blemishing his pre rogative, and detailing various acts in proof of their guilt. Not the least prominent among these was the constraint they had put upon the justices to set their hands to the answers to the unconstitutional ques tions which had been propounded to them, and their endeavours by virtue thereof to get the lords and others, who had agreed to make the ordinance in the last parlia ment, attainted as traitors. All of tbe appel lees, except Brambre, who was in custody, were pronounced guilty for default of ap pearance ; and the duke, the earl, and TresiUan were sentenced to tbe death of traitors, and to forfeit their property to the king, the archbishop's temporalities being also taken into the king's hands. (Rot, Pari iU. 229-237 ) Nicholas Brambre was next brought for ward to undergo his trial, aud while it was proceeding TresiUan was taken and brought before the parliament. The circumstances of his capture are related with some slight variations. The king had joined the Duke of Ireland at Bristol, and being desirous of knowing, what proceedings were contem plated by his uncles at "Westminster, Tre siUan had volunteered to undertake the perilous journey. He reached London with out discovery, and taking up his lodginir in an alehouse, or, according to another account, at au apothecary's, opposite the palace gate, he had ensconced himself in a window so that he could observe every one who passed. His disguise, however, though sufficient to mislead ordinary observers. 672 TEEVAIGNON could not deceive a squire of the Duke of Gloucester's who had been often in his com pany. Thinking that he recognised the chief justice, he went in and had an inter view which satisfied him that he was not mistaken, although TresiUan represented himself as a farmer on Sir John Holland's estate in Kent, come up to town in order to obtain redress for some wrongs done to him by the men of the Archbishop of Can terbury, The squire, pretending to beUeve him, went directly to the duke, his master, by whose orders he returned with a suffi cient guard, and brought the unfortunate judge before the council. His fate was not long delayed, for, after a short colloquy -with the duke, he was a.sked what he had to say why execution should not be done according to the judgment pronounced ; and becoming as one struck dumb, so that he could not answer, he was led away to undergo his sentence. Froissart (ii. 285) says he was beheaded, and after hanged upon a gibbet; but the Parliament Roll states that he was taken to the Tower, and thence drawn through the city, and hanged at Tyburn. (Holinshed, ii. 794.) His body was buried in the church of the Grey Friars. These events, it is agreed by all, occurred on February 19, 1388 ; and the attainder against him and the others was confirmed iu the same parliament. Although all these proceedings were reversed by the parliament of 21 Richard IL, when the king regained his power in the state, they were again revived and confirmed on the accession of Henry IV, The confiscation of Tresilian's property was not delayed for an instant. No less than eleven manors in Cornwall are men tioned as belonging to him, besides other extensive posses.rions in that county and in Oxfordshire. (Cal Inq. p. m. Ui. 106, 120.) By his wife, Emeline, the daughter of WiUiam Hiwishe, of Stowford iu Devon shire, he left one son, named John ; and a daughter, who married John Hauley, of Dartmouth. TEEVAIGNON, John db, was of a Cornish family, the descendants of which still flourish in that county. His name appears in the reign of Edward II. as an advocate ; and in 4 Edward III. he had the degree of tbe coif, and was afterwards one of the king's Serjeants, On September 24, 1.334, 8 Edward IIL, he was constituted a judge of the Common Pleas, and probably died within the next year, as no flnes were acknowledged before him subsequent to Michaelmas Terra, 9 Edward III. TEEVETT, Thomas, was the father of Nicholas Trevet, the author of numerous works, one of which, entitied ' Annales sex Regum Anglia?, qui a cnmitibus Ande- gavensibus originem traxerunt,' has been pubUshed (1845) by the English Historical TREVOR Society. The editor, in his preface (p. v.), says that ' the judge, according to Leland, was descended from a family of some note in Norfolk ; a statement which is confirmed by a descent preserved in Sir Richard St, George's Heraldic Collections ; though the documents from which this has been com piled refer exclusively to certain lands in tbe county of Somerset,' Thomas Trevet was appointed, in 49 Edward IIL, to assess the taUage on the 'Villam de Shaftonia,' in Dorsetshire. (Madox, i. 742.) He acted as a justice itinerant for that and the neighbourmg counties from 62 to 65 Henry III. In August 1272, 56 Henry IIL, the priory and cathedral of Norwich having 'been maliciously burnt by the citizens, he was sent there, according to the statement of his son in the 'Annales ' (279), to try the malefactors. He calls his father 'justiciarium militem quendam, Thomam Treveth dictum, qui et justiciarius itineris fuerat de corona.' The first clause of the description seems to warrant the idea that he was something more than a justice itinerant. He died in II Edward I. (Abb, Rot. Orig. i. 36, 37.) His son became a Dominican friar, and is stated to have been prior of their monastery in London, and to have died in 1328. (Preface, vii.; Hvtchin£s Dorsetsh. ii. 441.) TEE-VOE, Thomas, was the youngest of five sons of John Trevor, Esq., of Trevallyn in Denbighshire, of an ancient and noble Welsh family, by Mary, daughter of Sir George Bruges of London, and was born July 6, 1586. He was admitted a member of the Inner Temple, and became reader there in autumn 1620. He was soon after knighted, and made soUcitor to Prince Charles, who, when he ascended the throne, called him to the degree of the coif, and nominated him one of his Serjeants on April 8, 1 625. On the I2th of the foHow ing month he was advanced to a .seat of the Exchequer. (Rymer, xviii. 637.) Nothing is told of him for the first ten years of his j udicial life, except that at the Bury assizes, trying a cause about winter ing of cattle, and thinking the charge im moderate, he said, ' Why, friend, this is most unreasonable ; I wonder thou art not ashamed, for I myself have known a beast wintered one whole summer for a noble.' ' That ¦n'as a buU, my lord, I believe,' re torted the man, to the infinite amusement of the auditory. (Anecdotes and Traditions [Camden Soc.'], 79.) But more serious matters soon occupied him. The impofsition of ship-money was attempted, and Baroii Trevor united -with tb^ rest of the judges in 1686 in subscrib ing a joint opinion in favour of its legality, which he afterwards supported in a most foolish inconclusive speech in the case of TREVOR Hampden, (State Trials, iii. II52.) On the meeting of the Long Parliament in 1640 proceedings were commenced against him and five of the other judges, who were eventually impeached for the judgment they had delivered. Trevor was sentenced to imprisonment and a fine of 6000/,, but upon payment he was discharged and per mitted to resume his duties. In 1643 the kinghadissued proclamations to adjoum tlie term from Westminster to Oxford ; but, as these had been hitherto fruitless, ' for want of the necessary legal form of having the writs read in court,' the judges at Oxford could not proceed to business there till that formality had beeu observed. The parliament, having then assumed the sovereign power, had published orders to the contrary; yet the Mng, thinking that the judges remaining in London would obey him rather than the parUament, sent messengers in Michaelmas Term with directions to deliver them the writs. There were only three judges then sitting in London — Justice Bacon in the Kmg's Bench, Justice Reeve in the Common Pleas, and Baron Trevor in the Exchequer. The two latter were served, but im mediately ordered the apprehension of the messengers, who, being tried by a coimcil of war, were condemned as spies, and one of them was actually executed as an ex ample. The fears that then influenced Trevor seem to have been dispersed by the tragic termination of the king's life. On February 8, 1649, he was one of the six judges who holdly refused to accept the new commission offered them by the then ruling powers, (Clarendon, iv, 287, 342 ; Wliite locke, 47, 76, 878,) He lived nearly eight years after his re tirement, and dying on December 21, 1656, was buried at Lemington-Hastang in War wickshire, the manor of which belonged to him. He was twice married — first to Pru dence, daughter of Henry Butler, Esq.; and secondly to Frances, daughter and heir of Daniel Blennerhasset, Esq., of Norfolk. An only son he had by the for mer, named Thomas, was created a baronet in 1641, but the title became extinct in 1676. (Stow's London, 876; Wotton's Baronet, iii. 148.) TEE-yOB, John, may claim a descent from an elder branch of the old Welsh family from which the above Thomas Trevor sprung, his ancestor being seated at Brynkynalt in Denbighshire at his death in 1494. He was second but eldest sur viving son of John Trevor of that place, by Mary, daughter of John Jeffreys, of Helon in the same county, the aunt of the Judge Jeffreys of infamous memory. At the time of his admission to the Inner Temple, in November 1654, his father is TREVOR 673 described of Ross-Trevor in Ireland, whither he had probably retfred in reduced circumstances, if Roger North's statement (218) be true, that the son 'was bred a sort of clerk in the chambers of old Arthur Trevor, an eminent and worthy professor of the law in the Inner Temple,' ' A gentle man,' he adds, 'that observed a strange- lookmg boy in his clerk's seat (for no per son ever had a worse sort of squint than he had), asked who that gentleman was : " A kmsman of mine," said Arthur Trevor, " that I have allowed to sit here to learn the knavish part of the law," ' That he was bettered by the instruction may be doubted ; but that he became an able pro ficient there is evidence in the reputation he gained of being the best judge m all gambling transactions, of the tricks and intricacies of which he had personal experience. He was called to the bar in May 1661, became treasurer of his inn in 1674, and reader in 1675. He was knighted in 1671, and there is no doubt that he was indebted to his cousin, George Jeffreys, for some of his future preferments. In the parUament of March 1679 he was elected for Beer alston, which retumed him again for that called in October of the same year. In the Oxford parliament of March 1681 he re presented his native county of Denbigh; and Sir John Bramston (208) records that he was the only man who spoke in favour of Jeffreys when the complaint against him as recorder of London was discussed in the house. On the accession of James II. , his cousm, who was then chief justice, had an oppor tunity of showing his gratitude. Trevor having obtained a seat in that king's only parliament for the to^wn of Denbigh, Jef freys, in opposition to Lord Keeper North, succeeded in recommending him to be the speaker. So inefficient was he in the requirements of the office that he was even obliged to read from a paper the few for mal words in which he announced to the house the king's approbation, and was guilty of some other irregularities that were inexcusable in one who had had so long a senatorial experience. He showed more boldness and self-possession on the occasion of presenting the revenue biU on May 30, when he_ assured the king that the Com mons entirely relied on his majesty's sacred word to support and defend the religion of the Church of England. Of this remmder of the royal promise the king took not the sUghtest notice, nor apparently any offence as on the 20th of the foUowing October he promoted Sir .lohn to the office of master of the Rolls, then vacant. (Bramston 197 207 ; Pari Hist. iv. 1359.) ' This _ elevation occurred at the period when his relative and patron had returned XX 674 TREVOR from his bloody campaign and been re warded with the Great Seal. The Court of Chancery was then presided over by two judges of kmdred spirit, and it might be a question which of the two exceeded the other in want of principle, or in the use of coarse vituperation. Yet they both deserve praise in the exercise of their judicial functions, and the decrees they pronounced in private causes were able and just. A sort of rivalry, however, soon rose up be tween them. Jeffreys sometimes reversed his coadjutor's decrees and adopted other irritating measures against him. Trevor, who could on occasion imitate not un successfully the objurgatory style of his patron, now feeling himself no longer a dependent, assumed a dictatorial manner, found fault with the chancellor's proceed ings, and very early after his appointment told him that if he pursued Alderman Cornish to execution, it would be no better than murder. Indeed, Roger North teUs us, ' like a true gamester, he fell to the good work of supplanting his patron and friend, aud had certainly done it if King James's affairs had stood right much longer, for he was advanced so far with him as to vilify and scold with him publicly at WhitehaU.' He was not admitted to the privy council till July 6, 1688 ; and on August 24 he was sent for in a hurry from ' the Wells ' to be present at that meeting when the king re solved to have another parliament. He was again present iu October, when proof was given of the genuineness of the birth ofthe Prince of Wales ; and after the king's first escape he was one of the faithful councillors who attended at his levee on his return from Rochester. (Bramston, 311; State Trials, xU. 128.) At the Revolution he, -with all the other judges, lost his place. But he managed by Ms open professions of adherence to the extreme doctrines of the Church of England to keep up some degree of popularity with that party which was gradually superseding the ministers, who, though they had been chiefly instrumental in effecting the great change in the government of the kingdom, soon disgusted the king by assuming too great a control over him, 'To the Conven tion Parliament he did not venture to offer Mmself; but the borough of Beeralston returned him again on a vacancy. Before the end of the year he entered into the debates as boldly as if he had never been connected -with King James's court. In the next parliament of March 1690 he was re turned for Yarmouth, and was selected by the minister Carmarthen to be the speaker of it, as the most flt instrument in the practice, too openly encouraged and too long continued, of buying off those members who opposed the goyernmei.t. (Burnet, iv. 74,) TEEVOE A very graphic description of him is given by Lord Macaulay (iii. 647), Being ' a bold and dexterous man,' Trevor soon after had a renewal of his legal honours. On January 13 he was replaced in his old position as master of the Rolls ; and on May 14 he was made one of the lords commissioners of the Great Seal, an office which he enjoyed for nearly three years, till the nomination of Somers as lord keeper on March 23, 1693. Not satisfied with aU these honours and the emoluments that fiowed from them, Trevor with unblushing rapacity participated largely in the corrup tion that then too universaUy prevailed. In the investigation instituted by the parlia ment it was found that he had, among other bribes suspected but not proved, re ceived a present from the city of London for getting the orphans' bUl passed, which had several times before been brought into the house -without success. He was condemned to sit for six hours hearing himself abused, and at last was obliged to put the question and to declare himself guilty of ' a high crime and misdemeanour,' A new speaker was immediately appointed, and he was expelled the house on March 16, 1695, having only a fortnight before attended m all state the queen's funeral in Westminster Abbey, (Pari. Hist, v, 901- 10 ; Bramston, 386,) No further punish ment being awarded, the -wits remarked 'that justice was blind, but bribery only squinted,' He never afterwards offered himself as a member ; but so little was he abashed by his expulsion that soon after, on meeting Archbishop Tillotson, he muttered loud enough to be heard, ' I hate a fanatic m la-wn sleeves.' The archbishop answered, ' And I hate a knave in any sleeves,' This disgrace did not deprive bun of the mastership of the RoUs, that office having been conferred upon him for life. Though Lord Raymond (p. 566) names him aa jomed with the three chiefs as commis sioner of the Great Seal on the dismissal of Lord Somers in 1700, the ' Crown Office Minute-book ' (p, 141) proves that the ap pointment was to the three chiefs alone, his commission being solely to hear causes till a new lord keeper was appointed. He continued master of the Rolls for twenty- two years after his expulsion, possessing so high a reputation as a lawyer that he was frequently appealed to as authority in doubtful points by Lord Chancellor Har court, but vrith the ch.aracter of being dead to every sense of shame, and of treating the counsel .who attended his court with coarse and unfeeling bnitaUty. So rough were his public reproaches to a nephew of his that it is said the sensitive youuf barrister sunk under them and never recovered. The only honour he received in the reign of Queen Anne was that of constable of FUnt TEEVOE Castle in 1705, in the place of his father- in-law. Sir Roger Mostyn, He died on May 20, I7i7, at his house in Clement's Lane, and was buried in the Rolls Chapel, (Luttrell, iv, 641, v, 640,) The avarice for which he was notorious was not redeemed, as it often is, by occa sional fits of generosity. Various stories are told of his meanness. One of them is that on a relation calUng upon him while he was drinking his wme, he exclaimed to the servant, '"You rascal, you have brought my cousin Roderick Lloyd, E.sq,, protho- notary of North Wales, marshal to Baron Price, and so forth, up my back stairs. Take him down again immediately, and bring him up my front stairs,' During the operation the bottle was removed, and Sir John saved his wine, (Yorke's Royal Tribes of Wales, 109,) He married Jane, the daughter of Sir Roger Mostyn, Bart,, and the widow of Roger Puliston, of Emeral in Flintshfre, and had by her four sons and a daughter, who by her marriage with Michael HiU, of Hillsborough in Ireland, was the mother of Arthur, first Viscount Dungannon, who, succeeding to his grandfather's estates, took the name of Trevor. Anne, the daughter of Arthur, was the mother of the great Duke of Wellington. (Townsends Hch of Commons, ii. 58 ; Woolrych's Judge Jeffreys.) TEEVOE, Thomas (Loed Teevoe), was the grandson of Sir John Trevor, of Tre vallyn in Flintshire, an elder brother of the above Sir Thomas Trevor. His father, also Sir John, became secretary of state to Charles II. and died in 1672, leaving by his wife, Ruth, a daughter of the celebrated John Hampden, four sons, of whom this Thomas was the second. Bom about 1659, he entered the Inner Temple in 1672 (just before the death of his father, who had been a bencher of the mn), and was called to the bar on November 28, 1680. So early did he dis^ tinguish himself in the courts that he was elected a bencher in 1689, and was ele vated to the post of solicitor-general on May 3, 1692, and thereupon knighted. He refused the attorney-generalship in 1693, but on June 8, 1695, accepted the office. (Luttrell, iii. 68; Lord !Raymond, 67.) During the six years that he filled that responsible place he had to conduct the trials of the persons implicated in the Assassination Plot, in all of which he acted ¦with a fairness and candour that formed a remarkable contrast to the criminal pro ceedings in the late reigns. In the progress of those trials the act of parliament (St. 7 Will. in. c. 3) for regulatmg trials for treason, which gave to the prisoners so charged the pri-rilege of having counsel, came into operation, and Sir Thomas met the multiplied objections that were conse quently urged by the defendmg advocates TREVOR 675 with temper, ability, and leammg. On the removal of Lord Somers in May 1700 he declined the offer to be made lord keeper ; but on June 28, 1701, he accepted the mor© permanent place of chief justice of the Common Pleas. He was member of one parliament only, that of 1695, in which he represented Plymptoa, and according to Speaker Onslow he divided against Sir John Fenwick's attainder, although he was an officer of the govemment. (State Trials, vols. xii. xiii, ; Luttrell, iv. 645 ; Bumet, iv, 234,) On the accession of Queen Anne he was re-appointed chief justice, and presided in the Court of Common Pleas during the whole of her reign. In the short interval between the chanceUorships of Lords Cbw- per and Harcourt, from September 26 tO' October 19, 1710, he was entrusted with the Great Seal as first commissioner; and on December 31, 1711, he was called tO' the peerage by the title of Baron Trevor of Bromham in Bedfordshire, being one of the' twelve peers whom Queen Anne by an un usual exercise of her prerogative created at once, to secure a majority for the proposed peace in the House of Lords, He was th& first chief j;ustice of the Common Pleaa who was eimobled while holding that office. Though commencing his profes sional career as a whig, and being united in office with Somers, he gradually joined the tory party,, and attached himself to it while Queen Anne reigned. He is thus described in the accounst of the judges of the different courts given by Lord Cowper to George I. on his accession : — ' The first [the chief justice] is- ani abl& man, but made one of the twelve lords- w*'' the late mmistry procur'd to be created at once (in such haste, y' few, if any, of their patents had any preamble, or reasons of their creation), only to support their peaee, v!"^ the House of Lords, they found,, would not -without that addition. From that time, at least, he went violently into all the measures of that mimstry, and was much trusted by them ; and when they divided, a Uttle before) the queen's death, he sided w'" L^ BoUngbr, ; and for so doing, 'tis credibly said, was to have been made 1" president. Many of y= lords think Ms being a peer an obj° to his being a jiidge f because, by y^ constitation, y= judges ought to be assistants to the House of Lords w"*' they can't be, if a part of that body, Ther is but one example known of the like ; w""* is that of LO Jefferys, ch, just, of the King's Bench, and after chancellor to K, Ja. y»- 2°". 'Tis natural to think, y'' other judges stomach y« distinction, while he is among them : and tis said y« y= suitors dislike y» difference they find in his behaviour to them since he had this distinction. He is grown very wealthy. If it be thought flt xx2 676 TREVOR to remove him, S' Peter King, record' of the City of London, I should humbly pro pose as flt to succeed him.' (Lord Camp bell's Chanc iv, .349.) Upon the hint thus given Lord Trevor was removed on October 14, 1714. As his appointment was ' quamdiu se bene gesse rit,' he said he would have tried the ques tion as to the king's power to eject him if Chief Justice Holt had not, by taking out a new commission when Queen Anne came to the throne, decided that in his opinion his former commission had expired on the demise of the crown. (Lord Raymond, 1818 ; Burnet, v. 12 n.) Lord Trevor lived sixteen years afterwards, and, changing his party again, became in 1726 lord privy seal, and iu the next year was one of the lords justices during the last absence of George I. He retained the privy seal under George IL, bj' whom he was raised, on May 8, 17-30, to the high office of lord president of the council, an honour which he did not enjoy for more than six weeks, as he died on the 19th of the next month at his seat at Bromham, where he was buried under a monument with an elegant Latin inscription. He was generally admitted to have been an able aud upright judge, though Chief Justice Holt is said to have disparaged his law. But the facility with which he deserted one party to side with the other, and returned again to the party he had left, could not but be detrimental to his charac ter. Yet Speaker Onslow says (Burnet, iv. 344, n.), ' He was the only man almost that I ever knew that changed his party as he had done, that preserved so general an esteem -with all parties as he did. When he came back to the whigs he was made lord privy seal aud afterwards president of the council, and had much joy in both. He liked being at court, and was much there after he had these offices, but was very awkward in it, by having been the most reserved, grave, and austere judge I ever saw in 'W'estminster Hall.' Lord Hervey (i, 114) describes him as being 'by principle (if he had any principle) a Ja cobite, However, from interest an j policy he became, Uke his brother convert and brother lawyer Lord Harcourt, as zealous a servant to the Hanover family as any of those who had never been otherwise ; for as these two men were too knowing in their trade to swerve from the established prin ciples of their profession, they acted Uke most lawyers, who generally look on princes like other clients, and without any regard to right or wrong— the equity or injustice of the cause— think themselves obliged to maintain whoever fees them last and pays them best.' This is a very prejudiced portrait and a most unfair judgment of lawyers, Trevor TEOP like most sensible men, did not approve of the extreme views of either party, and, see ing the impossibility of restoring the ex iled family, and that any attempt to do so would inevitably be accompanied by all the horrors of a civil war, wisely lent his aid in supporting the Hanoverian princes in the peaceful possession of the throne to which they had been called. He married twice. By his flrst wife, Elizabeth, daughter and coheir of John Searle, Esq., of Finchley, he had two sons and three daughters ; and by his second ¦wife, Anne, daughter of Robert Weldon, Esq., and widow of Sir Robert Bemard, Bart., he had three sons. The fourth of these flve sons became Bishop of Durham in 1762, and the three elder brothers held the title of Lord Trevor successively. The last of them, Robert, fourth Lord Trevor, adopted the n,ame of Hampden in 1764, in compliance -with the will of his relative John Hampden, and in 1776 was advanced to the dignity of Viscount Hampden, both titles becoming extinct m 1824, (CoUins's Peerage, vi. 302 ; Nicolas's Synopsis ; Lut trell, v. 421,468.) TEIEINOHAU, Lambeet de, whose legal and judicial Ufe extended from the reign of Edward I. to that of Edward IIL, belonged to a family so called from a place of that name in Lmcolnshire; and Alexander de TriMngham, who acted in the assessments of that county in the early part of the reign of Edward L, was probably the judge's father, (Pari Writs, i, 871, ii. 1824.) The first mention of Lambert occurs in 27 Edward I., 1299, as a justice itinerant into Kent, In the next year he was raised to the bench at Westminster as a justice of the Common Pleas, and the fines leried before Mm continued tiU Midsummer 1316, 9 Edward II, On August 6 in the latter year he was removed to the King's Bench, where he remained exactly four years, re tiring from that court on August 6, 1320, and being immediately made a baron of the Exchequer, We do not find him acting as a baron, nor summoned to parliament among the judges, later than the seven teenth year of that reign, and it is most probable that he left the bench about that time, as a new baron was named at the close of the year, apparently in his place. He still, however, was employed as a justice itinerant, and he is placed next to the chief justice in the commission into Northamptonshire as late as 1329, 3 Ed ward HI, (Dugdale's Orig. 44 ; Rot, Pari 161-380,) ^ ' In 1817 he received the mastership of Sherbourn Hospital in Durham. (Surtees' Durham, i, 188,) TEOP, or THOEPE, Simon de, took his name from the place in Northamptonshire, TRUMPINGTON which was in those times as often spelled Thorpe as Trop. His father, Ralph, met with a violent death in 6 Henry III,, and three persons were charged with being concemed m it. One of them, being a clergyman, was delivered over to ecclesias tical jurisdiction, where he purged himself of the accusation. (Rot, Claus. i, 454, 464, 486, 611,) Simon, there can be very little doubt, was brought up to the law, for he was appointed no less than four times, from 1262 to 1256, to act as a justice itinerant, not in his own county alone, but in several others. He died in January 1259, 48 Henry HI., leaving, by his wife, Maria, sister and co heir of Robert de Salceto, a son named Ralph, who did homage for his lands in Northamptonshire, (Exeerpt e Rot. Fin. i. 296, ii. 293.) TETJMPINGTON, William db, so called from a place of that name in Cambridge shire, forfeited his lands by joining the barons against King John. On his sub mission at the beginning of the next reign they were restored to him, after which he made his loyalty sufficiently apparent to be appointed in 3 Henry IH. one of the justices itinerant into his own county and the neighbouring shires. (Rot. Pat. 176 ; Rot Claus. i. 272, 273, 326.) TEUEO, Loed. See T, Wilde, TETJSSEL, William, seems to have belonged to a Warwickshire family, as there was a suit relative to property in that county in which he was concerned in 26 Henry III, He was constituted a justicier, Dugdale says of the Common Pleas, on September 3, 1252, and fines were acknow ledged before him till November 1254 (Dugdale's Orig. 43), in which year he went as one of the justices itinerant into the counties of Gloucester and Stafford. That he continued to act as a judge till September 1267 is evidenced by the pay ments made for assizes before him recorded in the Rot, de Finibus (ii, 162-262), He and his wife claimed the advowson of the church of Sharneford in Stafibrdshire against the prior of Kirkeby, who in 63 Henry III, substantiated his right of possession. (Abb. Plarit 178.) TEUSSEL, William, is usually described by historians as a justiciary, but he cer tainly was not a judge of either of the courts of Westminster, nor a regular justice of assize. His judicial functions seem to have been confined to the special trials with which his name is connected. He was apparently descended from the above William Trussel, and was second son of WUUam Trussel, of Cublesdone (Kibbles- done) in Staffordshire, and of other manors in Northamptonshire, by Maud, daughter and heir of Warm de Manwarin, After his father's death he was retumed TRUSSEL 677 member for the county of Northampton in 12 Edward IL, and is named among the knights of that county and the county of Stafford in the seventeenth year, 1324, In the interim he had been in arms against the government, and was with the Earl of Lancaster in the defeat at Boroughbridge, He was there taken prisoner, and appears to have been in custody on July 20, 1322, but a writ for his pursuit and capture on August 2 proves that he had made his escape. In the next year he was at the head of those who ravaged the estates of the Despencers, (Pari Writs, ii, p, ii. 1-528.) Joining the queen in Frsmce, he accompanied her on her landing in England in September 1.326, and was present at the fall of Bristol and the seizure of the elder Despencer. Some writers say that the aged earl was executed without hearing or trial, while others state that he was accused before Sir William de Trussel, but there are no remams of any regular proceedings against him. The younger Despencer, on his capture, was arraigned before Trussel in an equally informal manner, his speech, in pronouncing the horrible sentence, seem ing to have been the only indictment. That speech recapitulated all the popular charges against the prisoner and his father, and, after minutely particularising the punishment awarded, concluded by dis missing the fallen favourite with coarse vituperation, Trussel is neither before nor after described as ajudge, and the actor in so summary a process, which has the appearance of martial law, is scarcely entitled to be so designated. Although there is no record that Trussel was retumed as a knight or burgess to the parliament that assembled at Westminster on January 7, 1327, there is no doubt that he was present in some character, as he was appointed procurator for the whole parliament, and deputed to proceed, with certain prelates and peers, to Kenilworth Castle, where the king was confined, and to pronounce the renunciation of their homage and fealty to him. This formality completed, Edward III, was proclaimed, and Trussel received the reward of his devotion by being immedi ately constituted the king's escheator south of Trent, He was, however, removed from this office in the following year, having made himself an enemy in Roger de Mor timer, the queen's favourite, on whose death he was reinstated in the fourth year. In 7 Edward III, some change took place in the office, and he had a grant of certain lands in the Isle of Anglesey, of which he was soon after made sheriff, and constable of the castle of Beaumaris, From the ninth to the fourteenth year we find him again king's escheator, sometimes on one and sometimes on the other side of the 678 TUNSTALL Trent. (Ahh. Rot Orig. ii, 4^14, 42-71, 78, 82, 103-136.) After this time it is difficult to trace distinctly whether the entries apply to his son WilUam or to him ; but it seems most probable that it was the son who was the admiral of the fieet in 18 and 16 Edward IIL, and who is stated by Dugdale (Ba- ronage, U, 143) to have been summoned as a baron to parliament in the latter year. If so, however, it is difficult to understand how ' Monsr. William Trussel ' answers as the representative of the Commons — that is to say, their speaker — in the parliament held at Westminster in May, 17 Edward III. (Rot. Pari ii 136) ; but the question is of little importance, because it is allowed that neither he nor any one of his posterity was ever afterwards summoned as a baron. TUNSTALL, Cuihbeet (Bishob op Dpe- HAm), was grandson of Sir Thomas Tun staU of Thurland Castle in Lancashire, whose two sons, Richard and Thomas, have each at different times been described as the father of Cuthbert ; but the evidence adduced by Surtees (Durham, i. Ixvi.) tends strongly to flx the parentage on Thomas, His birth is said to have been illegitimate ; and a curious story told by George Holland in the genealogical table of his fanuly, com piled in 1563, may be supposed to give some grounds not only for tbis belief, but also for the report that Richard, and not Thomas, was his father. He says, ' Cuth bert TunstaU, late Bishop of Durham, in bis youth near two years was brought up in my great-grandfather Sir Thomas Hol land's kitchen unknown, 'till being known, he was sent home to Sir Richard TunstaU his father, and so kept at school, as he him self declared in manner the same to me! (Blomefields Norfolk, i. 232,) He was born in 1474 or 1475, at Hatch- ford in Richmondshire, and was entered at BaUiol College in Oxford in 14S1, but, on account of the plague then racing there, was removed to the sister university as a member of King's Hall, now part of Trinity College. He then completed Ms studies at the university of Padua, where he took the degree of Doctor of Laws, and on his return to England entered into holy orders, being only sub-deacon m 1508, At this date he received the rectory of ytauhope in Durham, which was followed by that of Harrow-on-the-IIill in Middle sex, by prebends in the churches of Lincoln and York, and by the appointment of vicar- general from Archbishop Warham. Intro duced by that prelate to King Henry, the talents and learning for which he had" been recommended were soon employed in diplo matic services. In October 1515 he was sent as ambassador to negotiate a treaty of peace with the Archduke Charles (Rymei-, xUi. 587), his success in which no doubt led TUNSTALL to his nomination on May 12 in the foUow ing year to the office of master of the RoUs, In 1519 he was made archdeacon of Chester, and soon afterwards was engaged with Sir Thomas More in settling the provisions under the commercial treaty with Charles, now emperor. While at Brussels on this embassy his friendship commenced -with Erasmus, in whose house he lodged. In May 1521 he became .dean of Salisbury, and was elected Bishop of London in Ja nuary 1522, soon after which he resigned the mastersMp of the RoUs. Surtees says that just previous to this he was made keeper of the Great Seal; and Parry in his 'Parliaments aud Councils' mentions Mm as chancellor at the parUament of April 1623. But both authors are mani festly mistaken, for Cardmal Wolsey was then in tbe plenitude of his power. Tun staU was, however, appointed keeper of the privy seal on July 12, 1528 ; and in No vember he had the grant of a pardon for the escape from his custody as bishop of John Tompssn, an attamted clergyman, (Ihid. xiv. 1, 10.) Before his next advance in the Church he rendered further service m various em bassies — solicitmg the release of Francis I, when a prisoner after the battle of Pavia, accompanying Cardinal Wolsey m his osten tatious visit to that monarch m 1527, and concluding, with Sir Thomas More in 1529, the treaty of Cambray, Cn March 25, 1530, he received restitution of the temporaUties of Durham, to which see he had been trans lated on the resignation of Cardmal Wolsey, (Le Neve.) ^^ Ll the changes which Henry "VIII. sub sequently introduced. Bishop TunstaU dis played some weakness and frresolution ; and on the king's assumption of the title of supreme head of the English Church, he 'hesitated, argued, and submitted,' By thus temporising he preserved the personal fav^our ofthe kmg, who made him president (»f the North, and appointed him one of the executors of his will, with a legacy of 300/, (Testam. Vetust. 41.) Under the reign of Edward \1., when Protestantism was more strictly enforced, though in parliament he protested against , the changes in religion, yet when they were adopted he obeyed the law. He would have continued safe in his quiet retirement, but that Dudley the new Duke of Northumberland had a craving for his episcopal possessions. A false charge was accordingly concocted against him, on which a bill for his attainder was introduced into parUament ; but, though it passed the House of Lords, the Commons were not satisfied, and would not sanction it. The persecuted bishop was not allowed thus to escape, A commission was issued to the duke's own creatures, who deprived him of his bishop- TURNER ric, and sent him to the Tower on August 14, 1562, Mary, immediately on her accession, re leased him from prison, and restored him to his see. He assisted at her coronation and at her marriage (Q. Jane and Q. Mary [Camden Soc], 31, 142), but kept aloof from the cruel persecutions that disgraced her reign. Though named in several commis sions, he devoted himself to his pastoral duties ; and by his lenity and toleration Ms diocese enjoyed an uninterrupted peace, in happy contrast with the rest ot the kingdom. He discouraged too severe an investigation mto men's opinions, saymg to his chancellor, when desirous of examining a preacher supposed to entertain heretical opimons, ' Hitherto we have had a good report among our neighbours : I pray you brmg not this man's blood upon my head,' When EUzabeth, whose godfather he had been, ascended the throne, he was near eighty-four years old — an age not Ukely to give up preconceived opinions, nor to be swayed by worldly considerations. The queen, influenced by the moderation he had exhibited, regarded him at flrst with favour, and employed him in the consecration of several bishops ; but at length, on his per sisting m his refusal to take the oath of supremacy, she was compelled after a year's trial to deprive him. Instead, however, of sending the aged man to prison, she com mitted him in July 1669 to the custody of Archbishop Parker, in whom he found a kind and considerate host for the few re maining months of his life. He survived till November 18, and was buried in the chancel of Lambeth Church, at the expense of the archbishop. In addition to his professional works, he published a treatise on arithmetic, ' De Arte Supputandi,' in 1522, the year of his eleva tion to the episcopal bench, (Godmn; Sur tees; Brit. Biog.) TUENEE, Geoege James, was one of those modest and retiring persons who owe their prosperity to no extraordinary incident in their lives, nor to any political or extraneous interest, but simply to their honest efforts to do their duty in that state of life to which it has pleased God to call them. Little therefore can be recorded to render his biography interest ing, beyond the important lesson that a steady reliance on Providence will bless all human exertions, when accompanied by integrity of purpose and persistent and intellectual industry. He was one of a large family, and was born in 1798 at Great Yarmouth, where his father, the Rev, Richard Turner, B.D,, was for thirty years the minister. His education was commenced at the Chai'terhouse (where he became a go vemor), and flnished at Pembroke CoUege, TURNHAM 679 Cambridge, of which his uncle. Dr. Joseph Turner, dean of Norwich, was then master,- by obtaining the distinction of a wrangler's place in 1819, and soon after being elected to a fellowship there. He had previously entered the society of Lincoln's Inn, and was caUed to the bar in July I82I, flrst preparing himself by becoming a pupil to Mr. Pepys (afterwards Lord Cottenham). Attaching himself to the Court of Chancery, he worked dUigently and successfully for nineteen years as a junior, when in 1840 he was honoured with a silk gown. During the next eleven years his energies were brought more into play as well in his legi timate court of the Rolls, and in cases of appeal, as in the House of Lords and in the judicial committee ofthe privy council. In the latter he had particularly distin guished himself by his elaborate and tri umphant argument for the Rev. Mr. Gorham, the appellant against a decision of the Bishop of Exeter. From 1847 to 1861 he sat in the House of Commons as member for the city of Coventry. So conspicuous were his legal attainments, and so peculiarly quaUfied was he allowed to be for a judicial position, that on April 2, 1851, he was selected as one of the vice-chancellors, and was then knighted, and placed on the privy council. Two years afterwards, when Lord Cranworth became lord chancellor. Sir George was promoted to his place of lord justice of the Court of Appeal in Chancery, on January 10, 1853, as the colleague of Sir James Lewis Knight-Bruce. By their united administration of justice, in the necessarily difficult cases they had to decide, so much satisfaction was given, both to the suitors and to the bar, that when a change took place by the removal of one of them the deepest regret was felt by all. This regret was doubled by the death of both within eight months of each other, his col league dying in November 1866, and he following on July 9, 1867. By his marriage with Louisa, one of the daughters of Edward Jones, Esq., of Brack- ley in Northamptonshire, Sir George had a family of six sons and three daughters. One of his sons was made Bishop of Grafton and Armidale, in AustraUa, in February 1869. TUENHAM, Stephen de, who is called by different writers Stephen of Tours, or de Turonis, de Turnham, or de Mazzai, was the younger son of Robert de Tumhani, who founded the priory of Cumbwell in Kent. He was senesch.il of Anjou in the latter part of the reign of Henry IL, with whom he was a great favourite, and over whom he exercised considerable influence. He assistedthatking in his last fatal wars, and was with him at Mans when it was besieged by PhiUp of .France ; and intending 680 TUENHAM to destroy the suburbs by fire, the flames unfortunately extended to the city itself, and obliged Henry to fly. On Henry's death, he was taken by King Richard, and loaded with chains ; nor was he released until he had delivered up all the castles and treasures which the late king had entrusted to him, nor, as Richard of Devizes asserts, without the payment of an enormous fine. He was, however, soon restored to favour, and, accompanying Richard on his expedition to Jerusalem, was, with Richard de Camville, entrusted with the government of Cyprus, and after wards is enumerated among those noted ' for their high valiance ' in the holy war. In 1198 he was appointed to conduct Queen Berengaria into Poictou, and after the king's return he was employed in the Curia Regis as one of the justiciers. His name appears on several fines levied there in the last two years of Richard's reign, and as acting as a justice itinerant in the counties of Essex, Hertford, and Surrey. Durmg the firs^t four years of John's reign also he was en gaged in the same duties. (Madox, i. 666, 733-7, 743.) He then appears to have retired from active employment, inasmuch as in 6 John he fined one thousand marks to be dis charged from all accounts, fines, &c. (Rot Pat. 41.) That this was intended to be a favourable close of his account, and that he still enjoyed the confidence of his sove reign, appears from the close of the entry, whereby the kingexeuses him three hundred marks, and orders that out of the residue he should be allowed one mark a day for the custody of the king's niece, the sister of the unfortunate Prince Arthur. In 7 John he received several payments of one mark each for the use of the queen (Rot de Prcestito, 273-4), and in II John a gift from the king of one hundred marks. (Rot Misce, 154.) The Rotuli Misas ofthe latter year and of 14 John contain entries of frequent payments to messengers to and from Winchester conveying the corre spondence between the king and him, and in 14 John he was commanded not to allow any one to see the king's son Henry with out special order. (Rot. Claus. 121, 123.) His property was considerably increased by his marriage with Edelin, the daughter aud one of the heirs of Ranulph de Broc. He held one of the estates so acquired by the service of 'Ostiarius CameriB Regis,' and by another which he held in wardship he was marshal of the kmg's household. He died in 16 John, in which year his widow paid sixty marks and a palfrey for liberty to marry with whom she pleased, aud his lands were divided among his five daughters. (Ibid. i. 168; Excerpt e Rot Fin. i. 25 ; R. de Wendover, ii. 459, iU. 1; Ric Devizes, 6, 7; Holinshed, ii, 202, TUENOUE 222, 232; Manning and Bray's Surrey, i, 16, 83,) , ,^ TUENOE, Cheistophee, was the eldest son of Christopher Tumor, Esq., of Milton- Erneys in Bedfordshire, by Helen, daughter of Thomas Sam, Esq., of Printon, Hert fordshire, He was bom on December 6, 1607, and was educated at Emmanuel College, Cambridge, to which in after life he contributed a lilDeral donation towards rebuilding its chapel. He took the degrees of B.A. and M.A. in 1630 and 1633, and, having been admitted a student at the Middle 'Temple, was called to the bar in November 1683, and became bencher in 1664. His name does not frequently ap pear in the Reports, and he is not mentioned as taking any prominent part in the troubles. But that he had a fair legal reputation is manifest from his being selected at the Re storation as third baron of the Exchequer on July 7, 1660. He was thereupon knighted. On his first circuit he refused to try three persons mdicted for murder m Gloucestershire, for the very sufficient reason that the body had not been found. His successor on that cfrcuit at the next assize. Sir Robert Hyde, not influenced by the same consideration, condenmed and hanged the prisoners, whose innocence was some years afterwards established by the re appearance of the man supposed to have been murdered. A gossiping letter preserved in the State Paper Office (Cal [1660], 589), dated in March 1661, relates that ' Judges Atkins and Turner, who went on the Midland Cir cuit, are taken iU, the latter struck blind and deaf It adds that ' it is thought a j udgment for their severe conduct to poor honest men.' As no other record of the severity of the two judges appears, we may hope that it existed only m the writer's imagmation. The visitation on Sir Chris topher, if at all true, was only temporary, for he continued to perform the duties of his office during fourteen subsequent years. His death occurred in 1676, and his re mains were deposited at Milton-Emeys, By his wife, Joice, sister of Sir WUliam Warwick, secretary of the Treasury, he left several children, the descendants of whom still flourish at Stoke-Rochford in Lincoln shire, ( Gent. Mag. Ui, 69 ; 1 Sideifin, 8 ; State Trials, xiv. 1818.) TUENOUE, Edwaed, was of a family which is said to be derived ftom a Norman who was one of the rewarded warriors of William the Conqueror, and whose descen dants were long seated at Haverhill in Suffolk, where Edward Turnour his grand father resided, and was a bencher of the Middle Temple in the time of James I, Arthur, the judge's father, was a serjeant in the next reign, and was seated at Little Paringdon in Essex, By his wife, Ann, TURNOUR daughter of John Jermy, of Gunton in Nor folk, he had several children, the eldest being the future chief baron, who was bom in 1617 m Threadneedle Street, at the house of his uncle Sir Thomas Moulson, lord mayor of London, Educated flrst under Dr, Goodwin, author of the 'An tiquities of Rome,' at the free school at Abingdon, and next at Queen's College, Oxford, he was on October 30, 1688, ad mitted to the Middle Temple; and being caUed to the bar on June 19, 1640, became bencher on June 29, 1660, and afterwards treasurer. He was elected steward of Hertford in 1648, (Athen. Oxon. 1060,) He represented Essex in Cromwell's second and third parliaments, and in that of 1658, called by the Protector Richard ; but that he was but a moderate republican, and veered at last to the side of monarchy, is apparent from his being returned mem ber for the same county to the Convention ParUament of AprU 1660, and from his being knighted immediately on the Re storation ; and that he was well reputed as a lawyer may be concluded from his being engaged as counsel for the king in the trials of the regicides, particularly in those of Harrison and Cook, and from his being made solicitor, and afterwards attorney, to the Duke of York, Being again returned to the parUament of May 1661, as member for Hertford, he was elected speaker (Manning's Speakers, 364) ; and his speeches on this and subsequent occasions, though not ¦without some touch of eloquence, are remarkable for their excessive adulation and their amusing reference to sacred and profane history, (State Trials, v. 1015, 1108 ; Pari. !Hist. vols, iii, iv. ; Burton, iv. 431.) In December 1663 he had a grant of 2000/. as a free gift, and another of 5000/. in July 1664, This parliament lasted for nearly eighteen years, during which there were no less than four speakers — Sir Ed ward Turnour for twelve years. Sir Job Charlton for Uttle more than twelve days. Sir Edward Seymour for flve years, and Sir Robert Sawyer for the remaining months. The speakers at that time were always attended by the mace, even during the adjournment of the house, and, being lawyers, forbore to practise. In 1668, the kmg having adjourned the parliament for a longer time than usual (they did not meet for eighteen months). Sir Edward was naturally anxious to be freed from that formality and interference with his profes sional pursuits; but on his application to be released from it the Commons declared that he ought to be attended by the mace as in time of shorter adjournments. But having on May 11, 1670, during a six months' adjournment of the ninth session, received the appointment of solicitor- TUERI 681 general to the king, it must be presumed that the above vote did not forbid his prac tising. When the parliament met in Octo ber he resumed the chair, but, according to Roger North (p. 52), he had lost much of his former credit and authority in conse quence of having received a small present, m other words a bribe, from the East India Company. The session was terminated by a proroga tion in April 1671 ; and on the 23rd of the next month Sir Edward was removed from the chair of the House of Commons to the seat of chief baron of the Exchequer, an elevation somewhat extraordinary for a man suffering under such an imputation. No complaint, however, has been made of his presidency, which lasted only four years. He died while on circuit at Bedford on March 4, 1676, and was buried in the chancel of Little Paringdon Church, He seems to have been prouder of his oratory than his law, for his publications were conflned to his speeches. Of his two wives, the first was Sarah, daughter and heir of Gerard Cole, alderman of London ; the second, Mary, daughter and heir of Henry Ewer, of South Mimms, Middlesex. By the first he had several cMldren, the eldest of whom was Sir Edward, M.P, for Orford in Suffolk, whose daughter Sarah was the grandmother of Edward Garth, who, succeeding to the estates, assumed the name of Turnour, and was in I76I created baron, and in 1766 Earl of Winter- ton in Ireland, (Manning and Bray's Surrey, ii. 7 ; Biog. Peerage, iv, 85.) TUEEI, JoEDAN DE, was an officer of the Exchequer in 1 Richard I., the Great Roll of that year recording that the sheriffs of London and Middlesex accounted for cer tain expenditure, 'per visum Jordani de Turri et per testimonium Willelmi de S, Mariie Ecclesia,' (Madox, i. 370.) In 4 John, 1202, he was among thejusticiers at Westmin.ster before whom fines were levied, present, perhaps, only as an officer. He died about 6 John, in which year certain houses he held in London were ordered to be given to Hugh de Wells. (Rot Claus. i. 18, 86.) TUEEI, Nicholas de, was a justicier as early as 86 Henry HI,, 1251, payments being made from March in that year for assizes to be held before him. These con tinue uninterruptedly till May 1270, 54 Henry III. (Excerpt e Rot. Fin. ii. 100- 613,) Dugdale, however, does not men tion him till 44 Henry HI., 1260, and then only as a justice itinerant. In the iters of 46 and 47 Henry III, he stands at the head of all the commissions on which he is named. In the former of these years Dug dale introduces him among the justices of the Common Pleas, -with a grant of 40/. a year; and the only fine he notices as 682 TUETON having been acknowledged before him is in 48 Henry IIL In 51 Henry IIL, 1267, a writ directing the removal of a process from his court to the Exchequer is addressed ' Nicholao de Turri et sociis suis justiciariis ' (Madox, i. 236), which would seem to im ply that he was then at the head of the Court. He died most probably in 1270, when he ceased to act ; and if so, he would then have sat on the bench between nine teen and twenty years. From an entry among the pleas of Michaelmas, 51-52 Henry IIL, relative to a messuage and some land at Gretelington in Wiltshire, it appears that Nicholas de Turri was parson of the church of All Saints in that place. (Abb. Placit 165.) TUETON, John, was the grandson of John Turton, of 'West Bromwich in Staf fordshire, of whose two sons, John aud William, the former was the ancestor of Sir Thomas Turton, created a baronet m 1796 (now extinct) ; and the latter was the father of the judge by his wife, Eleanor, daughter of Thomas Fownes. He was born at Alrewas, his father's residence m tiie same county, and, becoming in 1669 a member of Gray's Inn, was called to the bar in 1673. At the general election for the last parliament of Charles IL, in 1681, his name is contained in a double return for the town of Tamworth ; but as the dissolution occurred before it had sat a week, the claims of the candidates were never decided. History is silent as to Tur- ton's conduct during James's reign; but that he was a friend to the Revolution, and distinguished among his legal brethren, is apparent from his being selected as a baron of the Exchequer on May 4, 1689, and knighted. He sat in that court for seven years, when he was transferred on July 1, 1696, to the King's Bench, There he continued during the remainder of Wil liam's reign, and was re-appointed on the accession of Queen Anne in March 1702. On June 4 following, however, he received a message from the lord keeper that he might forbear to sit on the next day, the flrst day of Trinity Term, her majesty de signing to give him his quietus, and he accordingly received his supersedeas on the 9th. This removal no doubt was caused by the prevalence of tory politics, which then ran to great extremes. It became the fashion to decry all King William's acts, and even in an address to the throne the victories of the Duke of Marlborough were spoken of as signally ' retrieving ' tbe an cient honour and glory of the EngUsh nation. That Sir John Turton felt himself aggrieved may be well supposed, and the sentiments of his family on the subject were expressed by his grandson in a memo rial presented to George I, in 1721, stating that the judge ' fell the flrst sacrifice to the TWISDEN rage and malice of the enemies of that glo rious prince [King William] at the very beginning of the succeeding reign, and that his disgrace was occasioned by his honest and firm adherence to the Revolu tion interest.' He survived his discharge for six years, and died suddenly on March 12, 1708. Hia wife was Anne, daughter of Samuel More, of More and Linley m Staffordshire, His portrait is in Gray's Inn, (Erdewick's Staf- fordsh. 234; Luttrell, v. 181, vi, 278; 2 Lord Raymond, 768 ; State Trials, xUi, 461, 486, xiv 221, 228.) TUEVILL, Maueice de, was in the ser vice of King John, by whom in 1215 he was sent with three associates to the earls, barons, and others of the county of Hants, to convey the royal commands and to ex plain the affafrs of the kingdom. In the same year he and WilUam de Faleise were custodes of the castle of Wmchester. (Rot. Pat. 128, 136,) His only appearance in a judicial capacity was in 1219, as one of the justices itinerant into Wilts, Hants, Berks, and Oxford, He held the office of one of the three coroners of the county of Glou cester, all of whom were superseded, ' prop ter debiUtatem,' m 1225, when the shenff was ordered to cause three others to be elected in thefr stead, (Rot. Claus. U. 25.) TUTTEBUEY, Thomas, was of a Derby shire family, and is first mentioned in I Henry IV, with the designation of -clerk, as keeper of the kmg's wardrobe, in which character he received two sums of 66/, 13s, 4d. and 13/. 6«. 8d. ' for the costs and charges incurred for the carriage of the body of Richard, late King of England, from Pountfreyt Castle to London.' On June27, 1401, he was rewarded for this serrice by being constituted second bai-on of the Ex chequer, In May 1402 we find him send ing a messenger to the king announcing ' the capture of a certain ship sent to Scotland to victual those parts,' Beyond July 1403, when he received payments on account of his former office, among which is the sum of 253/. 9.s. for fish, no enti'y concerning him is published. (Devon's Issue RoU, 275-294; CaL Rot Pat 244.) T-WISDEN, Thomas. The familyof Twys- den is oue of the most ancient in the county of Kent, and can be traced from the reign of Edward I., when it possessed a manor of that name in the parish of Sandhurst, In the reign of Henry VIII,, William T-wysden, hy his marriage with Elizabeth, one of the daughters and coheirs of Thomas Roydon, came into possession of Roydon Hall in East Peckham, thence the chief seat of the family. This 'WilUam was the grandfather of Sir William T-wysden, the first baronet, who by his marriage with Anne, daughtei; of Sir Moyle Finch, of EastweU, Bart,, had five sons, through the eldest of whom, Sir T'WISDEN Roger T-wysden, renowned as much for his antiquarian and constitutional leai-ning as for his loyal and exemplary life, the title has descended to the present time. ( Wot ton's Baronet, i. 211 : Hasted, v. 96,) This Thomas was Sir William's second son, and on estabUshing a new family altered the usual spelling of his name from Twysden to Tvrisden, in order to distinguish the two branches. (Ex inf. ofthe late Rev. Lambert B. Larking.) He was born at Roydon Hall on January 8, 1602, and became a fellow commoner of Emmanuel CoUege, Cambridge, to the re building of the chapel of which he after wards was a liberal contributor. Being admitted a member ofthe Inner Temple in 1618, he was called to the bar in 1625. He was not raised to the bench of the society till November 5, 1646, but long before that time he was in full employment as an advocate, his name appearing m the Reports of Croke, Styles, Aleyn, &c. After the death of Charles I., Siderfin mentions him frequently ; audit is evident he acqufred much eminence in his profession, as Crom weU, in Hilary Term 1654, called him to the degree of serjeant, a dignity which he says he accepted ' animo reluctante.' In the next year Cony's case arose. This gen tleman had been illegally imprisoned for refusing to pay certain customs imposed without any authority but the protector's dictum. He eitber brought an action for false imprisonment, or sued out his Habeas Corpus (for the accounts differ), and he employed Serjeants Twisden, Maynard, and Wadham Wyndham as his counsel. 'Their advocacy was so effective that they were tyrannically silenced by being sent to the Tower, from which they did not get release till they petitioned the protector. (Ludlow, 223 ; Clarendon, vU. 296 ; Harris's Lives, iii. 446.) Twisden, like the rest of his family, was a staunch loyalist ; and that his -wife shared in his feelings is apparent from a letter addressed to her by Charles II. in 1650, in which, after stating that he has assurance of her readiness to perform his desires, he gives her directions as to the delivery of ' the George and Seals,' according to her ' brother's promise ' to ' his blessed father,' This lady, whom Mr. Twisden married in 1639, was Jane, daughter of John Tomlin son, Esq., of Whitby in Yorkshire ; and the brother alluded to was Matthew TomUn- son, a colonel in the parliamentary army, under whose charge Charles I, was placed during the time of his trial, and on the day of his execution, UnUke others about the king, he treated him with Mndness and civility. This considerate conduct was gratefully acknowledged by his majesty in his last moments, when he presented the colonel with his gold toothpick and case as T'WISDEN 683 a remembrance, and entrusted him with the George and Seals to be transmitted to his son. Though Tomlinson was afterwards one of Cromwell's peers, and a commissioner for the management of Iri.sh affairs, he reaped at the Restoration ' the eff'ect and fruit ' of his generous treatment of the fallen monarch by being called as a witness on the trial of the regicides, instead of being arraigned as an accomplice in their guilt, (Evelyn, v. 183; Whiteloeke, 666, 693 ; State trials, v. 1178.) Tlie serjeant continued the practice of his profession through all the subsequent changes, and it may well be supposed that the king's retum was gladly welcomed by him. Laying down the dignity which had been forced upon him by the usurper, he was legitimately invested with the coif a few days after ; and on JiUy 22, 1660, he was sworn in as one of the judges of the King's Bench, and knighted. He retained the office for the remainder of his life, but ceased to exercise its functions in October 1678, more than four years before his death, the king, in consideration of his great age, or, as Noble says (CromweU, i. 438), from being too virtuous for the place he held, then excusing him from further attendance in court. Though on the commission for the trial of the regicides, he took little part in it, the principal conduct being left to the lord chief baron, Sir Orlando Bridgeman ; and m the trials of the Fifth Monarchy men and Sir Harry Vane m the King's Bench, he is only mentioned as speaking on pomts of law. He was one of the judges in the harsh proceedings against George Fox and other Quakers for not taking the oath of obedience, and seems to have been some what puzzled to answer the arguments of the zealous disputants, (State Trials, vi. 74, 156, 206, 634.) Roger North (Examen, 56) gives an amusing account of an accident wMch befeU the judge in Hilary Term 1673 :— ' His lordship (Lord Shaftesbury) had an early fancy, or rather freak, the first day of the term (when all the officers of the law, king's counsel and judges, used to wait upon the Great Seal to Westminster HaU) to make this procession on horse back, as in old time the way was when coaches were not so rife. And accordingly the judges were spoken to to get horses, as they and all the rest did by borrowing or hiring, and so equipped themselves -with black foot-cloaths m the best manner they could: and diverse of the nobiUty, as usual, in compliment and honour to a new lord chancellor, attended also in their equip ments. Upon notice m town of this caval cade, all the show company took their places at windows and balconies, with the foot guard in the streets, to partake of the 684 TYRRELL fine sight, and being once settled for the march, it moved, as the design was, state- lily along, Butwhen they came to straights and interruptions, for want of gravity in the beasts, or too much in the riders, there happened some curvetting which made no little disorder. Judge Twisden, to his great affright, and the consternation of his grave brethren, was laid along in the dirt, but all at length arrived safe, without loss of life or limb in the service. This acci dent was enough to divert the like frolic for the future, and the very next term after they fell to their coaches as before,' The author speaks of this as the revival of an ancient custom ; but it is one which could not have been long left off, for in October 1660, only thirteen years before, Pepys (i. 116) says, 'In my way I met the lord chancellor and all the judges riding on horseback and going to West minster Hall, it being the first day of the term,' And Aubrey (ii, 386) fixes the date of its discontinuance at the death of Sir Robert Hyde in 1665. Sir Thomas's health began to fail him m the year 1677, and in October of the next year he received his quietus in the honour able manner before related, being allowed to retain the title of judge with a pension of 600/. a year during the continuance of his life. He enjoyed the reputation of being a sound lawyer and an upright judge, though withal somewhat passionate, so that the contemporary reporters, in record ing his judgments, begin, 'Twisden, in furore, observed,' &c. (Lord Campbell's Ch. Justices, i. 659.) Having purchased Bradburn, a seat in East Mailing in Kent, at a very early period, the king in June 1666 conferred on him a baronetcy of that place. There he died on January 2, 1683, and was buried under a monument in the church of that parish. He was the father of eleven children, five sons and six daugh ters; but the baronetcy, after being enjoyed by seven of his descendants, became extinct in 1841. TYEEELL, Thomas, was one of the military lawyers of the Commonwealth, He was the third son of Sir Edward Tyrrell, of Thornton in Buckinghamshire, a knight of very ancient family (descended from that Sir Walter who shot William II. in the New Forest), by his second wife, Mar garet, daughter of Thomas Aston of Aston in Cheshire, and relict of Thomas Egerton of Walgreve. Sir Edward, by his first wife, Mary, daughter of Benedict Lee, Esq., of Huncote, Bucks, had a son also named Edward, who obtained a baronetcy in 1627, which became extinct in 1749, Thomas was born about the year 1594, and began Ms legal career at the Inner Temple, where he was caUed to the bar on November 13, 1621. His miUtary career T'YREELL began in May 1642, when he accepted the office of deputy lieutenant of his native county under Lord Paget, having Hampden and WMtelocke among his colleagues. He soon after received a commission as colonel in the parliament army, but nothing is recorded of his prowess, except that in a quarrel that arose in Westminster Hall between him and Sir William Andrews, in April 1646, he ' behaved himself dis creetly,' and was called into the house and thanked ' for his carriage therein.' Pleased perhaps -with the flattering expressions addressed to him, he became desfrous of entering the parliament as a member, but did not succeed. During the next thirteen eventful years history makes no mention of him, though probably he resumed his prac tice at the bar ; but at the end of them he was retumed to Protector Richard's par liament of January 1669, as member for Aylesbury, In that short session the colonel took an active part in all questions connected with the law, and sat as chafr- man of the Committee of Grievances and Coui-ts of Justice. On the dissolution of the parliament, and the consequent expira tion of Richard's power, the Long ParUa ment met again ; and soon after its rerival, dismissing the late commissioners of the Great Seal because they were members of the house, they committed its custody to Tyrrell in conjunction -with Bradshaw and Fountaine on June 4 for a period of five months. On the I8th he was caUed to the bench of his inn of court, being desienated ' Thomas Lord TyrreU,' and on the 16th the parliament made him a serj eant-at-law. The three commissioners held the Seal till November 1, when the army having again prevented the house from meeting, and no minated a committee of safety, it was trans ferred to Whiteloeke as sole keeper. When the Long ParUament was again permitted to sit, Tyrrell was restored on January 18, 1660, with Fountaine one of his former colleagues aud Sir Thomas Widdrmgton. The Convention Parliament, soon after summoned (to which Tyrrell was returned as member for his county), caused Charles II, to be proclaimed on May 7, and at the same time named the Earl of Manchester, the speaker of the House of Lords, as an other commi.^ssioner of the Seal, which was retained by all four tiU it was ordered to be defaced just before the return of the king. When that event took place TyrreU was considered to have acted with so much discretion that he was confirmed in his degree of the coif, and on July 27 was ad vanced to the bench as a justice of the Common Pleas, and knighted. King Charles in 1663 granted Mm in fee the estate of Castlethorpe in Bucks, where he died on March 8, 1671-2, at the age of ULECOT 78, and in the church of which he was buried under a stately monument with his effigy in robes and coif. He married thrice, but the names of two of his vrives only are knovra,the first and the third — viz., a daughter of — Saunders, of Buckingham shire ; and Bridget, one of the daughters of Sir Richard Harrington, of RidUngton, Rutland, Bart, who was also the father- in-law of his colleague John Fountaine. URS'W'YKE 685 By his first wife he had, besides daughters, two sons, Thomas and Peter, the latter of whom married a daughter of Carew Ra leigh, eldest survivmg son of Sir Walter Raleigh, and was created a baronet during his father's life in 1665, but the title be came extinct in 1714. (Lipscombe's Bucks, iv, 89; Wotton's Baronet, ii, 77; Whiteloeke, 55, 144, 167, 680-700 ; Burton's Diary, iv. 1, 126, &c. ; 1 Siderfin, 3.) u ULECOT, JoHNDB, wasprobablyayounger branch of the same family as the under mentioned Philip de Ulecot, and from the employments which he is recorded to have held seems to have been a retainer of the court. He was sub-sheriff of Northamp tonshire in 6 John, and of Cambridge and Huntmgdon for four years from 6 Henry III. The only time he acted as a justice itinerant was in 14 Henry IIL, 1229, when he was appointed for Sussex and Rutland. Ten years afterwards he and Everard de Trumpington, probably as the king's es cheators, were commanded to extend the lands of John, late Earl of Chester and Huntingdon, beyond the county of Chester, and cause the same to be divided among the hefrs of the earl, (Madox, i. 226 ; Ex cerpt e Rot. Fin. i. 318,) 'ULECOT, Philip de, was a northem knight of great power and possessions, and was flned 100/, and a complete horse in the flrst year of Kmg John's reign for his mar riage with Johanna, the sister of the wife of Sewel Fitz-Hem-y, part of which flne was subsequently remitted, (Rot. de Ob latis, 5 ; Rot. de Liberat. 25.) In 6 John he was appointed constable of Chinon in Tou- raine (Rot Pat. 40) ; and it would appear that he was taken in battle, as the king gave Mm two hundred marks for his re demption (Rot Claus. i. 62) ; a very large sum in those times, and sho-wing by the demand his value as a knight, and by the payment the extent of the royal favour. In this he gradually advanced, and in 14 John was invested with the office of forester of Northumberland, with a grant of several manors, (Rot. Chart 190), To these was added the sheriffalty of that county, in con junction with the Earl Warren and the archdeacon of Durham, who, with Mm, were also appointed custodes of the bishop ric of Durham during its vacancy, (Rot. Pat 93, 94; Rot de Fin. 476, &c.) The sheriffalty he then held alone for the re mainder of this and the flrst four years of the reign of Henry III, In I2I6, King John having constituted him and Hugo de BaUol governors of all the country to the north of the Tees, they stoutly defended the castles committed to their charge from the attacks made upon them by the King of Scots in behalf of Louis of France. (R. de Wendover, iU. 430, 438.) Soon after the accession of Henry III. some quarrel seems to have occurred be tween him and Roger Bertram, for they were both summoned to appear before the council, and shortly afterwards the sheriff of Nottingham was commanded to seize his lands if he did not give up the castle of Midford to Roger, according to the king's frequent commands. His favour was soon restored, for in the very next month the manor of Corbrig was assigned for his sup port while in the Mng's service (Rot. Claus. i. 336, 367, 860), which was followed by various other grants. In 3 Henry III. he was one of the justices itinerant in the three northem counties, and in the next year he received the appointment of seneschal of Poictou and Gascony ; and for his convey ance thither the barons of Hastings were ordered to provide three good ships. In this service he died, and the king, iu a mandate dated November 2, 1220, 5 Henry IIL, announcing his death to the sheriff of Northumberland, calls him ' dominus tuns,' showing that he still continued govemor of the northern district, (Ibid. 480, 483, 449, 466, ii, 20 ; Excerpt e Rot Fin. i. 56.) UFSALE, Geoeeeet db, of a Yorkshire family, was among the justices itinerant for pleas of the forest only in the northern counties in 64 Hemy IH,, 1270; but he never appears to have been engaged in ge neral judicial duties, (Excerpt. eRot Fin. U, 410.) UES'WYKE, Thomas, named probably from the parish of Urswick in Lancashire, was common serjeant of the city of London, from which he was raised to the office of recorder in 1465, In that character he was one of those named in the commission to try treasons at Guildhall in July 1460, when Sir Thomas Brown was convicted. (Rot ParL vi. 19.) In the foUowing year, after the queen had gamed the second battle of St. Albans, and was advancing to 686 VALOINES London, the mob prevented the lord mayor fr'om sending her a supply of provisions, and deputed Urswyke, with the Duchess of Bedford and some bishops, to make his excuses, and to give her majesty hopes of being received into the city as soon as the people were appeased. (Rapin, iv. 605.) The recorder willingly announced the_ stop page of the supplies, but no doubt did not participate in tbe encouragement held out. A strong partisan of the Yorkist faction, he knew its power -within the walls, and re joiced to see the Earl of March enter them shortly after, and mount the throne as Edward IV. In the flrst parUament of the new king he was returned as the representative of the city ; and again in 1467, when he was one of the members selected to investigate the sUver coinage. (Rot. ParL v. 634.) He stiU held the recordership when Henry VI. re-assumed the crown; but, retaining his loyalty to Edward IV, he showed his de votion to that prince by admitting him through a postem gate into the city before the battle of Barnet, when the slightest im pediment might have given time for War wick's army to arrive, and thus have brought about a different consummation. King Henry and the Archbishop of York were at the Bishop of London's palace, and had ridden through the streets to urge 'the peple to be trew unto hym ; ' to which the chronicler adds, 'Nevere the latter, Urs- ¦wyke, recordere of Londone, and diverce aldermen, such that hade reiile of the cyte, commaundede alle the peple that were in harnes, kepynge the cite and Kynge | VAUGHAN Herry, every manne to goffhome to dynere; and in dyner tyme Kynge Edwarde was late in, and so went forthe to the Bisshoppes of Londone palece, and ther toke Kynge Herry and the Archebisschoppe of Yorke, and put theme in warde, the Thursda^ next before Ester-day.' ( Warkworth Chron, 15, 21.) In the middle of May the recorder, ' being well armed in a strong jacke,' did good service in repelling the forces of the bastard Fauconbridge which in their at tempt upon London had assaulted Aldgate. (Holinshed, iU, 323.) Urswyke was immediately kmghted ; and soon after Edward had re-established him self on the throne he received a more sub stantial reward by being made chief baron of the Exchequer on May 22, 1471, the very day of Henry's death m the Tower, when he resigned the recordership. Although, filling the office of recorder, he must have been brought up as a lawyer, it is evident that he held no eminent rank in his profession, as his name never once occurs in the Year Books before he was advanced to the bench. Even then he does not seem to have taken a prominent part in the judgments in the Exchequer Chamber there recorded, being only mentioned in four terms, m the fifteenth and sixteenth years, during his continuance in office. He presided over the Court of Exchequer eight years, and died in the commence ment of 1479. By the inquisition taken on his death (Cal iv. 897), it appears that he was possessed of the manors of Markes and Doneres in Essex, and other property in the county. V VALOINES, Theobald de, is called by Le Neve (189) archdeacon of Essex in 1218 ; but he is not so designated in October 1223, 7 Henry IIL, when he was commanded to give possession of the bishopric of Carlisle (of which he was custos) to Walter Mau clerk, the newly-elected bishop. In 1226, however, he is so described, when he was constituted justice itinerant in the county of York, Le Neve adds that he is also men tioned as archdeacon in 1228, (Rot Claus. i. 673, U, 8, 77,) VAUGHAN, John, whose family is traced by Cambrian genealogists as Mgh as the founder of one of the noble tribes of Wales,, and whose property of Trowscoed in Car diganshire is stated by them to have beeu in possession of his forefathers for ten genera tions, wasthe eldest son of Edward Vaughan and Letitia his wife, the daughter of John Stedman, of Strata Florida in the same county, and was born at Trowscoed in 1603. He was educated at the King's School at Worcester, and Christ Church, Oxford, and went in I62I to the Inner Temple. So many of the same names appear in the books of that society that it is difficult to give the precise date of his call to the bar. A. Wood (iii, 1025) states that he for some time devoted himself to the study of poetry and mathematics (a curious combination), until by his intimacy with the learned Selden he was led to ap ply himself to the law with so much zeal and industry that he soon established the character which he afterwards maintained. He also associated with Edwai-d Hyde, the future chancellor, who (Life, i. 37), though giving him credit for his superior attain- ments,_ describes him as magisterial and superciUous in his humour, and proud and insolent in hia behaviour. But as the chancellor at the close of his career beUeved that he had some reason to complain of VAUGHAN Vaughan's ingratitude, the , harshness of the picture might require a little softemng, were it not that he is painted in the same coloiirs by others of his contemporaries. (Pepys, ii, 408,) Though Hyde says ' he looked to those parts of the law which disposed him to least reverence to the crown and most to popular authority,' he proved his disgust at the violent measures taken by the Long ParUament, to which he was retumed as member for the town of Cardi gan, by retiring from the scene at the very commencement of them. That assembly, therefore, treated him as a malignant, dis abled him from sitting, and gave his lihrary to John Glynn, then recorder and after wards chief justice. He -withdrew at the same time from the practice of his pro fession, and spent the twenty years that elapsed before the Restoration in his own county, unharmed by the different rulers in the interval. The Mr, Vaughan named by WMtelocke (177, 361) among other members as prisoners to whom on December 12, 1648, 'liberty was given upon their paroles,' was either Charles or Edward Vaughan, two of the victims of Pride's Purge, In 1654 he acted as one of Selden's executors, and shared in the bequest of his estate -with Sir Matthew Hale and Rowland Jewkes, They preserved his valuable collection of books, amounting to 8000 volumes, by presenting it to the Bodleian Library, where it was deposited in a noble room, now generally known by the name of the Selden End. In the Convention Parliament of 1660 Vaughan was returned for Cardiganshire, and again sat for the same county in the first parliament called by Charles II. In the former he does not appear to have taken any part in the debates; but in the latter he is noticed by Bumet (i, 225) and Pepys (ii. III, 125, 416) as taking a prominent part in opposition to the court, and is spoken of by the latter as ' the great speaker.' In 1667 the proceedings against the Earl of Clarendon took place, and were pressed with so much vehemence by Vaughan that, considering his alleged intimacy with that nobleman in early life, and his subsequent professions of friendship and respect for him, it is somewhat difficult to account for his conduct, (Pari. Hist. iv, 373, &c,) The bill for Clarendon's banishment passed in December 1667, and in the following May Vaughan was raised to the judicial bench, by being appointed chief justice of the Common Pleas, on May 23, 1668, and knighted. He proved him self worthy of his promotion by the leam ing, discrimination, and judgment which he displayed during the period of his presi- denc}'. That did not extend beyond six yeai-s and a half, and was terminated by his VAUGHAN 687 death, which took place suddenly at hia chambers in Serjeants' Inn en December 10, 1674, His remains lie in the Temple Church, where there is a marble to his memory. He has the credit of having put an end to the iniquitous practice of fining and im prisoning juries for not giving such verdicts as the court approved, by the famous judg ment, concurred in by all the judges, which he delivered in the case of Bushell, who being imprisoned with the rest of his fel lows, for acquitting Penn and Mead contrary to the opinion of the mayor and recorder at the Old BaUey sessions, had brought his Habeas Corpus. He was rather overbearing in his language, and treated the ignorance of others with too much contempt. Even his colleagues on the bench did not escape. It is told of him that on the hearing of a cause in which ecclesiastical points arose, and the canon law being cited, two of the judges interrupted the argument, owning they had no skill in that law, and priding themselves on that account. On which the chief justice, lifting up his hands towards heaven, exclaimed, ' Good God ! what sin have I committed that I should sit on this bench between two judges who boast in open court of their ignorance of the canon law ?' (Vaughan's Beports, 1-35 ; Law and Laioyers, ii. 204.) To the evidence of his high character which the friendship of Selden gives may be added the unwilling testimony of Lord Clarendon, who describes Mm as 'in truth a man of great parts in nature, and very well adorned by arts and books,' Evelyn (ii, 293) calls him ' a very wise and learned person ; ' Harris (v, 801) speaks of ' his honesty and courage ; ' and his legal learning is proved by his Re ports on the special cases argued while he was chief justice, which were published by his son Edward three years after his death. He married Jane, daughter of John Sted man of Kilconnin. His eldest son Edward was the father of John Vaughan, who in 1696 was raised to the Irish peerage by the title of Baron of Fethers and Viscount Lis- biime, titles to which the earldom of Lis- bume was added in 1776, VAUGHAN, John, was of a different lineage, as well as of a different character, from his above namesake. He was a native of the county of Leicester, and the second of five sons of Dr, James 'Vaughan, a physician at Leicester, and of Hester, daughter of John Smalley, alderman of that borough, and granddaughter of Sir Richard Halford, the fifth baronet of that name. Threeof the judge's brothers became emi nent m their respective professions: the eldest, Henry, was the distinguished court physician m the reigns of the three last sove reigns, being honoured with a baronetcy in 1809, and assuming the name and arms of 688 VAUX Halford in 1814, on succeeding to the Hal- ford estates ; the third son, Peter, rose to be dean of Chester ; and the fourth son. Sir Charles Richard, was employed as our envoy extraordinary to the United States. John was bom in 1768, and was educated at Westminster School, from which he en tered at once into the study of the law at Lincoln's Inn, and was called to the bar in Trinity Tei-m 1791. He chose the Midland Circuit, and by his agreeable manners and good connection speedily succeeded. His advance was rapid : first he was elected re corder of his native place, Leicester, and in 1799 he took the degree of serjeant-at-law. During the next twenty-eight years he had an immense business, which he owed less to his legal acquirements than to his fluency of speech and the energy and pertinacity which he always displayed for his clients. In fact, he was not deeply leamed m the science, and knew little of the law of real property. But he was industrious and pains taking, and, though his manner was some what boisterous, his addresses to the jury were humorous and effective. For his subsequent advances, in 1814 as solicitor and in 1816 aa attorney general to Queen Charlotte, in the same year as king's Serjeant, and lastly, on February 24, 1827, as a baron of the Exchequer, he was no doubt greatly indebted to the influence of his brother, tbe royal physician ; and when he received the latter appointment the bar joke was, that no one had a better title to it, as he was a judge hy prescription. After sitting in the Exchequer for seven years, he exchanged on April 29, 1834, with Sir Ed ward Alderson into the Common Pleas, and was at the same time honoured with a seat in the privy council. In his new court he remained till his sudden death in Sep tember 1839, of a heart complaint. As a judge he was much respected for his Mnd and gentlemanly demeanour, and, though not pretending to any superior legal know ledge, his good sense, patience, impartiality, and care enabled him to perform his judi cial functions very satisfactorily. He was married twice. His flrst wife was Augusta, daughter of Henry Beau champ, twelfth Lord St. John of Bletsoe ; aud his second was Louisa, daughter of Sir Charles William Rouse Broughton, Bart., and widow of St, Andrew, thirteenth Lord St. John. VAUX, Robeet db, or DE VALLIBUS, was the son of Hubert de Vaux, to -whom Ranulph de Meschines granted the barony of GUlesland in Cumberland, and of Qrascia his wife. (Baronage, i. 526.) In 19 Henry IL, 1178, he was governor of the castle of Carlisle ; and when William, King of Scots, in 1174, laid siege to it, he made so brave a defence that the king was obliged to turn the siege into a blockade. Pressed for pro- VAUX visions, Robert de Vaux agreed to surrender, if he was not relieved by Michaelmas ; but before that period the Scottish king was, hy the gallantry of Ranulph de Glanville, de feated and taken prisoner before Alnwick, (Lord Lyttelton, iii. 134.) He also held the sheriffalty of that county from 21 to 30 Henry IL, and during some of those years he acted as one of the justices itinerant for the northem counties, having been selected for that duty when the council of North ampton made the judicial division of the kingdom in II76. (Madox, i. 180-186.) There is an entry on the Pipe RoU of 1 Richard I, (137) of a flne of one hundred marks wMch he incurred for allo-wing cer tain prisoners to escape out of his custody, and for permittmg, during his sheriffalty, the currency of the old coin after it had been prohibited. He married Ada, the daughter and heir of William de Engaine, and afterwards had a second wife, named Alice, He founded the priory of Lanercost m Cumberland (Monast vi. 228), and gave the church of Helton to the canons of CarUsle. His death occurred just before or just after the ac cession of King John, leaving two sons, Robert and Ranulph, who m tui^n succeeded him. VAUX, Olivee de, was descended from Robert, a younger brother of Hubert, the father of the above Robert de Vaux. This branch ofthe family was settled in Norfolk, where they founded the priory of Pentney. Oliver was the second of seven sons of Robert de Vaux, and, on the death of his elder brother -without issue, succeeded to the estate. (Baronage, i. 626.) In 9 John is a curious entry, authorising the constable of Winchester Castle to permit Jordan de Bianney, a knight whom he had in custody, to go out of his prison twice a day or more, ' ad eskermiandum,' so that he retained Oliver de Vaux in his place tiU his re turn, when Oliver might be discharged. A caution, however, is given to the constable, as he loves his goods and his body, to keep Jordan safe. (Rot Claus. i. 88.) In 12 John he accompanied the kmg to Ireland (Rot. de Preestit 182,200, 226); but after wards joining the barons in their hostile measures against him, all his possessions were seized and distributed among the ad herents to the royal cause. Early in 2 Henry HI, he obtained their restoration; and in 10 Henry III, his name appears at the head of those selected to assess the quinzime for Norfolk and Suffolk. (Rot Claus. i, 236, 262, 374, ii, 146.) He was appointed to act as a justice itinerant in two of the commis sions in 1 234, The date of his death is not recorded, but he lived beyond 1245, when he is mentioned in the Pipe Roll. By his wife, Petronilla, the widow of Henry de Mara and also of VAUX WiUiam de Longchamp, he left several sons. The succession cf this barony devolved on the eldest, on the death of whose two sons, WiUiam and the under-mentioned John, without male issue, it feU mto abeyance. Oliver's fourth son, Roger de Vaux, how ever, was the Uneal ancestor of Nicholas Vaux, who was created Baron Vaux of Har- rowden, by Henry VHI,, m 1523, TMs title fell into abeyance in 1662, which was temiinated in 1838 m favour of George Mostyn, the present peer. VAUX, John de, was one of the justices itmerant appointed in 6 Edward L, 1278, to -risit the northern counties, and also up to the fourteenth year in various other counties. (Rat. Pari i, 29, 218 ; Madox, i. 531.) As he takes precedence on aU these Occasions of three who were regular justices, he was no doubt selected as a principal baron of the district to head the commission. He was the grandson of the above OUver de Vaux. His father, Robert, died either in the lifetime of Oliver or soon afterwards, leaving several sons. WUliam, the eldest, died without cMldren in 1263, when this John succeeded. In 49 Henry IH., after the battle of Evesham, his fidelity to his Sovereign procured him the sheriffalty of Norfolk and Suffolk, and a grant of certain houses 'prope Garther' in London. (Cal. Rot. Pat. 89.) Under Edward L, besides the duties which he performed as a justice itmerant, he was, in the eleventh year of that reign, appointed steward of Aqmtaine, He died in 1288, leaving by SibUla, his wife, two daughters, (Baronage, i, 626,) VAVASOUE, William le, is mserted by Dugdale as a justice itinerant m 34 Henry IL, 1188 ; and in the roU of the previous year he appears -with two others as setting the assize m the counties of Lincoln and York, (Madox, i. 685, 713.) In 1 Richard L (Pipe RoU, 139) his pleas are recorded in the northern counties. During the vacancy of the archbishopric of York he was one of the custodes of its rents and manors. (Madox, i. 309.) His own property was at Haslewood in that county. His father was Manger le Vavasour, who gave some property to the monks of SaUcey; and his son Robert was the grandfather of the next-mentioned Wil liam le Vavasour, VAVASOUE, William le, was the great- grandson of the above WiUiam le Vavasour, and the son of John le Vavasour of Hasel- wood. He served his kmg in the expe- -dition into Gascony and in his wars m Scotland, and his prowess is pithily de scribed by the poetical historian of the siege of Cariaverock (8, 113) m 1300 m these Unes : — E de celle mesme part Fu GniUemis li Vavasours Ki darmes nest muet ne sours. VAVASOUR 689 In 38 and 34 Edward I. he was appointed one ofthe justices of trailbaston for several northern counties. (N, Fmdera, i, 970 ; Rot ParL i. 186, 218 ; ParL Writs, i. 407.) He was summoned to parliament from 27 Edward I, to 6 Edward II,, the year in which he died, (Ccd. Inq. p. m. i. 249.) He had three sons by his wife, Nichola, the daughter of Sir Stephen "V\^allis of Newton, neither of whom, nor their de scendants, were summoned to parliament ; but there are now two baronets derived from the same stock. (Baronage, ii. 119.) VAVASOUE, John, was the son of John Vavasour of Haselwood, by Isabel, daughter and coheir of Thomas de la Haye, lord of Spaldington, who brought that lordship to the family. (!Proc Soc Antiq, iv. 79,) He is described as a member of the Inner Temple when he was called serjeant in 18 Edward IV, (Y. B. 10,) His flrst em ployment in court that is recorded in the Year Books is in Trinity Term 1467 ; and baring been invested with the coif as above in 1478, he was in the last fortnight of the reign of Edward V, appointed one of the king's seijeants, his patent for which was renewed both by Richard HI, and Henry vn. In the first year of Henry's reign it happened that Miles Metcalfe, the recorder of "York, died, when, in opposition to the Mng's recommendation of Thomas Mid delton, and to the Earl of Northumber land's in favour of Richard Greene, the corporation thought fit to exercise their privilege of nammg their own officer, and accordingly their election fell on Mr. Ser jeant Vavasour. This disregard to the king's wishes did not prevent Mm from visiting that city in April I486, when he was wel comed in a speech by the newly-made recorder, who in the foUowing year had a further opportunity of ingratiatmg himself with the monarch, by being the bearer of important despatches from the corporation with regard to the j unction of the Earl of Lincoln in Lambert Simnel's rebellion. He soon after received the honour of knight hood, and it was not long before Ms loy alty, or his talent, was rewarded with a seat on the bench. On August 14, 1490, he was constituted a justice of the Common Pleas. (Gent. Mag. May and November 1851 ; !Proc, Archceol Inst, at York.) From a memorial dated in 20 Henry VIL, it is much to be feared that he was one of tliose who were influenced by the infamous Sir Richard Empson to pervert the course of justice in a lawsuit which the latter had instigated agamst Sir Robert Plumpton. (Corresp. cxvii,) The last flne levied before him was in Michaelmas 1506, soon after which the date of his death may be flxed. (Dugdale's Orig, 47.) TT 690 VENTRIS VENTEIS, Petton, was of a family foreign in its origin, but traced in England for at least three centuries, when it became divided into two branches, established re spectively in the counties of Bedford and Cambridge, to the latter of which the judge belonged. One of Ms ancestors represented the borough of Cambridge m the reign of Philip and Mary, and was its mayor in that of EUzabeth. He and his descendants pos sessed considerable property in the county, and were connected in marriage ¦with the Evelyns, the Brewes, the Holts, and other distinguished families. Edward Venteis, the senator's great-grandson, mherited from his father the manor of Granhams in Great Shelford, and the rectory of Stow Quy in that county, together vrith other estates in Suffolk and Essex. He was a barrister of Gray's Inn, and died in 1649 at the age of thirty, leaving by his -wife, Mary, daughter of Sir John Brewe, of Wenham Hall in Suffolk, four children, the eldest survivor of whom was the future judge, then under four years old. Peyton Ventris was bom in November 1645 at Wenham, the seat of his maternal grandfather, and, having entered the society of the Middle Temple, was called to the bar on June 2, 1667, That he was a dili gent student, and a competent master of the intricacies of his profession, he gave early proof by commencing in 1668 his reports of cases adjudged in the King's Bench and Common Pleas, These he con tinued durmg the rest of the reign of Charles II,, and in part of that of James H. ; and in the reign of WUliam and Mary he recorded those in his own court as long as he sat there as judge. They were flrst published after his death, and in the cus tomary allowance of the pubUcation all the judges expressed their ' knowledge of the greatlearning and judgmentof the author.' The editor also refers to his eminence in the profession and his great worth, and the high reputation ofthe work is evidenced by the demand of no less than four editions m thirty years. As a constitutional lawyer he could not but be disgusted with the recent encroach ments of the crown, nor fail to rejoice at the prospect of the beneflcial change which the arrival of the Prince of Orange opened. He represented Ipswich in the Convention ParUament, but sat there only four months, being appointed a judge of the Common Pleas on May 4, 1689, and knighted in the following October. The honourable esti mation in which his character is regarded, although he graced the bench for less than two years, is the best proof of the excel lence and efficiency with which he per formed the responsible duties of his office. His phraseology on the bench was rather famiUar. On a question whether a devisee. VEEDUN in fee could disclaim the estate devised, he said that ' a man cannot have an estate put mto him in spite of his teeth.' He died on April 6, I69I, at Ipswich, and was buried in the church of St. Nicholas there. By his ¦wife, Margaret, daughter and coheir of Henry Whiting, Esq., of CoggeshaU m Essex, he left several children, one of whom held the post of master of the King's Bench. Some mem bers of the original stock still survive, and to the kind information of the Rev. Ed ward Ventris, incumbent of Stow Quy, the present representative of both branches of the family, who possesses the original por trait of the judge by Riley, I owe many of the particulars here recorded. (Luttrell, i. 529, 598, U. 205; ParL Hist v. 29,) VEEDUN, Beeteam de, was a powerM baron, who signalised Mmself both in a ciril and miUtary capacity, acting as a judge and counsellor under Henry H,, and doing his devoir as a soldier under his Uon- hearted successor, Richard, His grandfather, of the same name, was of French extraction, probably commg over with the Conqueror, as in his time he was possessed of Famham-Royal in Bucking hamshire, wMch he held by the serrice of providing a glove, on the day ofthe king's coronation, for his right hand, and of sup porting his right arm whUe he held the royal sceptre. This service is now attached to the lord of the manor of Worksop in Nottinghamshire, that estate having been granted by letters patent of King Henry VHI,, dated November 26, 1541, to Francis Earl of Shrewsbury, then the proprietor of Famham-Royal, in exchange for the latter, and upon the same tenure, Bertram's father was Norman de Verdun, who possessed Lutterworth m Leicester shire, and his mother LuceUne, the daugh ter of Geoffi^ey de Clinton, chamberlam to Henry I. Bertram de Verdun held his prinripal seat in Staffordshire in 1166, and was^ sheriff or fermer of the counties of War wick and Leicester from the 16th to the 80th years of the reign of Henry H. In II75, 21 Henry H,, and the three foUo'wing years, he was regularly present as a baron in the judicial proceedings of the Curia Regis ; and from the 22nd to the 26th of the reign, and probably later, he acted as a justice itinerant in eight counties. (Mado.v, i. 94-137,) There are some entries of his pleas on the Pipe Roll of Richard I. (164), but they are clearly arrears of former years. These and other employments show, not only that he enjoyed the confidence of his sovereign, but also that his talents were of a superior order. The remainder of his career was devoted to his attendance on King Richard in his expedition to the Holy VERDUN Land, whither he accompanied him in the second year of his reign. In the agreement between the Kings of England and Sicily he was one of the sureties for its due per formance on the part of Richard, who committed Acre, on its being taken, to his custody. Two years afterwards, m II92, he died at Joppa, and was buried at Acre. His reUgious benefactions were numerous. He was twice married. His flrst wife was Maud, daughter of Robert de Ferrers, Earl of Derby, by whom he had no issue. By his second wife, Rohese, he had two sons, Thomas and Nicholas, who in turn succeeded him, Rohese, the only daughter of the latter, married Theobald le Butiller, and was the mother of the next-mentioned John de Verdun. (Dugdale's Baron, i, 471 ; Monast. v. 660,) VEEDUN, JoHNDE, was the son of Theo bald le Butiller, and his vrife Rohese de Verdun, the daughter and sole heir of Nicholas de Verdun, and the granddaughter of the above Berti-am de Verdun. Being heir of the barony and of the large posses sions attached to it, she retained her sur name, which continued to be borne by her descendants. John was among the twelve who were appointed at the parliament of Oxford m 1268 to treat for the whole com munity on the common business, and as a baron-marcher was in 1260 called upon to resist the incursions of the Welsh. In the same year he was constituted one of the justices itmerant for Shropshire, Stafford- shfre, and the neighbourmg counties. He stood on the part of the Mng in the subse quent troubles, and was employed in pur suing such of the rebellious barons as held out after the battle of Evesham, In 64 Henry III, he took the cross with Prince Edward, and the next year went to the Holy Land. He died on October 21, 1274, 3 Edward I., leaving Alianore, his second wife, surviving. His flrst wife was Mar- ferie, the daughter of Gilbert de Lacy, and eir to her grandfather, Walter de Lacy. (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. i. 446,) By her he had a son, Theobald, who succeeded him and was summoned to parUament; on the death of whose son, also Theobald, the barony fell mto abeyance among his four daughters, (Baronage, i. 473.) VEEDUN, Waltee de, was probably a junior branch of the noble family noticed above. He was in King John's service in the eleventh and twelfth years of his reign, accompanying him to Ireland in the latter, (Rot Misee, 123 ; Rot de Preestit 193, &c,) In 16 John he and Robert de Courtenay were sent into Shropshire for the defence of that county, and the custody of the castle of Bridgenorth was committed to them, (Rot Pat. 136.) In I Henry HI, he held the office of one of the escheators of Lin colnsMre ; in the next year he seems to VERE 691 have had the custody of the Tower of London ; and in 3 Henry HI, was sheriff of Essex and Hertfordshire, In that year also a fine was leried before him and his associates, justices itinerant, at Westmmster ; and he again was selected to perform the same duties m 9 Henry III, for the coun ty of Oxford, Between the two last dates his services were required in a diplomatic capacity, he being sent to Rome in 4 Henry IIL, and in the next year to Poictou. (Rot. Claus. i, 168, 818, 320, 384, 438, 477, 626,) His death occurred in 1229, in March of which year his son Ralph was admitted to the seisin of his land at Blokesham m Ox fordshire, on the payment of a reUef of a hundred shilUngs, (Excerpt e Rot. Fin. i. 182.) VEEE, Albeeic de, was the son of a Norman baron of the same name, who ac companied King William on his conquest of England, and who received for his re ward Kensington and other lordships ; and of Beatrice, daughter of Henry, castellan of Bourbourg, and niece and heir of Ma- nasses Count of Ghisnes, The priory of Colne in Essex was foimded by them m llll, (Monasticon, iv, 99, 100,) The first mention that occurs of Alberic Junior, as he was called, is in a charter of King Henry, granting power to the prior of Christchurch, or the Holy Trinity, in Aldgate, London, to enclose a way near the church, addressed ' To Richard, Bishop of London, and Albericus de Vere, sheriff and all his barons and lieges of London.' (Ibid, vi, 165.) Stow also mentions that Henry sent ' his sheriffs, to -wit, Aubrey de Vere, and Roger, nephew to Hubert,' to invest that priory with the soke of the English Knighten GuUde, in pursuance of his charter addressed to the same bishop, and vritnessed by Queen Adelisa. This, therefore, must have been between 1121, when Adelisa was married, and 1127, when Bishop Richard died. The office of sheriff or portgrave of London corresponded with that of the present mayor, but was in those times one of considerable digmty, and held by persons of high rank. Both Dugdale and Spelman mtroduce him into thefr Usts of chief justiciaries of England, but there does not appear suffi cient authority for so designating him. That he acted judicially with the other barons in the Curia Regis there can be no doubt, and that he shared highly m the confidence of the king there is as Uttle question. But that he never filled the highest judicial office, the above and other documents that remam afford strong pre sumptive evidence. In the ancient Exchequer RoU of 31 Henry I. (1130) he appears to have had, in conjunction ¦with Richard Basset, the control over eleven counties as sheriff or tt2 692 VEEE fermer, but Richard Basset's name in variably stands first. Thtit this was an office of at least as much trouble as honour appears from the fact that he fined, in the same year, to be relieved from the burden in Essex and Hertfordshire. The preced ing entry, that he was charged with 550/. and four war-horses for the escape of a prisoner, shows, perhaps, the cause of his retirement. In 1134 King Henry granted to Mm and his heirs the office of his magistra came raria (great chamberlain) of all England, in which character he was present at the general council held the first year of Ste phen ; and when that Mng, in the fourth year of his reign, was summoned to a coun cil by the Bishop of Winchester, to ansvver for having seized the old Bishop of Salis bury, and his nephew Alexander, Bishop of Lincoln, aud confiscated their property, he sent Alberic de Vere to defend him, as one experienced m those matters. This, however, required more of policy than law, and his attendance in the Curia Regis would sufficiently instruct him in the latter. The selection, however, by no means proves him to have been chief justiciary at the time, and William of Malmesbury's desig nation of him as ' Albericus quidam de Ver, homo causarum varietatibus exercitatiis,' and as ' causidicus Albericus,' certainly bears no appearance that he was so. He was kiUed in London on the ides of May 1140, probably in performing some of his duties as portgrave of the city. A query is raised by Spelman whether there were not two Alberics, one the earl and the other the portgrave; but he suggests no adequate reason for the doubt. He married AdeUza, the daughter of Roger de Yvery, who came over with Wil Uam the Conqueror, and whose son Roger was chief butler to William II. Alberic, their eldest son (the third of that name), was created Earl of Oxford in II65. The ninth earl was advanced to the titles of Marquis of Dublm and Duke of Ireland, but forfeited hia honours. The earldom was granted to his uncle ; and on the death of the twentieth earl, without isaue, in 1702, the title became extinct ; but the office of great chamberlain had, by the death of the eighteenth earl, without isaue, passed with his aimt Mary to the family of Bertie Baron Willoughby de Eresby, afterwards Earls of Lindsey and Dukes of Ancaster, whose representative, the present Baron Willoughby de Eresby, is now great chamberlain of England. (Stoiv's London, 116; Morant's Essex, ii. 292; Madox, i. 18, 66, 164, 827, 468; Baronage, i. 188 ; Leland, i. 129,) VEEE, William de (Bishop oe Heee foed), was a son of Alberic de Vere, the third of that name. Earl of Oxford. In 23 VEEE Henry H,, 1177, he was engaged with Walter de Gant in building the church at Waltham, and they had 40/, allowed to them towards the expenses, (Madox, i, 226.) He was raised to the bishopric of Hereford on August 10, 1186, and presided there for thfrteen years. His pleas as a justice itinerant m the counties of BucMngham and Bedford, Lin coln and Derby, appear on the Pipe Roll of I Richard I., 1189 (82, 68, 1.56) ; but they seem to refer fo a former year. He acted in the same capacity iu 7 Richard I., im posing fines m Staffordshfre and assessing tallages in Gloucestershire, (Madox, i, 546, 703.) In the latter year, also, fines were levied before him as a justicier. He died on December 24, II99, and was buried m his own cathedral. (Godwin, 484.) VEEE, Robeet de (the thied Eael oe OxpoED),was grandson ofthe above Alberic de Vere, and the son of Alberic the ffrst earl, by Lucia Ms -wife, who became first prioress of Heningham m Essex, founded by her husband. After the death of his brother Alberic the second earl he joined the rebelUous barons, for which he was not only excommunicated (R. de Wendover, ui. 297, 365), but had his lands seized into the Mng's hands m May 1215, In the follo-wmg June,' however, they were re stored to him ; but before the end of the year he again feU off from his aUegiance, and again was m negotiation for a return to favour, which does not appear to have been completed at Kmg John's death. But soon after the accession of Henry HE, this was accomplished, and the whole of his possessions were once more put into his hands, (Rot Claus. i. 115-337; Rot, Pat. 171, 172.) Dugdale introduces him as a justicier in 4 Henry HL, 1220, on the authority of flnes acknowledged before Mm from the Easter of that year to the same festival m the following. As none of these fines are stated to have been le-ried at Westminster, and as there is no evidence of Ms having on any other occasion acted m the King's Court, there may be some reason to doubt whether he was more than a justice itinerant before whom fines were frequently le-ried on the circuits. He was certainly at the head of the itinerant justices sent in the following year into HertfordsMre (Rot, Claus, i. 444, 478), and not improbably had previously ' acted m a similar commission, at the head of which noblemen were frequently placed. Still it is to be remembered that from the death of his father in 1194, tiU that of his brother in I2I4, he held the position of a younger son, and may therefore have adopted the profession of the law as an honourable means of support, and been eventually advanced to a seat on the, bench. VEENEY He died in October in 1221, leavmg a son Hugh, a minor, by his wife, Margaret de Bolebec. (Excerpt eRot Fin,'}., 74,101, 435.) VEENEY, John, was the youngest son of George fourth Lord Willoughby de Broke, by Margaret, daughter and heir of Sfr John Heath, of Brasted in Kent, the son of SU* Robert, the persecuted judge m the reign of Charles I. He studied the law at the Middle Temple, where he was called to the bar in 1721. He represented Downton in the last parliament of George I. and m the first of George IL, and while a member of the former he was made a judge of South Wales, George II. selected him to be one of his counsel, and in 1729 appointed him attorney-general to Queen Caroline. His next promotion was in December 1738 as chief justice of Chester ; and he was ap pomted master of the RoUs on October 9, 1738. After enjoying this comfortable judicial seat not quite three years, he died on August 6, I74I. He married Abigail, only daughter of Edward Harley of Eyewood m Hereford shire, and sister of the first Earl of Oxford ; and by her he left a son, John Peyto Verney, who, upon the death of his uncles without issue, became sixth Lord Willoughby de Broke. (CoUins's Peei-age, iv, 71, -vi, 701.) -VEENON, William db, was a knight of the county of Lancaster, and was at the head of a body of archers m 5 John. (Rot. de Liberat. 78,) A few years afterwards he was imprisoned for some offence, and paid a fine of twenty marks for his release. (Rot de Fin. 416 ; Rot aaus. i. 99.) He accompanied the king to Ireland in 12 John (Rot. de Preestit 218), and was attached to the service of William Earl Ferrers, under whom he held various lands in Nottingham and Derby, He had also other possessions in Berkshire, Oxfordshire, Buckingham shire, Staffordshire, aud Lancashfre. (Rot. Claus, i. 206-631.) It was probably in respect to the latter that he was appointed m 3 Henry HI., 1219, one of the justices itinerant for the northern counties (Rymer, i. 154), an office which he afterwards ex ercised in 1226 in Nottingham and Derby. In II Henry III. he was excused the scu tage on his property in those counties. (Rot Claus. ii. 77, 204.) VEENON, Geoege, was descended from the noble and ancient family of Vernon in Normandy, which established itself in this country at the Conquest, He was the son of Sir Thomas 'Vernon, of Haslington in Cheshire, and his vrife, Dorothy, the daughter of WilUam Egerton, Esq., of Betley, Becoming a member of the Inner Temple, he was called to the bar m 1603, and was elected reader m 1621, On July 4, 1627, he was raised to the degree of the coif, an honour which Judge Whiteloeke states that he paid for — dedit aurum. In VESCY 693 four months, no doubt as part of the bar- gam, he was made a baron of the Exche- chequer. Ma patent bemg dated November 13, After remaining in that court three years and a half, he was removed to the Common Pleas on May 8, I63I. (Rymer, xix. 348.) In the great case of ship-money in 1687 he abstained from stating his rea sons on account of his want of health, but delivered his opinion, not only in favour of the charge, but also asserting that a statute derogatory from the prerogative did not bind the king, and that the Mug might dispense -with any law in cases of necessity. (State Trials, iii. 1125.) For these ultra sentiments he escaped the retribution which in the parliament of 1640 visited those of his coUeagues who pronounced a similar judgment, by his death, which occurred on December 16, 1639, at his chambers in Serjeants' Inn, Chancery Lane. He was buried in the Temple Church, Croke (Car, 565), his brother judge, describes him as being ' a man of great reading m the sta tute and common law, and of extraordinary memory,' but says nothing of his integrity or mdependence. His first wife was Jane, daughter of Sir George Corhett, of Morton Corbett in Shropshire, By her he had an only daughter and heir, Muriel, Of his second wife nothing is kno-wn, except that she produced no issue, VEEULAM, Loed, ^eeF, Bacon, VESCY, William de, was a descendant of Yvo de Vesci, who came over with the Conqueror, and was rewarded by receiving • in marriage the heiress of the lordships of Alnwick in Northumberland, and Malton in Yorkshire, He was second son of Wil liam de Vesci, and of Agnes, one of the daughters of WUUam de Ferrers, Earl of Derby, His elder brother dying without children in 1289, he succeeded to the barony. (Baronage, i, 90.) Having begun his career as a younger son, he had pursued the profession of the law, and was advanced to the office of justice of the forests beyond Trent, receiving his ap pointment in 1285 (Abb. Rot, Orig. i. 60, 90) ; and in the following year he was a-t the head of the justices itmerant for pleas of the forest m Nottinghamshire and Lan cashire, He retained his place till 1289, when he was appointed govemor of Scar borough Castle ; and in the following year he was constituted chief justice of Ireland. Three years afterwards, while in the execu tion of his duties, he was charged by John Fitz- Thomas with confederating against the king. The RoUs of ParUament contain a curious account of the proceedings taken by him against the accuser for defamation ; of the duel that was awarded; of the summons to appear before the king at Westminster, when De Vesci came fuUy armed, but Fitz- 694 VETERI PONTE Thomas kept away ; and of the ultimate annulUng of the process in 23 Edward L, on account of some irregularity. (Rot. Pari. i, 127, 182 ; Abb, Placit 284,) It does not appear that any further proceeding took place, but it is evident that the charge was not believed, as he was in the same year summoned to parliament, was employed m the wars of Gascony m that and the follow ing year, and i had grants sho-wing the favour of his sovereign. On the death of Margaret, Queen of Scotland, in 1290, he became one of the competitors for that crown, in right of Margaret, daughter of William the Lion, and sister of Alexander, King of Scotland, whom his ancestor Eustace de Vesci had married. From the immediate dismissal of this claim, and those of other daughters of William the Lion, a doubt has arisen as to their legitimacy, the pretensions of Baliol and Bruce being founded on a title which, but on that presumption, would have been posterior. ( Ti/tler's Scotland, i. 90,) He died on July 19, 1297, at his manor of Malton, His wife was Isabel, daughter of Adam de Periton, and widow of Robert de Welles, By her he had a son John, who died before him, VETEEI PONTE, Robeet de, whose ancestor of the same name (Vieuxpont, or Vipont) flourished in the reign of the Con queror (Baronage, i. 347), held an office in the treasury at the beginning of the reign of King John, and probably at the end of that of Richard I. 'The Rotulus CanceUarius of 8 John makes him account for seyeral forms in Northamptonshire and Nottmghamshire for the 9 and 10 Richard I, In 2 John the necessaries for the queen and her company, at Marlborough, were ordered to be provided ' per testimonium Roberti de Veteri Ponte.' SimUar entries are recorded in 8 and 5 John. (Rot de Liberat. 7, 16 ; Rot. Cancell. 806.) From this time the rolls contain numerous orders to Mm to pay money from the treasury, showing his connection with that department. They evidence also his continual attendance on the Mng, and that prisoners taken in the French war were in his custody. (Rot Pat 9-23.) That his services were at this time highly appreciated \>j his royal master, ample proof is given by the grant he received, in 4 John, of the castles of Appleby and Burgh, with the barony of the former, in cluding divers manors and castles, among which was Brougham Castle. To these was added the sherift'wick of the county of Westmoreland (Ibid. 25, 27), which re mained in his family long after the male branch of it became extinct. In 6 John the castle of Bowes in Richmondshire was committed to him, and was deUvered to his nephew Eudo to keep (Rot. de Liberat 63) ; and various other evidences are recorded of VETERI PONTE the favour which he then enjoyed. In that year, also, the baiUwick of Caen m Nor mandy was committed to his charge, as that of Rouen had been in the previous year. In the foUo-wmg year he was ap pointed constable of Nottingham Castle, •with the sheriffalty of that county and of Derby, m which he continued till II John. (Ibid, 26, 33, 46.) Up to this period he does not appear to have acted m a judicial capacity; but in 8 John, Mr. Hunter introduces Mm into his list of justiciers before whom flnes were acknowledged. It is not improbable that he performed this duty in one of his journeys with the king, who frequently was himself present on these occasions. This, however, was the sole year m John's reign m wMch he is so noticed. Durmg the remamder of it he was actively engaged iu many respon sible and important trusts. In 9 John he had the custody of the bishopric of Durham, and had a patent of approval and conflrmation of the sale he had made of the woods, and the terms on which he had let the lands, of the Arch bishop of York. (Lbid. 76, 81.) From 12 to 17 John he held the sheriffalty of De vonshire, aud from 12 to 15 John that of Wiltshire. He accompanied the Mng to L'eland and Wales in 12 John (Rot. Idisee, 141-281), and adhered to him both during the interdict and in his subsequent wars against the barons. The Mng's son, Richard, was committed to his charge, to be taken to his father (Rot Pat. 104) ; and in 17 John he was entrusted with the custody of the castles of Carlisle and Durham, together with the county of Cumberland, and aUthe manors on the Tyne and the Tees (Ibid. 152, 163), and, with Brian de Insula and Geoffi-ey de Luci, was appomted the king's lieutenant of all the castles and other royal possessions in Yorkshire. The flrst notice under the reign of Henry III. is a grant to Mm of the manor of Hnr- dingesthorn in Northamptonshire, which belonged to his brother Yvo, who had jomed the insurgent barons (Rot. Claus. i. 299) ; a grant probably made -with a view to its ulterior restoration to his brother. He was among the loyal barons at the siege of the castle of Montsorel, and assisted in the re lief of Lincoln, receiving in reward the forfeited possessions of several of the rebels. In 3 Henry III, he was made sherift" of Cumberland; and was also selected as one of the justices itinerant in the counties of York aud Northumberland ; and again per formed the same duty in 10 Henry III, in Yorkshire. Dugdale adds that fines were levied before him in the following year. Roger de Wendover states that he was one of the barons who continued to plunder after the termination of the war with Louis of France; and that, after some resistance, "\nEYM ie was obUged in 1224 to deli-ver up to the kmg the castles he had in his custody. The above appointments, however, as jus tice itinerant, vrith several instances of favours and employments conferred upon him about the same time, manifest no great animosity on the part of the govemment. Thus, in 7 Henry HI., 1222, five bucks and fifteen does were given to him from the forest of CUve for his park at Isenden; two years afterwards, his debts to the Mng were respited from February to Michaelmas ; and in the ensumg May, the quinzime of "West moreland and of the bishopric of Carlisle was dfrected to be coUected under his con duct, (iJ/(/, 5I8,ii,I6, 75,) He died m 12 Henry IIL, previous to March 2, 1228, leaving Ms wife surviving, who was Idonea, the daughter of John de Builly, lord of TickhUl, By her he had a son named John, who died leaving a son WAKERING 695 Robert, on whose death, without male issue, in 49 Henry III,, at the battle of Evesham, his possessions, though seized by the king, were regranted to his two daughters, one of whom, Isabel, married Roger de CUfford, a justice itinerant before noticed, ancestor of the present Baroness de Clifi'ord, and of Lord Clifford of Chudleigh, (Baronage, i. 847 ; R. de Wendover, Ui, 237, 801, 863, iv 16, 19, 34, 93,) VEYM, Richaed de, was appointed, in 9 Henry HL, 1226, to act as a justice itinerant in Gloucestershire, where his property was situate. During the troubles at the end of King's John reign his land had been given to Robert de Vernay ; but it may be pre sumed it was afterwards restored to him, as he was selected m 10 Henry IH. as one of those who were to assess and coUect the quinzime of the county. (Rot Claus, i. 262, U, 64, 76, 147.) w -WADHAM, John, whose family took its name from the place of its residence in the parish of Knowston, near South Molton, in Devonshfre, was the son of Sir John Wad ham, knight, and was educated as a lawyer. His name appears among the advocates in R. BeUewe's Reports, and he was eventu aUy made one of the kmg's Serjeants. His appomtment as a justice of the Court of Common Pleas is not recorded, but it pro bably took place in II Richard IL, at the time when the court was almost cleared by the impeachment of aU the judges except Sfr WiUiam de Skipvrith. The fines levied before him commence in 12 Richard IL, 1388, and continue tiU 1397 (Dugdale's Orig, 46) ; and as beyond that year he was not summoned to parliament, he probably was then removed, or resigned. He lived till 1411 (CaL Inq, p. m. Ui. 338), and it is said of him ' that being free of speech, he mingled it well with discretion ; so that he never touched any man, how mean soever, out of order, either for sport or ¦spight; but with alacrity of spfrit and soundness of understanding, menaged all hisproceedings.' His descendants contmued in Uneal suc cession tiU Nicholas, who, vrith his wife Dorothy, the daughter of Sfr WiUiam Petre, secretary of state to Queen Eliza beth, founded the college at Oxford which bears Ms name. (CoUins's Peerage, vii. 273 ; Prince,) 'WAKEEING, John (Bishop oe Noe wich), so called from avUlage of that name in Essex, was certamly one of the masters, ¦or clerks of the higher grade, in Chancery in 19 Richard IL, 1395, when he acted as receiver ofthe petitions to parliament. (Rot. Pari. Ui, 337.) He probably held the office for some time before, as he was instituted to the valuable living of St. Benet Shere- hog in the city of London in 1389, He was advanced on March 2, 1405, to the mastership of the Rolls, which he enjoyed for more than ten years. During this period he twice held the Great Seal as keeper, in II and 12 Henry IV,, in the absence of the chanceUor, He became archdeacon of Canterbury in 1406, and canon of WeUs in 1409, On June 8, I4I5, he exchanged the office of m'aster of the Rolls for that of keeper of the privy seal (Kal. Exch. ii, 130-2), and in the following year was elected Bishop of Norwich, When the Council of Constance was held in 1417, to settle the contention between the three claimants of the papal chair, the bishop was one of the six ecclesiastics who were selected to attend on the part of England, and he is said to have gained the applause of the assembly by Ms learning and wisdom. One of the candidates re signed, the two others were formally de posed from their assumed authority, and the election feU on Martin V, On the accession of Henry VI, he was named as one of the special council of assistance to the protectors; but his ser vices in the third year of that reign were terminated by his death at his manor of Thorpe on AprU 9, 1426. He was buried in his cathedral. He is spoken of as having been a person of extraordmary merit, pious, bountiful and affable, aijd govermng his see -vrith 696 WALCOT prudence and moderation. (Godwin, 488 ; Blomefield's Norwich, i. 628; Hasted, xii. 581 ; Rot ParL iv. 176, 201,) WALCOT, Thomas, derived his descent from Llewelyn with the Golden Cham, lord of Yale in Denbighland, one of whose descendants married the heir of Sir John Walcot, of Walcot in Shropshire, and there upon assumed the name -with the extensive estates. He was the second surviving son of Humphrey Walcot, who was sheriff of the county in 1631, and Buffered consider ably by his adherence to the royal cause, by Anne, daughter of Thomas Dockwra, of Poderich in Hertfordshire, Born in 1629, and admitted to the Middle Temple, he was called to the bar in 1658, became a bencher in 1671, and Lent reader in 1677. He was elected recorder of Bewd ley m 1671, and in 1679 was summoned to take the degree of the coif. In the parUa ment of October 1679, dissolved in Ja nuary I68I, he was elected member for Ludlow, and in the same year he received the honour of knighthood. On October 22, 1683, he was constituted a judge of the King's Bench by Charles IL, but retained his seat there for less than two years, dying in the Trinity vacation which fol lowed King James's accession. When the sentence pronounced by that court m June 1684 against Sir Thomas Armstrong, on his attainder by outlawry, was taken up by the parliament in January 1689, it appeared that Mr, Justice Walcot had died intestate, and had not left an estate sufficient to pay his debts. In the only other public trials in which his name appears, those of Rose- well and Titus Oates, he made no remark in dicative of either his character or his talents. He married Mary, daughter of Sir Adam Littleton, of Stoke Melbury in ShropsMre, Bart., and by her had several children. He was seated at Bitterly Court in that county, which, by various intermarriages, has be come the property of the senior branch of the family, the Walcot estate having been sold in 1764 to Lord Clive, (Pedigree of the Family ; Nash's Worcester, U. 279 ; Stede Trials, X, 119, 151, 1198 ; 2 Shower, 484.) 'WALDHULL, SiMON DE, probably mean ing Wahull, is introduced by Dugdale as a justicier in 12 John, 1210, on the authority of a fine levied before him. But Mr. Hunter ornits Mm in the list he has given, and cer tainly his name does not appear on any of the fines in those counties which have been hitherto published. There was a barony of WfihuU in Bed fordshire, the lord of which at this time was John de WahuU, of whom this Simon may have been a younger brother. (Baronage. i. 503.) ^ •' ' WALDEIC appears as chanceUor to the concord between the abbot of Fescamp and PMlip de Braiosa made at Salisbury on WALEDENE January 13,1103^ ; and there are four other documents of this reign m the ' Monasticon,' attested by him in the same character, which, though bearing no date, must have been executed about this time. (Monast. i. 164, vi. 1083, 1106,1278.) In II06 a charter occurs, granted to the church of Tewkesbury, one of the signatures to which, immediately foUovring the Mng's, is that ' 'Walteri, CanceUarU ; ' and the same signature is added to anothercharter granted to the priory of Thetford, which is dated at Ramsey, in transitu regis, on February 14; (Ibid. ii. 66, v. 149.) 'The year is not men tioned, but it probably was signed when the king went to Normandy, m the same year. No author notices such a chancellor aa Walter, and the name only occurs on these two occasions. It may fairly be presumed, therefore, that they are merely errors, either of the scribe or the prmter, m substituting them for Waldric. In the preceding notice of Galdric, the chanceUor under 'WilUam H., it is suggested that he may be the same as this "WSdric ; and an account is given of his takmg Duke Robert at the battle of Tenchebrai, and being rewarded -with the bishopric of Laon. It vrill be observed that all the above-men tioned instruments were executed before that battle, which was fought on September 28, 1106, and that the last of them was pro bably dated before embarking on the ex pedition agamst Duke Robert. That the name neither of Waldric nor of Galdric occurs at any subsequent date, and that Ranulph soon after appears as chan ceUor, if aff'ordmg no positive confirmation, at least offers no contradiction to the sug gestion, WALEDENE, HuMEEET DB, was au officer in the Exchequer long before he became a baron of that court. In 19 Edward I, the manor of Horsington was committed to him, dm-ing the mmority of the hefr, at a rent of 50/, a year. In 28 Edward I. he was ap pointed to perambulate the forests of Somer set, Dorset, and Devon. In 80 Edward 1. the bishopric of Worcester was committed to him during its vacancy, and four years afterwards the archbishopric of Canterbury. (Abb.Rot Orig. i. 66,119, 150 ; ParL Writs, i. 398.) He was appointed a baron of the Ex chequer on October 19, 1806, 34 Edward L ; but he only retained his office till the fol- lovring July, when the reign termmated. (Mado.v, U. 46-325.) Although he was not one of the barons sworn in on the accession of Edward 11, there is notMng to show that he was dis graced. On the contrary, he is found among the justices of Oyer and Terminer, in the fourth and eighth years of that reign, for Essex and Hertford. In 13 Edward II. he had an extensive grant of the stewardship WALEIS of various royal castles and manors m eleven counties — among which was the park of Wmdsor, — and of the auditorship of their accounts. He is mentioned also as steward to the Earl of Hertford, and seems to have been appointed, at his desire, one of the justices to take an assize m which he was interested. (Ahb. Rot Orig. i. 262, 276; Rot ParL i, 398,) He was restored to his place on the Ex chequer bench on June 18, 1824, 17 Edward II. ; but, though he acted during the re mainder of the reign, it does not appear that he sat as a baron under Edward HI. He died in the fifth year of that king, leaving an infant heir, who became escheator of Essex and Hertford m 23 Edward HL (Abb. Rot Orig. 50-203 ; Cal. Inq. p, m, U, 37.) -WALEIS, William le, was one of the justices itmerant for Dorsetshire in 9 Henry in,, 1225, and in the next year was ap pomted to assess and coUect the qmnzime in that county. -WALEEAND, Robeet, was a favourite of Henry HL, and frequently employed m his serrice, particularly in the "Welsh wars. The rolls contain frequent proofs of the con fldence reposed in him, and of the favour he enjoyed. In 30 Henry IIL, 1246, he had the custody of the lands and castles of WUliam Mareschall, late Earl of Pem broke, and in the next year those of John de Munchanes, In 34 Henry IIL, 1250, the castles of Carmarthen and Cardigan, with the lands of Meilgon Fitz-Meilgon, were committed to his charge at the small annual rent of forty marks ; and three years after wards he paid a fine of forty shilUngs of gold for the marriage of Beatrice, the daughter of Robert de Brus, (Exceipt. e Rot Fin. i. 468, ii, 14, 87, 158,) From June 1251 there can be little doubt that he was a regular justicier, many entries occurring on the Rotulus de Finibus of pay ments made for assizes to be taken before him. These continue, with slight interrup tion, tiU August 1258, (Ihid. U, 107-286,) He is described as the king's seneschal in 36 Henry III, (Ibid U, 358) and the fol lowing years ; and it probably arose from his attendmg the court as seneschal that in 46 Henry III., 1262, the Great Seal was temporarily put into his and Imbert de Munster's hands during the chancellorship of Walter de Merton. The Earl of Leicester's ravages in 1263 were specially directed against Mm as one of the Mng's chief favourites; but after Henry regained his authority he resumed his former position, and received some com pensation for his losses. From April 1268 till August 1271, the frequent entries of assizes to be held before him prove that he was restored to his place on the bench. (Ibid Ui. 441, 468-646 ; Abb. Placit 182.) He died about Edward I., and was found WALLOP 697 possessed of sixteen manors, and extensive possessions in eight counties. (CaL Inq. p. m.i. 48.) ¦WALKINGHAM, Alait db, whose family had considerable possessions m Yorkshire, was probably the son of John de Walking- ham, whose widow, Agnes, paid for an assize in that county in 1267. (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. ii. 434.) He pursued the legal profession, and was appointed in 8 Edward I., 1280, one of the justices to take assizes in different counties. In the next year he acted as the king's advocate, or local at torney-general, in the pleas before the jus tices itinerant in Yorkshire, and in 10 Edward I. was added to the commission of justices itinerant in Comwall. He died in 12 Edward I, (CaL Inq. p, m. i, 34, 128 ; Madox, ii, 112.) WALLOP, Richaed, belonged to the Hampshire family which was ennobled by George I, -with the earldom of Portsmouth. His branch was settled at Bugbroke m Northamptonshire, and his father, Richard, was resident m that place. He was called to the bar by the Middle Temple in Fe bruary 1646, and was elected a bencher in 1666. Though not mentioned by the re porters till I66I, his future success in his profession may be estimated by the nume rous state trials in which he was engaged ; and his political tendencies are apparent from his being generally retained against the government during the reigns of Charles II. and James II. In 1680 he was leading counsel for Lord Stafford, one of the five Popish lords. In 1681 he was selected as counsel for the Duke of York on the indict ment for recusancy, and was assigned to argue points of law in defence of Edward Fitzharris, and of Stephen Colledge. In 1682 he assisted in defending the city of London against the quo warranto, and was engaged as counsel for the Earl of Danby. fie was peculiarly obnoxious to Chief Justice Jeffreys, who took every opportunity of browbeating him. When Wallop, on the trial of Bradford and Speke in 1684 for asserting that the Earl of Essex was murdered in the Tower, persisted in asking some question of the vritness, which the chief justice disapproved, his lordship exclaimed, ' Nay, Mr. Wallop, be as angry as you -will, you shaU not hector the court out of their understandings ; ' and upon Wallop's saying, ' I refer myself to all that hear me, if I attempted such a thing as to hector the court,' he was checked thus intemperately by the judge : 'Refer your self to aU that hear you ! refer yourself to the court. It is a reflection on the governr ment, I tell you the question is, and you sha'n't do any such thing while I sit here by the grace of God, if I can help it; ' and again, ' Pray behave yourself as you ought, Mr. 'WaUop ; you must not think to huff '698 WALMESLEY .and swagger here.' On the trial m the same year of Thomas Rosewell for high treason the chief justice took another op portunity of showing his prejudice against the imfortunate counsel. Seemg him in court, he asked him what business he had there, and on his saymg that he only came from curiosity to hear the trial, Jeffreys declared that it should not proceed while he remained. Wallop, however, had the pleasure afterwards of moving successfully m arrest of the judgment. Another in stance of tMs judge's brutality towards Mr. "Wallop occurred shortly after, when he was counsel for Richai-d Baxter. ' Mr. WaUop,' said Jeffreys, ' I observe you are in all these dirty causae ; and were it not for you gen tlemen of the long robe, who should have more vrit and honesty to support and hold up these factious knaves by the chin, we should not be at the pass we are at.' Mr, Wallop mildly answered, ' My lord, I iumbly conceive that the passages accused are natural deductions from the text,' Upon which the infuriated chief cried out, ' "You humbly conceive ! and I humbly conceive ; swear him, swear him,' Wallop attempted to proceed, but Jeffreys stopped his ad vocacy by saymg, ' Sometimes you humbly conceive, and sometimes you are very posi tive ; you talk of your skill in Church his tory, and of your understanding Latin and EngUsh ; I -think I understand soniethmg uof them as well as you ; but in short I must tell you that if you do not your duty better, I shall teach it you.' (State Trials, vols. ¦rii,-xi, ; Luttrell, i. 69, 195, 297 ; Woolrych's Jeffreys, 146,) These attacks upon him originated pro bably from some personal antipathy, as every other judge treated him and his ar guments with respect. They continued during the whole of the coarse chief jus tice's presidency of tbe court, and were regarded with the greater disgust from the object ofthem being an old man approach ing his seventieth year. After ten or eleven years more of hard forensic duty, he obtained a retirement from Ms labours in the snug office of cursitor baron of the Exchequer, to which he was ¦appointed on March 16, 1696, Not long was his enjoyment of it. Narcissus Lutt reU (iv, 32, 267) recording that ' old Mr, Wallop, cursitor baron,' died on August 22, 1697, WALMESLEY, Thomas, of an honour- .able family settled at ShoUey in Lancashire, was the eldest son of Thomas Walmesley, by his wife, Margaret, daughter of — Live- say. He was bom about 1637, and com menced his legal studies either at Barnard's Jnn or Staple Inn, for each claims him as having been a student, before he was en tered, at Lincoln's Inn. He was called to the bar by the latter society on June 16, WALMESLEY 1667; and being elected one ofthe governors m 1675, he became reader in 1678, and again in 1580. On the last occasion he had just received his summons to take the de gree of the coif, which he accordingly as sumed on October 18. (Dugdale's Orig. 263, 261 ; Holinshed, iv. 432.) Chief Jus tice Dyer having named the barristers whom he had selected to receive that honour, Mr. Justice Francis Wyndham wrote to Lord Burleigh, suggestmg that two in the Ust might be spared ' in respect of suspicion of their religion.' These were Mr. Maryot, of the Inner Temple, and Walmesley; and the judge's representa tions, though faUmg in regard to the latter, seem to have been successful against the former. (Manning's Serv. ad legem.) He was constituted a judge ofthe Com mon Pleas on May 10, 1689, On King James's accession he was re-appointed and knighted, and was one of the ' Thomases ' aUuded to by Lord EUesmere as differing both in the House of Lords and the Ex chequer Chamber from the majority of the judges on the fquestion of the post nati, (State Trials, ii. 576, 669.) His account of presents received and ex penses incurred on same of Ms circuits, a very curious record, has been preserved among the Petre Papers. By this docu ment it appears that he went the Westem Circuit -with Mr. Justice Fenner for five consecutive years, fi-om autumn 1596 to sprmg 1601. At each place of holding the assize it was the custom for the mayor and the sheriff to present some article of consumption, varying accordmg to their means or Uberality. The eatables consisted of 'half a bucke,' 'one mutten,' ' one veale,' lambs, capons, quayles, conyes, turkies, hemeshawes, chickmgs, ducks, guiles, samons, lobsters, gurnetts, scales, haddocks, and, among numerous pies and pasties, ' one redd deare pie.' Of drinkables there were wine (-without naming the sort) and several ' hoggesheades of beare.' The noblemen and gentry of the coimty also sent similar contributions of bucks, muttons, &c. ; be sides which these additional articles are re corded : ' One Mdd,' pigeons, a pecock, pe- wetts, ' two peeces of turbett,' ' one isle of sturgeon,' 'artychocks and peases,' and 'xii suites ' (sweets ?). The sheriff of Devon seems to have been a most muniflcent caterer, for, besides presenting half a buck and two hogsheads of beer, he provided the judges with an excellent supper during the whole time they were at Exeter. The 'Rewardes' paid by the judges for these presents, varying from 5s, down to 6c/,, amounted to 6/, 16s, Besides what they thus received, they had themselves to furnish a plentiful supply of food, so that their joint expenses of oue circuit amounted to 47/, 18s, I0(/, To Judge Walmesley's half WALSH ¦of this, 23/. I9s. 6d., are added his private charges, for horse-meat, &c., servants, and 20d. at each place 'to the poore,' amount ing to 23/. 2s. 5d., making the whole cir cuit cost him 47/. Is. lOd, (Ex. inf, of Wm. Durrani Cocker, Esq., F.S.A.) He retained his seat above twenty-three years, and died on November 26, 1612, aged seventy-flve. He was buried at Blackburn m Lancashire, where his magniflcent monu ment was demolished by the parUamentary ¦soldiers in 1642. The epitaph on it com menced vrith the foUo-wing quamt Unes {Lansdowne MSS. No. 973, fo. 88) :— Tombs have their period, monuments decay, And rust and age -wear Epitaphs away. But neither rust nor age nor time shall 'wear Judge Walmesley's name that lies entombed here. Who never did for favour nor for awe Of great men's frowns quit or forsake the laive. His inside was his outside, he never sought To make fair showes of what he never thought. He had the repute of having amassed considerable wealth by great rapacity in his practice of the law; but no evidence is given of the charge. He became possessed of the estate of Dunkenhalgh, in the parish of Whalley, near Blackburn, on which he built a flne mansion. By his wife, Anne, the rich heiress of Robert Shuttleworth, Fsq,, of Hackinge in the same county, he left an only son, whose male descendants faUed at the beginnmg of the last century, and the large property passed into the families of Lord Petre and Lord Stourton, .who were the flrst and second husbands of the last possessor's sister and heir. (Shuttleioorth Accounts, Chetham Soc. 1856.) -WALSH, John, called .sometimes WELSH, was the only son of another John Walsh, of Cathanger, in the parish of Fivehead, Somersetshire, by Jane, daughter of Sir Edward Broke. He became a reader at the Middle Temple in 1665, having been previously mentioned as a barrister m Plowden's Reports. He was of those summoned in the last month of Mary's reign to take the degree of the coif in the following Easter, when by a new writ from Queen EUzabeth they were admitted on April 19, 1559, His next step was to the bench of the Common Pleas, of which he was constituted a judge on February 10, 1663, and had fines acknowledged before him as late as February 1572. (Dugdale's Oiig. 48, 217.) In that year he died, and was buried in the parish church of Fivehead. He left an only daughter, who married Sir Edward Seymour, the eldest son of the first Duke of Somerset by his first -wife, who was excluded from the title till the failm-e of the issue of the duke's second ¦wife. 'This failure occurred in 1740, when WALTER 699 a descendant of Sir Edward's succeeded to the dukedom, which now remams in his, the elder family. (Collinson's Somerset, i. 42.) WALSHE, Thomas, Uke many of the other barons, began his career as an officer in the Exchequer. He was clerk of estreats in 1616, and was made treasurer's remem brancer in April 1623, and was promoted to a seat on the bench of that court as fourth baron on April 27, 1586, It appears by an order of the privy coimcil in June 1541 that he was then engaged as a com missioner m Ireland on some of the king's bnsiness, and that he was dfrected to retum to England to make his report, (Acts Privy Council, vii, 201,) He continued baron till August 6, 1542, when his place was fllled up. WALSINGHAM, Loed. -See W. De Geet. ¦WALSINGHAM, RiCHAED DE, was a knight residing in Norfolk, his family being so called from the to-wn of that name. He was returned for the county to the parlia ments of 28, 29, and 38 Edward I. ; and it was probably on that account that he was placed in the latter year among the flve justices of trailbaston appointed for Norfolk and Suffolk, and was re-nominated in the new commissions of 1807. He was summoned among the justices to parliament in the flrst year of Edward IL, and during the remainder of his life was occasionally employed in judicial busmess. He stiU contmued to represent Norfolk in parliament up to 7 Edward IL, and is last mentioned m 12 Edward II. In the fol lowing year his executors were directed to brmg in the proceedings before him. (Pari, Writs, i. 892, ii, 1574; Rot Pari. i. 218,) His wife, whose name was Anastasia, was buried in the Black Friars at Thetford. (Weever, 828.) WALTEE, HiTBEKi (Aechbishop oe Canteebuet), bom at "West Dereham in Norfolk, was one of the sons of Hervey Walter, whose barony was in that county. His mother was Maud, the daughter of Theobald de Valoines, and the sister of Berta, the wife of Ranulph de Glanville, the great justiciary. Brought up under that celebrated man to the two leamed profes sions of the church and the law, his ad vance in both, under such instruction and with such patronage, could not be doubtful. So eariy as 31 Henry IL, 1185, his name appears among the barons and justi ciers before whom flnes were levied in the Curia Regis. Soon afterwards he was raised to the deanery of York. Even at this early period of his career he gave evidence of his piety and his gratitude by founding a monastery for Praemonstratensian monks at his native place, for the souls of his father 700 "WALTER and mother, and of his patron Ranulph de GlanvUle and his wife. Immediately after the coronation of Richard I. he was elected , to the see of Salisbury, and in the foUowing year he accompanied that monarch on the crusade, and, with Archbishop Baldwin and his uncle Ranulph de Glan-riUe, was placed in command of the forces before Acre. He alone of the three survived the campaign, and by his spirit and vrisdom was of the greatest service to the army during Ri chard's illness, being mainly instrumental in procuring the truce with Saladin when the King of France had deserted the cause. Before his return to England he had the satisfaction of yisiting Jerusalem, The king was so deeply impressed with his talents and prudent counsel that when he heard of the sudden death of Reginald Fitz-Josceline, Archbishop of Canterbury, he took every means, even before his own release from prison, to procure Hubert's appointment to the vacant primacy. His election having taken place on May 30, 1193, the new archbishop exerted himself in collecting the ransom for the release of his sovereign. In September 1193 he was raised to the office of chief justiciary, and his power was afterwards greatly increased by his being appointed legate of the apos tolic see. On Richard's return he was high in his confldence, officiated at his second corona tion in April 1194, and continued for four years to perform the duties of his office with flrmness and moderation. By his ad vice weights and measures were regulated, and other laws against fraud were ordained. 'The possessor of power, however, is certain to have enemies, and he must be fortunate indeed who, in its exercise, commits no act which is obnoxious to censure. The arch bishop was charged with neglecting his ecclesiastical duties, and with having vio lated the right of sanctuary in directing the execution of William Fitz-Osbert, a factious demagogue, who had taken refuge in the church of St. Mary-le-Bow, These and other representations to his disadvan tage were urged upon Pope Innocent by the monks of Canterbury, who, however, are stated by Roger de Wendover to have been instigated by the fear lest a magni flcent church which the archbishop was erecting at Lambeth should occasion the removal of the archiepiscopal seat from their city. Nevertheless, their appUcation was successful; the new church was or dered to be demolished, and the king, under the threat of an interdict, was compeUed to part with his chief j usticiary ou the shallow pretence that it was not lawful for bishops to be engaged in secular affairs. Hubert's resignation was reluctantly accepted in July 1 198, 9 Richard I. WALTEE Although he had been a faithful servant to Richard, his absence m the Holy Land had prevented Mm from coming mto col lision with the king's brother, John. That prince then, on Richard's death, knowing the respect -with which he was regarded, deputed him and WilUam Mareschall, Earl of Pembroke, to receive the fealty of the English barons. How the archbishop was induced to set aside the more legitimate claims of Prince Arthur does not appear ; but, as no improper motive is imputed to him, it may be presumed that he had not obtained an msight mto John's real cha racter, and that he considered the safety of the kingdom m its then unsettled state would be risked in the weak hands of a youthful sovereign. He placed the crown on John's head on May 27, 1199, being Ascension-day, and either on that day or immediately after was constituted his chan cellor. There is a charter given under his hand as chancellor, dated on June 6, being ten days after that solemnity. (Rymer, i. 75.) His acceptance of this post did not escape remark as a proof of his cupidiiy. It was sneeringly observed to Mm that ' Heretofore chancellors have been created archbishops, but no archbishop before you has vouchsafed to become chanceUor.' 'The fact, however, merely proves that the office of chancellor was then advancmg m im portance, and was rapidly treadmg on the heels of that of chief justiciary, which in a few years, in reference to aU poUtical power, it entirely superseded. In October 120l he again crowned King John, -with his second -wife. Queen Isabella, at Westmin ster, and soon afterwards repeated the cere mony at Canterbury. He contmued to perform aU the duties of the office of chancellor, if not to enjoy the favour of his sovereign, durmg the re mainder of his Ufe, (Madox, i. 67,) He died at Tenham on July 13, 120-5, and was bmied iu Canterbury Cathedral, Few persons who have iUled such high offices have passed through thefr career with so little blame. Commencing his life under the eye of his illusfrious uncle, he acquired that knowledge and laid the foundation for that experience and discre tion which gained him the confidence of three kings of very opposite characters, without degrading himself by any low arts or undue subserviency. His private worth is evidenced by the friendship of Arch bishop Baldwin, who entrusted him with the execution of his will ; his resolution and high spirit were shown by his accom panying King Richard iu his dangerous enterprise in the Holy Land; his loyalty and gratitude by his energetic efforts to release him from captivity ; his -wisdom by his administration of the government, and the useful laws he introduced : and if, from -WALTER his secular employments, he neglected some of his ecclesiastical duties,, those of hos pitality and charity were not forgotten. Besides the monastery at Dereham, he founded another at Wolverhampton, en riched the revenues of his see, ornamented it with many buildings, and procured for it some valuable privileges. He presented also the livmg of Halegart to the church of Canterbury, devotmg its revenues to the support of -the library there, and obtained from Kmg John the liberty of a mint for coming money in the city of Canterbury. (Dugdale's Orig. 8.) He was the brother of the next-men tioned Theobald Walter. (Godwin, 88, 34S; Atkyns's Gloucestersh. 9 ; Weever, 218 ; Hasted, xU, 346 ; R. de Wendover, iii, 30- 183 ; Lingard, &c.) WALTEE, Theobald, was one of the four brothers of the above Hubert Walter, Kmg Richard granted him the lordship of Preston in Lancashfre, -with the whole wapentake and forest of Amundernesse ; and he became sheriff of that county in 5 Bichard I., and so continued till 1 John, In 9 Richard I,, 1197-8, he was one of the justices itinerant to set the taUage m Col chester, (Madox, i. 733,) In 5 John he paid a fine of two palfreys for Ucence to go to Ireland, where he held the office of chief butler, and where he pos sessed large property. He founded two ab beys iu that Mngdom, that of Wotheny in Limerick, and that of Nenagh in Tipperary, besides the monastery of Arkelo, In Eng land, also, he founded an abbey at Cocker- sand in Lancashire, for canons regular of the order of St, Augustin. He died in 9 John, and Ms widow, Maud, the daughter of Robert le Vavasour (Rot Pat 74), a few years afterwards married Fulke Fftz- Warren. His son, Theobald, a-ssumed the name of Boteler, from his ¦office, and was the progenitor of the noble family of that name, the head of which is the present Marquis of Ormond. (Dugdale's Baron, i. 638 ; Nicolas.) 'WALTEE, John, was the son of Edmimd Walter, of Ludlow in Shropshire, an eminent counsel m the reign of Queen Elizabeth, and chief justice of South Wales. The family was an offshoot of that of the above Hubert and Theobald. Hia mother was Mary, the daughter of Thomas Hackluit, Esq., of Eyton in Herefordshire. He was bom in 1568, and, after completing his edu cation at Brazenose CoUege, Oxford, was admitted a member of the Inner Temple, and in 1690 was called to the bar, and became reader there in 1607. Previously to this time he had sufficient reputation as a barrister to be employed -with Serjeant Altham and Mr. Stevens, before the councU and the judges, in defence of the rights and privileges of the Court of Exchequer, and WALTER 701 as counsel before the Peers m defending the Mng's title to aMage. (Issue of Exch. 82, 64.) He was also counsellor for the um versity of Oxford, and received from it on July I, 1613, the degree of M.A. In the same year he was selected as attorney- general to Prince Charles, and was knighted on May 18, 1619. He still held this place, when on a brief being sent to him against Sir Edward Coke, then prosecuted by the court, he had the courage to declme it, saymg, ' Let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth when I open it agamst Sir Edward Coke.' (Brit Biog. iv.l79.) This generous conduct, forming such a con trast -with Bacon's on a similar occasion, did not prevent his advancement. Imme diately on Charles's coming to the crown he appointed Sir John Walter one of Ms Serjeants, and a month after he raised him to the chief seat m the Exchequer, on May 12, 1625. (Rymer, xvUi, 638.) The new chief baron, however, did not answer the king's expectations. He was too mdependent and too honest to suit the royal -will. For some cause or other, which is not precisely described, the Mng was dissatisfied vrith his conduct, and would have discharged him, had he submitted to be thus thro-wn aside. But he alleged that by his patent he held his office ' quamdiu se bene gesserit,' and he refused to retire -without a scire facias to show ' whether he did bene se gerere, or not ; ' a course which the king did not think proper to adopt, but was obUged to be contented with forbidding him to sit in court. Before this event had taken.place — viz,, on February 14, 1628-9 — he and the other barons had given the somewhat equivocating answer to the House of Commons for refusmg to deliver back the goods seized for tonnage and poundage, {Pari. Hist ii. 472.) But the immediate cause of his disgrace was said to be that he disagreed ¦(rith the rest of the judges as to the legality of proceeding criminally against a member of parliament for acts done in the house. (Whiteloeke, 16.) Sir W. Jones (Reports, 228) says he received his prohibition to sit in court in the beginning of Michaelmas Term 1630, and that he forbore till he died. The interval between the two events was but short, for his de cease took place on November 18, at his house iu the Savoy. He was buried in the church of Wolvercote, near Oxford, where there is a splendid monument to him and his two vrives. (Fasti Oxon. i. 356.) His contemporary Judge Croke (Car. 208) describes him as 'a profoundly learned man, and of great integrity and courage ; ' and T-oMe-c '.(Worthies, ii. 260) joins his testimony to the same effect, adding that he 'was most passionate as Sir John, most patient as Judge Walter ; ' and that such was his gi-avity that once when Judge 702 WALTHAM Denham said to him, 'My lord, you are not merry,' he an.swered, ' Merry enough for a judge.' In the year after his eleva tion he obtained a curious licence for him self and his wife, and any four friends invited to his table, to eat meat on the prohibited days, on payment of I8s. 4^. per annum to the parish where he resided. (Rymer, xviii. 309.) His first wife was Margaret, daughter of William Offiey, Esq., an eminent London merchant ; his second was Anne, daughter of William Wytham, Esq., of Leastone in YorksMre, and relict of Sir Thomas Bigges, of Lenohwike in the county of Worcester, baronet. By the latter he left no issue, but by the former he had four sons and four daughters. His eldest son was created a baronet in I64I, but the title became ex tinct in 1731. WALTHAM, John db (Bishop of Salis- bitet), was bom at Waltham, near Grimsby, in LincoMshire, in the church of which his father and mother were buried, with the fol io-wing monumental inscription (ArcheeoL Journ. VU. 389) : — Hie jacent Johes et Margareta txs! ei qnond'm pater et mater Joh'is "Walth'm nup' Sar' Ep'l quor' aiabj p'piciet' deus. ame'. It is not kno-wn whether he was a clerk of the Chancery before he received his patent as keeper of the RoUs from Richard IL, on September 8, 1381. He held the place for more than five years, during which, on the allegation that it was incumbent upon Mm to visit his archdeaconry, he ob tained a patent enabUng him, as often as he should a'bsent himself for that or any other reasonable cause, to depute any person, whom the chancellor should consider suf ficient, to exercise his office m his absence, the power of such deputy to cease after his retum. It appears, from a petition of the Com mons in the reign of Henry V. (Rot Pari. iv. 84), that he extended the jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery by the mtroduction of the writ of subpcena ; a form of proceed ing of which they complained, but which, the king refusing to discontmue it, has sur vived to the present time. On the discharge of the chancellor, Ri chard le Scrope, from July 11 to Sep tember 10, 1382, he was one of the persons to whom the custody of the Great Seal was entrusted till the appointment of a new chancellor. In 1386 he twice performed the same duties: on one occasion, from February 9 to March 28, two clerks of the Chancery were associated with him ; but on the other, from AprU 28 to May 14, he acted alone. After the death of his predecessor, Wil liam de Burstall, he became keeper of the House of Converts, a benefice which was WAEBDRTON ever after appended to the office of master of the Rolls. He resigned both on October 24, 1386, and was then appointed keeper of the privy seal. (Rot. Pari, Ui, 229.) In the meantime his ecclesiastical pre ferments were numerous. He became suc cessively canon of York, archdeacon of Richmond, master of Sherbum Hospital, Durham, and sub-dean of York, and had not long resigned the mastersMp ofthe Roll* before he was elected Bishop of SaUsbury, the papal provision being dated April 3, 1388, (Rymer, vii. 369, 416 ; Surtees' Dur ham, i. 138 ; Le Neve, 258, 826,) He was called upon to serve the responsible office of treasurer in 1891, 14 Richard U., and he retained it tUl his death, about September 17, 1395. The favour -with wMch he was regarded by his sovereign, testified by the various dignities he received, was more strongly evidenced at Ms death, when the Mng, notwithstanding the murmurs of many ob jectors, caused Ms remams to be interred m the royal chapel of Westmmster Abbey, where they now Ue near the monument of" Edward I. He was one of the bishops who resisted the right of Archbishop Courteneye to visit his diocese, but was soon frightened into submission ; for vrithm two days after sen tence of excommunication was pronounced against him he underwent the visitation. (Godwin, 348.) WALTHAM, William de, was doubtless in some way related to the above, but how does not clearly appear. He became keeper of the Hanaper about 18 Richard IL, 1394,. and had, with the master of the Rolls, the temporary custody of the Great Seal on October I. He granted a messuage and a shop in St. Martin's-le-Grand, London, to- the abbot and convent of Croyland, in 21 Richard IL, after which date we find no- further mention of Ms name. (Cal. Ing. p. m. Ui. 219.) "WALTHAM, Rogee. There was a Roger de Waltham who was keeper of the ward robe in the latter part of the reign of Ed ward H. (Rot ParL ii. 883, 463), and it seems not improbable that this person was not only the progenitor of both the above,. but also of this Roger Waltham, the baron of the Exchequer. Of the latter, as of those of his coadjutors on that bench, scarcely any memorials can be found. All that is known of him is that he was appointed a baron in 1418, 6 Henry V. (CaL Rot Pat 267) ; but we have not the date of his resignation or his death. He was not, however, re-appointed by Henry VL, so that he could not have held his place more than four years. WAEBTJETON, Peiee,' descended, mdi- rectly, from the ancient Cheshire family of "Warburton and Arley, was the son of WARBURTON Thomas Warburton (an illegitimate son of John Warburton of North-wich in that county), and Anne, the daughter of Richard Maisterson of Winnington. (Family Pedi gree.) He was bom at North-wich, and began Ms legal studies at Staple Inn (where Ms arms are in the south window of the hall), finishing them at LmcoM's Inn. By the latter he was called to the bar in 1572, be came one of the governors in 1581, and was elected Lent reader in 1584. (Dugdcde's Orig. 253, 261.) He was then, and for some time after, resident in a mansion caUed the Black HaU, Watergate Street, Chester, for merly the house of the Grey Friars ; and in this year he was recommended by Henry Earl of Derby to the mayor of Chester, to be an alderman of that city. (HarL MSS. 2178.) Though it is evident, from the large purchases he made in the coimty, that he had a considerable practice as a barrister, it was probably chiefly in the provinces, for his name does not occur in the Reports of Westminster till 1589, four years before he took the degree of the coif, on November 29, 1593. In September 1693 he was ap pointed vice-chamberlain of Chester, and m November 1599 he appears as one of the commissioners ' de schismate supprimendo,' (Peck's Desid. Cur. b, v, I ; Egerton Papers, 192 ; Rymer, 386,) His elevation to the bench at Westmin ster soon foUowed, his patent as a judge of the Common Pleas bemg dated November 24, 1600, Kmg James renewed it on his accession, and knighted him. In none of the state trials at which he was present does he seem to have taken a prominent part, and no record remains of his argument in the great case of the post nati. Cham berlain, the letter-writer, records that in October I6I6 he was in disgrace at comt for hanging a Scotch falconer of the king, contiary to express commands. (CaL State Papers [1611-18], 398.) He died on Sep tember 7, 1621, at Grafton Hall in Cheshire, a stately building erected by Mmon a manor he purchased after he became a judge. He was buried in the church of Tilston, the parish in which the manor is situate. (Or- merods Cheshire.) He was thrice married. His first wife was Margaret, daughter and sole heir of George Barlow, of Dronfield- Woodhouse in Derbyshire ; his second was Elizabeth, daughter and coheir of Sir Thomas Butler, of Bewsey in Lancashire; and his third was Alice, daughter and coheir of Sir Peter Warburton, of Arley HaU. By the first only he had issue. His son John died in infancy, and Ms only surviving daughter, Elizabeth, inherited all his rich possessions. By her marriage with Sir Thomas Stanley, of "Wever and Alderley, she is the ancestress of the present Lord Stanley of Alderley. ¦ WARD 703 ¦WAEBTJETON, Petee, was a dfrect de scendant from the same family as the above. It originated from one of five brothers who came over -with the Conqueror, and who were aU largely rewarded. The township of Warburton in Cheshire was acquired by a younger sou, one of whose descendants, Peter, first assumed its name in the reign of Edward IL, and it has been since home by his posterity. The seat of Arley Hall in the same county was bmlt in the time of Henry VIL, and thenceforward became the residence of the family. The second Peter Warburton, in legal biography, was the grandson of Peter the purchaser of Hefferston Grange, who was the third son of Sir Peter "Warburton, of Arley, knight. He was born m 1588, and acquired the rudiments of the law in Staple Inn, of which he was a member m 161S, probably completing his studies at Lm coln's Inn, where several of his family had previously been educated. The first account of him is that he was appointed by the Long Parliament in March 1647 one of the judges in Wales, and that John Bradshaw and he were j omed together on the Chester Circuit. His next advance was on June 1, 1649, when he was raised to the bench at Westminster as justice of the Common Pleas ( Whiteloeke, 240, 406, 407), in which character he was one of the commissioners for the trial of John Lilbum in October following, but he does not seem to have taken any active part in it. At a later period, apparently about June 1655, he was removed to the Upper Bench, but the date is not precisely given. He is mentioned as sitting in that court in Style's and Siderfin's Reports, and on the trial in 1657 of Miles Sindercome for attempting to murder the protector, (iState Trials, iv. 1269, V, 841,) His name does not appear in Siderfin's Reports after Easter Term 1659, and, though he did not die till Fe bruary 26, 1666, his name is not among the judges who were named by the Rump Parliament m January 1660, nor among the Serjeants re-made by Charles H. He was buried at Fetcham in Surrey, (Ormerods Cheshire, ii, 93 ; Family inf. ; Nichols's Lit. Anecdotes, v. 529.) -WAED, William, was an officer of the Exchequer, and in 1 Henry V,, 1413, was appomted -to audit the accounts of the re ceivers, &c,, of the duchy of Comwall, (Devon's Lssue Roll, 383,) In the first year of the folio-wing reign he was constituted kmg's remembrancer ; and on May 26, 1426, 4 Henrv VI,, he became a baron of that court (CaL Rot Pat 269, 273) ; but how long he retamed his seat on the bench does not appear, -WABS, Edwaed, is described by Noble (Grangei-, ii, 181) as a native of Northamp tonshire ; and Luttrell (iv. 277) says [that 704 WARD in 1697 he purchased an estate in that county of 2000/. a year. He was called to the bar by the Inner Temple m 1670, and soon got into good practice. The tendency of his political opinions may be inferred from Ms being engaged by Lord Russell to argue points of law on his trial in 1683. He had married m 1676 EUzabeth, the third daughter of Mr, Thomas Papillon, of Acrise in Kent, a merchant of London, who was afterwards a candidate for the office of sheriff of that city in the famous contest that took place in 1683, He brought an action against Sir WiUiam Pritchard, the lord mayor, for a false return, and the lord mayor in his turn brought an action agamst Mr. Papillon for a malicious arrest. Mr. Ward was one of the coimsel employed to defend his father-in-law, and being ob noxious to Sir George Jeffreys, before whom it was tried, not only on account of his politics, but of his known connection with the defendant, the chief justice took the opportunity of attempting to browbeat him. "While making a very temperate statement, and endeavouring to show that there was probable cause for the arrest, Jeffreys rudely mtermpted him, telUng Mm that he did not understand the question at all, but that he launched out in an ocean of discourse that was wholly wide of the mark, and desired Mm not 'to make excursions ad captandum populum, for he would suffer none of his enamels nor his garnitures.' On Mr. Ward's attempting to explain, Jef freys repeated his remarks so insultingly that the people hissed. This of course made the chief justice more irate, but at length he was obliged to succumb, silenced . by the respectful firmness of Mr. Ward, and by a confirmatory sentence from Ser jeant Maynard. (State Trials, ix. 589, x. 386 ; Topog. and GeneaL iU. 36, 611.) In 1687 Ward was elected a bencher of his inn, and at the Revolution he modestly declined a judgeship that was offered to him. But on March 30, 1693, he accepted the office of attomey-general ; and on June 8, 1696, he was appointed chief baron of the Exchequer, and knighted. In this office he remained during King WiUiam's Ufe, and nearly all the reign of Queen Anne. For a brief interval of three weeks m May 1700 he held the Great Seal as one of the WARENNE nence, and the family is now represented by G. Ward Hunt, Esq., the descendant of Jane, the chief baron's eldest daughter, and member for North Northamptonshfre. (!Ex inf. T. Papillon, Esq., of Crowhurst.) WAEE, Richaed de, who was elected abbot of Westminster, December 15, 1258, was placed at the head of the commission of justices itinerant into the three northem counties m 6 Edward L, 1278 ; and in that year he was sent on an embassy to John Duke of Brabant, to negotiate a marriage between that prince's eldest son and Mar garet, the king's daughter. His name does not appear on any future iter. He presided nearly twenty-five years, durmg wMch he procured many immuni ties for the abbey, and adorned it vrith the mosaic pavement before the high altar, the rich materials of which he brought from Rome. Besides the employments above mentioned, he was engaged in 1261 in an embassy to France, and in 1281 was trea surer of the Exchequer, in which office he died on December 2, 1288, this epitaph bemg placed over his tomb : — Abbas Eichardus de Ware, qui requiescat Hie, portat lapides, quos hue portavit ab Drbe. (Monasticon, i. 278 ; Madox, U, 37,) WAEENNE, William de (Eael Wa-, EENNE and Eael op Stteeet). The Nor man family of Warenne was ennobled long before the conquest of England, bearing the name of St, Martin before the earldom of Warenne was conferred upon them. WilUam de W.irerme was distantly related to the Conqueror, his aunt Gunnora having been that prince's great-grandmother. This connection was further cemented by his subsequent marriage with Gundreda, one of the daughters of King WiUiam aud Ma tUda. An attempt has lately been made to prove that she was the daughter of Matilda by a former maniage with Ger- bodo, an avoue of St. Bertin, at St, Omer (ArcheeoL Journ. iii, 1, 26) ; but the hy pothesis is fully and satisfactorUy over turned by an able paper mthe ' Archaeologia '¦ (xxxU, 108). He was entrusted vrith a command at the battle of Hastmgs, and greatly contri buted to its successful result. In reward. commissioners, (Clarendon's Diary, ii, 273; LuttreU, i. 522 ; I Loi-d Raymond, 67, 566.) He seems to have been an honest and in telligent judge_, with sufficient legal know ledge and discretion ; but his name is not distinguished by any prominence of cha racter. He died at his house in Essex Stieet on July 16, 1714, a fortnight before his royal mistress, and was buried at Stoke Doyle in the county of Rutland. By his wife he had twelve children, 'Two of his sons became lawyers of considerable emi- the la-rish Conqueror conferred upon Mm lordships and lands in almost every part of the Mngdom, his share of the spoil amount ing to 298 manors. He bmlt castles at Reigate in Surrey, Castle Acre in Norfolk, Conisburgh m "yorkshire, and Lewes in Sussex, at the latter of which he fixed his rSSlflGTlCfl When the king left England in 1073 he and Richard Fitz-Gilbert were appointed chief justiciaries of the kingdom. Their government was principally distinguished by overcoming the rebelUon raised by the Earls of Hereford and Norfolk ; but they 'WARENNE disgraced their victory by erueUy ordering the right feet of their prisoners to be am- nutated — a barbarous practice for which they had the example of the kmg m some of his Norman wars. On the death of the Conqueror, William de Warenne assisted his second son, Wil liam, to mount the throne; and was in Such favour with that monarch that he was created Earl of Surrey at his coronation. He did not long survive this honour, dying in the foUownig June. The two earldoms devolved on his eldest son William, whose son, WiUiam, dying in II48 without male issue, that of Surrey passed with his daughter Isabel to her husband, Hameline Plantagenet, and ultimately, through sis ters, first to the Fitz-Alans, and after wards to the Howards, Dukes of Norfolk, in which title it is now merged. (Barcmage, i. 73 ; Horsfields Lewes, i. 116 ; Turner, Lingard, &c.) 'WAEENNE, Rbsinald db, was grandson of the above William, and was one of the sons of the second WiUiam, who succeeded to both earldoms, by his wife EUzabeth, daughter of Hugh the Great, Earl of Ver- mandois, and widow of Robert Earl of Mellent. He was appointed by the convention be t-ween King Stephen and Henry Duke of Normandy to have the custody of the castles of Bellencumbre and Mortimer in Normandy. Under Henry II, he became an attendant at the court, and his name ap pears as the first of the witnesses to a con cord at the Exchequer soon after Richard de Luci was made sole chief justiciary, {Madox, i. 216,) He naturally took the part of the king m the contest with Becket ; but his devotion to the cause was somewhat too violent, if it be true that he threatened to cut off the archbishop's head when he landed m England. But although he joined Gervase de Comhill, the sheriff of Kent, in appearing on the shore of Sandwich on that occasion, the mtervention of John of Oxford prevented any mischief From the 14th to the 28rd Henry IL, 1168-1177, he was regularly employed as a justice itinerant, his pleas appearing in twenty-one counties. (1W, was removed to the King's Bench, where he sat as judge above six years more, (1 Siderfin, 4 ; Pari. Hist iv, 4 ; T. Raymond, 217 ; T. Jones, 43.) On April 20, 1679, his patent was re voked at the same time as those of tlireo other judges— viz., Vere Bertie, Thurland, and Bramston. Burnet (i. 450) says that Sir AVilliam Wilde, ' a worthy and ancient judge,' was turned out for his plain free dom in telling Bedlow, one of the witnesses of the Popish Plot, that 'he was a perjured man, and ought to come no more into court, but go home and repent,' In the precedingFebruary, Green, Berry, and HiU WILDE were tried for the murder of Sir Edmund- bury Godfrey ; and on April 16 Nathaniel Reading was tried for ttmipering with the king's evidence; the convicti6u on both trials being founded materially upon the evidence of Bedlow. Justice Wilde took an active part in each, pronouncing sen tence of death in the former, and saying that the conviction of the latter was 'a very good verdict.' So that his discovery cf Bedlow's false swearing and his use of the expressions recorded by Burnet must have happened between April 16 and 26, (State Trials, vU, 222, 261.) He survived his dismissal only seven months, dying on November 28, 1679. He was buried in the Temple Church. He appears to have been well grounded in the law, and an honest and considerate judge. Sir Henry Yelverton's Reports were published by him in French in 1661, when he was king's serjeant, and in English in 1074, when he was judge. His residence when recorder waa in Great St, Bartho- lomew'a Close, and afterwards at Lewis ham, Kent, until he purchased the manor of Goldston, or Goldstanton, in Ash in the same count)'. He married three wives. The name of the first is not recorded ; that of the second was Jane, daughter of Felix Wilson, of HanweU in Middlesex; and the third was Frances, daughter of John Berecroft, of Chard in Somersetshire. He had a son by each of the two latter, but both dying with out male issue, the baronetcy became ex tinct. (Add MSS. 5607, 65* ; Hasted, i. 608, xi. 196.) WILDE, James Plaisted (Loed Pen zance), is the fourth son of Edward Archer Wilde, Esq., an eminent attorney and soli citor in I^oudon, for which city and the county of Middlesex he served the office of sheriff in 1828. His father was the brother of the late Lord Truro, who for some time was engaged in that branch of the legal profession. He Wiis born in 1816, and after his pre liminary education at Winchester School proceeded to Trinity College, Cambridge, where he took his degrees of B.A. iu 1838 and M.A, in 1842, With so much legal blood in his veins he was naturally devoted to the same profession, and, having been en tered of the society of Lincoln's Inn, was called to the bar in 1839. He attached himself to the Northern Circuit, and in the next year was appointed junior counsel to the Excise and Customs. Soon distinguish ing himself by his deep knowledge of mer cantile and maritime law, he rapidly ad vanced in professional reputation ; in 1855 heobtained an acknowledged lead as queen's counsel, and in 1859 he was made counsel to the duchy of Lancaster, He was appointed a baron of the Exche- WILDE 7.35 quer on April 13, I860, and was thereupon knighted ; and had not sat in that court more than three years and four months before the lamented death of that excellent judge Sir Cresswell Cresswell occasioned a vacancy in the Court of Probate and Di vorce, It speaks highly of the judicial ability which Sir James Wilde had exhi bited that he should have been called upon to undertake the responsible and delicate duties attached to the office of chief judge of the new court. He was appointed to it on August 26, 1863, and so satisfactory has been his performance of its duties that it is the universal wish, both of the bar and the public, that he ma)' long be able to undergo the heavy and incessant labour that devolves upon him. He was honoured with a seat in the privy council ; and on April 6, 1869, he was called up to the House of Peers by the title of Lord Penzance. He has shown that he is not merely a careful administrator of the law, but also an able analyst of its principles. In an ex cellent address delivered by him as presi dent of the department of jurisprudence and amendment of the law, in a late meeting of the Social Science Congress at York, he gave a rapid account of our original social institutions, of the gradual formation of the laws that regulated them, of the various additions that the advances of civilisation necessitated, and of the evils that arose from the complication occasioned by the admix ture of the new enactments with the old, which, though obsolete, remained unre pealed. He pictured the consequent diffi culties felt by the judges, which compelled them frequently, in order to do justice, to become legislators instead of interpreters; and in pointing out that the cases they de cided were so numerous, and the decisions they pronounced were often ao conflicting, the learned lecturer declared that he could see no remedy but in a Digest, bringing together the broad principles on which the common law reposes, and which ta.citly guide the decisions of our courts. He married Lady Mary Bouyerie, the 3'0iinge3t daughter of William, third Earl of Radnor. WILDE, Thomas (Loed Tkueo), The career of Thomas Wilde affords a most un common instance of the rise from the lowest to the highest step in the law, passing through the different grades of attorney, barrister, serjeant, king's serjeant, solicitor and attorney general, chief j ustice, and lord chancellor. He was born on July 7, 1782, in Warwick Square, and was the second son of Mr. Thomas Wilde, an attomey-at-law, by his wife, Margaret Anne Knight, whose two other sons were brought up in the same pro fession ; the elder becoming a barrister and ultimately chief justice at the Cape of Ciood 736 WILDE Hope ; and the younger, Edward Archer Wilde, holding a high rank as an attorney in London, the father of the above James Plaisted "Wilde, Lord Penzance. Thomas Wilde received his education at St. Paul's School, and in after life showed how much he appreciated the advantages he had derived from that establishroent,_by presenting to it 1000/., the interest of which he directed to be annually expended in prizes to the best scholars. He was admitted as an attomey in 1805, and continued to prac tise with great success in that department for nearly twelve years. In 1818 he married Mary, daughter of WilUam WiUman, Esq., and widow of William Devaynes, Esq., the banker. At this time, dissatisfied with the limited sphere in which he acted, and con scious that his powers were adapted to a more extended range, he entered the Inner 'Temple, and was called to the bar on Fe bruary 7, 1817, being then in his thirty- fifth year. Overcoming all the obstacles in the way of one who, as it were, intrudes himself into a higher branch of his profession, he almost instantly acquired a con.siderable proportion of business. He is said to have conquered an impediment in hia speech, which pre vented him from uttering certain words, by forming a list of synonymes, and substi tuting them whenever the words occurred which he could not pronounce. This per severance was his peculiar characteristic, and exemplified itself so remarkably in every cause in which hewas engaged that he won general confidence. His firmness and inde pendence secured the attention of the judges; and the character he had thus acquired, with his reputation for the power of precise ar rangement and for extraordinary industry, no doubt caused him to be selected, in 1820, when he had been only three years at the bar, as assistant counsel in the defence of Queen Caroline, who waa so pleased with his exertions on her behalf that she ap pointed him one of her executors. This naturally raised Mr. Wilde in profeaaional estimation, and his business increased so greatly that he felt warranted in accepting the degree of the coif when offered to him, in Easter 1824, by Lord Eldon, although as a whig he was opposed to that nobleman's political principles. In 1827 he had a fur ther advance m being made king's serjeant. He attained so prominent a lead in the Common Pleas that in a, short time there was scarcely a single cause tried in that court in which he was not engaged on one ."ide or the other. Eortunate were those litigants who secured hia services, for inde fatigable were his exertions for -their suc cess ; and hia were not the perfunctory consultations too commonly granted for a short half-hour, but real discussions into the points to be argued, and the evidence WILDE to be given in their support. Lord Tenter den ia said to have described him as having ' industry enough to succeed without talent, and talent enough to succeed without in dustry.' Not satisfied -with his forensic triumphs, he sought parliamentary distinction; and in May 1881, after many previous strug gles, he secured his seat for Newark-on- Trent, a borough which he continued to represent through the subsequent parUa ments till I84i, when he was returned for Worcester. In the senate he took the liberal side of politics, and was remarkable more for the clearness of his statements and. closeness of his arguments than for the fascination of his eloquence. His steady support of the whig party, and his com manding position at the bar, naturally re commended him to the government for employment, and on February 9, 1840, he was consequently made solicitor-general and knighted. In the foUo-wing June he lost his wife, after a union of twenty-seven years; and having remained a widower for five years, he married Augusta Emma D'Este, the daughter of the Duke of Sussex and L.ady Augusta Murray, whose legitimacy he had previoualy endeavoured to establish before the House of Lords. In June 1841 , for the two months during which the administration of Lord Mel bourne was doomed to last, he fiUed the office of attorney-general, of course re tiring from it with the mmister. For the five following years he remained out of office, but on the restoration of the whig party under Lord John Russell in July 1846, he was replaced as .attomey-general, to be again removed in three or fom- days, on being promoted to the office of lord chief justice of the Common Pleas on the 7th of that month, a vacancy in that court baring been occasioned by the death of Sir Nicolas Tindal only the day before. When he had presided in the Common Pleas for four years, he was constituted lord chancellor of Great Britain, receiving the Great Seal on July 15, 1850, together with a patent of peerage, by which he whs created Baron Truro of Bowes in Middle sex, This high dignity he held for nine teen months only, the prime minister, Lord ,Iohn Russell, being compelled to retire in Februai'y 1852, when Lord 'Truro was ne cessarily superseded. It must not have been the least gratify ing circumstance attending his elevation to receive an affectionate address of congra tulation from nearly five hundred members of that branch of the profession to which he had originally belonged, expressive ff their strong appreciation of his honourable conduct through life, of his zealous and indefatigable exertions as an advocate, and WILDE of the unvarying courtesy they had expe rienced at his hands. This address was accompanied by a request that his lordship should sit for his portrait, to be placed in the hall of the Incorporated Law Society, where it now ornaments the walls, and reminds the young student that by personal industry and exertion he may raise himself to the same honours. During the short period in which Lord Truro held the Seal he was deeply engaged in promoting various important law reforms. He appointed a commission to enquire as to the pleading and practice of his court, and assisted Lord St, Leonard.«t, who suc ceeded him in his office, in carrying into effect the most important regulations in the report. He established a system of paying the fees of the court by means of stamps, and greatly reduced their amount. He effected that most important change in the constitution of the court, by the appoint ment of the Court of Appeal, which at once remedied the great evil of delay so long complained of, and relieved the chancellor of one of the most oppres.9ive parts of his duties. His exertions were not limited to reforming the Court of Chancery ; they were extended also to the common law courts, with regard to which he originated many important changes, which have been greatly beneficial to the suitors, in preventing delay and reducing expense. Both as chief jus tice and chancellor he showed the most untiring patience, and the judgments he pronounced have been considered by the profession to be highly satisfactory, Itis no small proof of their value that only one was appealed from, though many of them were reversals of decisions of the vice- chancellors, and that one was affirmed. His courtesy and kindness were not con fined to his professional clients nor to his political partisans, but were distinctive marks of Ms general character. He exhi bited a pleasing proof of his generous feel ing when Sir Frederick Thesiger became solicitor-general in 1844, and before be had acquired any experience in his office had the additional duties of the attorney-general thrown upon him by the illneaa and con sequent absence of Sir William FoUett, Though Sir Frederick was of the adverse party in politics, and a coolness had existed between them from their having been opposed to each other in the contest for Newark, Sir Thomas Wilde, as soon as he saw the difficulty of Sir Frederick's posi tion, most liberally offered and gave every assistance and advice in his power as to the professional, apart from the political, duties of the office. Lord Truro survived his retirement for nearly four years, during two of which he suft'ered much from a painful iUness, which terminated in his death on November II, WILLES 737 1866, at his house in Eaton Square, He was buried in tbe mausoleum erected by Sir Augustus D'Este, at the church of St. La-wrence, Ramsgate. By his vrife he had issue two sons and a daughter, who ia married to her cousin Charles Norris Wilde, Esq., the brother of Lord Penzance, Lady 'Truro, soon after his lordship's death, gracefully offered the whole of his law books to the library of the House of. Lords, and must have felt amply repaid for her generous gift by the encomiums that were uttered by every leading peer when accepting it, on the legal attainments and judicial excellence of her husband, and on hia honourable exertions for the public and the disinterestedness that characterised him. WILFOED, Geevase de, belonged to a family who possessed the manors of Clif ton and Wilford in Nottinghamshire, one branch of which used the name of CUfton, and the other that of Wilford, He was of the latter, and, having been remembrancer (Hospitallers in England, 284), was made baron of the Exchequer on January 20, 1841, 14 Edward III. He was instituted to tbe living of Bamack in Northampton shire, and in 18 Edward III. he assigned various lands in Norfolk to the prior and convent of Shouldham in the latter county. He became chief baron on April 7, 1850, and presided in the court till 1861, The entry on the roll states that he was exone rated, being broken down by age. In 1359 he obtained the Bishop of Lincoln's licence ' alere et fovere pueros sub virga magistri, in lectura, cantu, et grammatica facultate, ad augmentum ciiltus divini in sua parochia, et eosdem inlbrmare, clericis post pestem diminutis.' ( Ihoresby's Notts, i. 105; Cal, Inq. p. m. ii. 119 ; Cal. Rot Pat! 188, 159, 174, 222 ; Ellis's Lettei-s, Sfc, 325.) 'WILLES, John, was of one ofthe most an cient families in "Warwickshire. They were settled at Newbold Comyn in that county, in the church of which is a memorial of one of them in stained glass dated 1577, He was the son of the Rev. Dr, John Willes, rector of Bishop's Ickington and canon of Lichfield, by Anne, daughter of Sir William Walker, mayor of Oxford ; and his brother Edward became in 1743 Bishop of Bath and Wells, (Berry's Gene alogies, Berks.) He was bom on November 29, 1686, and received his education at Lichfield gram mar school, and Trinity College, Oxford. Entering Lincoln's Inn, he was called to the bar in June 1713. He then went the Oxford Circuit, and arrived at the dignity of king's counsel in 1719, In hia_ early life he was much more noted for hilarity and licentiousness than for learnmg and 3b 738 WILLES ability, though he was by no means defl- cient in the latter. He sought advance ment by entering into the career of politics under the patronage of Sir Robert Wal pole, and in the parliament that met in October 1722 he procured a seat for Launceston. In May 1726 he was appointed second judge on the Chester Circuit ; and thereupon vacating hia seat for Launceston, he was not re-elected ; but a vacancy soon after occurring in Weymouth, he was re turned for that borough. In the parUa ment of 1728 he represented West Looe ; and before its close he was obUged to un dergo two re-elections, one on his being promoted to the chief justiceship of Chester in February 1729, and the other on being appointed attorney-general in January 1734. He was agam returned for West Looe to the new parliament of 1735, and sat for it till he was advanced to the bench. His speech against the repeal of the Septennial Act in 1734 is the only recorded specimen of hia aenatorial eloquence, and appears to deserve the praise it elicited. He was knighted as attorney-general, and filled that office exactly three years when in January 1787 he was appointed lord chief justice of the Common Pleas. ¦ Over that court he presided for nearly flye- and-twenty years, during the whole of which period he waa hankering after the Great Seal, which, when it was at laat within his grasp, he lost by his own folly. He was in perpetual expectation that the chancellorship of Lord Hardwicke would be terminated by a change of ministry, and took such measures as he thought would secure him the succession. During the re belUon of 1745 he endeavoured to organise a regiment of volunteers among the lawyers, for the defence of the king's person, of which he was to be the colonel ; but if we may believe a satirical song of the time, he ne-v'er got Ms commission ; and the danger being ended, his majesty declined their ser vices. The poet slyly concludea with this couplet (Ex inf. W. Durrant Cooper, Esq., F.S.A.) :— If you ask 'why a judge should attempt the command, I'll tell you — To take the Great Seal sword in hand. When at last Lord Hardwicke did re sign. Sir John was designed to take bis place ; but some objection being made by George II. to give him tbe sole power, he waa obliged to content himself with being the firat of three commissioners to whom the Great Seal was entrusted. They held it for seven months, from November 19, 1766, to June 80, 1757, when the Duke of Newcastle's and Mr. Pitt's aduiinistratio" commenced. Sir John -was then ofl'ered the chancellorship, which ho was willing WILLES enough to accept, but stipulated that a peerage should be added. This was refused, and he, thinking to obtain his terms by standing out, made this a condition sine quit non. (!Harris's Lord Hardwicke, iii, 139.) Great then was his confusion and indignation on finding that the ministers had taken him at his word, and appointed the attoi'uey-general, Sir Robert Henley, lord keeper. He lived four years after wards, and died at the advanced age of seventy-six on December 15, 1761. He was buried in the family vault at Bishop's Ickington. That in the exercise of his judicial func tions, both as chief justice and first com- miaaioner, he showed great leammg and ability, the reporta of Ms decisions prove ; but out of court he was ambitious and m- triguing, joining the different factions as he thought they would promote his riews. He had a great enmity against Lord Hard- -wicke, whom he looked upon as his rival, and as impeding the royal favour ; and Ms lordship had little respect for him, on account of his questionable morality, and Ms indiscreet involvements, Horace Wal pole (Memoirs, i. 77), who was inclmed to 'be one of his admirers, teUs a story which shows that even when chief justice he stUl pursued his old pro pensi tities. ' A grave person came to reprove the scandal he gave, and to tell him that the world talked of one of his maidservants being with child. WiUes said, "What is that to me ? " The monitor answered, "Oh ! but they say it is by your lordship." " And what is that to you ? " was the reply,' He married Margaret, daughter i^nd co heir of — Brewster, Esq,, of Worcester, and had by her four sons and four daughters, WILLES, Edwaed, was the second son of the above, and was called to the bar at Lm coln's Inn in February 1726. He is often confounded with his namesake who waa lord chief baron of the Irish Exchequer fi-om 1757 to 1766, and who died in 1768. He acquired the rank of king's counsel in 1756 ; and in 1766, five years after his father's death, he was made solicitor-general. On the death of Lord Bowes, chancellor of Ireland, in 1767, attempts were made to confer that appointment upon him ; but he was obliged to content himself with a seat in the King's Bench, to which he was pro moted on January 27, 1768, Soon after tbe questions relative to Mr. Wilkes came before the court, exciting the public to an mtenae degree. The judges were unani mous in their opinion on the various points raised in his favour, and, though they were then charged with corrupt bias, calmer times have confirmed their judgment. In the dean of St. Asaph's case Mr. Justice Willes dissented from the other judges, and his declaration that juries had the right WILLES to give a general verdict was one of the causes which led to the passing of Mr. Fox's Ubel act. Mr, Justice Willes did not accept the usual honour of knighthood. He outlived all his first coUeagues except Lord Mans field, and after nineteen years of judicial Ufe, unmarked by any other peculiar cha racteristics than a certain flippancy of manner and a neglect of costume, he died on January 14, 1787, and was buried at Bumham in Berkshire, By his wife, Anne, daughter of the Rev. Edward Taylor, of Sutton, Wilts, he left three sons, (4 Bur- row, 2143 ; I Term Reports, 651 ; State Trials, xix. 1091, 1123, xxi, 1040,) WILLES, Jambs Shaw, is one of the present judges of the Court of Common Pleas, He belongs to an Irish family of English extraction. His grandfather and father, both named James, were resident at Cork, the former as a merchant, and the latter as a physician. His mother was Elizabeth Aldworth, daughter of John Shaw, Esq,, mayor of Cork in 1792, He was born in Cork on February 18, I8I4, and flnished his education at Trinity' Col lege, Dublin, where he took his degree of B,A. in 1836, and was called to the bar at the Inner Temple on June 12, 1840, He edited Smith's ' Leading Cases ' in con junction vrith Mr, Justice Keating in 1847, another edition of which was pubUshed by them in 1856, and in 1850 he was selected as a common law commissioner. His prac tice was principally in the Court of Exche quer, where he fllled the post of tubman froin 1851 till his elevation to the bench on July 3, 1855, as a judge of the Court of Common Pleas, when he was knighted. A pregnant proof of the estimation wMch he commands as a lawyer ia afforded by his being placed on the Indian law commission in 1861, and on the EngUsh and Irish law commission in 1862, Devoting his body as well as his mind to the service of the country, and considering that 'the post of honour is the private station,' he has served in the ranks of the Inns of Court Volunteer Corps since its , formation in 1859, In I860 the degree of LLD, was conferred upon him by his alma mater, ' stipendiis condonatis.' He married Helen, daughter of Thomas Jennings, Esq., of Cork, WILLIAM, Aechdeacon ob'Heeeeoed from 1200 to 1221, was one of the justiciers present with the king at Bristol in 10 John, 1208, when fines were ackno-wledged before him, but I find no other record of his performance of judicial duties. He had a grant of that portion of the church of Ledbury which Henry Banastre held. Le Neve (118) thinks his name was Fitz- Walter. (Rot Chart. 80,) WILLIAM, Aechdeacon oe Totnbss, WILLIAMS 739 occurs with that dignity as one of the justiciers present in the Curia Regis at W'estminster before whom a fine was levied in 1189. He is not mentioned as archdeacon of Totness in Le Neve's list. 'WILLIAM, David, seems to have been a native of Wales. Among the accounts of the keepers of the House of Converts, now remaining in the records of the Mngdom, his commence m 2 Henry VH., and refer to his appointment on February 22, 1487, that office being then always held in con junction with the mastership of the Rolls. He held the first place among the receivers of petitions in the parliaments that met in 1487 and 1488, but in that of 1491 he was absent. (Rot. ParL xu, 385, 409.) It is not unlikely that this was occasioned by an ilMess which terminated in his death before May 5, 1492, the date of the patent of John Blyth, his successor. WILLIAMS, David, It was not till the reign of Henry VIII, that the Welsh be gan to abandon the practice of changing their names at each generation. The son had previously assumed the Christian namei of his father, uniting it to his own Chris tian name by the word ' ap ' (signifying ' son of '), in the same manner that the word ' Fitz ' was used by the EngUsh in earlier times before surnames were gene rally introduced among them. Thus this judge was originally called David ap Wil liam, his father's name being WiUiam ap Ychan, and it was not till he removed into England that he adopted the simpler ap pellation of David Williams, The father, descended, it is said, from Bleddin ap Maenyrch, lord of Brecknock in 1091, was a substantial yeoman, whose property was situate iu the parish of 'Ystradvelte in Brecknock. By his wife, Margaret, daught.er of Rhys Griffith Bevan, Melin, he had three sons, the youngest of whom, this David, born about 1650, went to seek hia fortune in England. Entering himself at the Middle Temple, he was called to the bar in 1576, and arrived at the post of reader in 1590. Tbis honour was repeated in Lent 1594, as a customary compliment on his taking the degree of the coif, according to his writ of summons dated in the previous November. (Dug dale's Clrig. 2l8.) It may be presumed, from his name not occurrmg in any of the Reports till after he became a serjeant, that his practice was principally in the provinces. That it was considerable may be inferred from his being appointed re corder of Brecon in 1587, and also from his acquisition of many manors and lands at Bampton in Oxfordshire ; at Guemevet, near the Hay, in his native county ; and at Kingston-Bagpuze m Berkshire, where he principally resided, and to the church of which he gave a nuw bell-tower, 3B2 740 WILLIAMS The estimation in which his professional abilities were held appears from his being mentioned by Lord Burleigh aa a proper person to fill a vacancy on the Exchequer bench ; and when King James, soon after his accession, determined to add a fifth judge to each of the two superior courts, Lord Chief Justice Popham, in a letter to Lord EUesmere, dated January 28, 160.3-4, re commended four Serjeants, Danyell, Wil liams, Tanfyld, and Altham, forthe king to make choice of two. Tbe first two were selected, and Williams received his patent as a judge of tbe King's Bench on Fe'bruary 4, and was thereupon knighted. In 1608 he coincided with the majority of tbe judges in the decision pronounced in the case of the post nati (State Trials, ii, 576), but his argument is not reported. Among the 'Egerton Pcipers ' (388, 447) is a letter from Archbishop Abbot to Lord EUes mere, dated January 22, 1611-12, in which, speaking of the condemnation of Legat and Wightman for imputed heresy, he says, ' Mr. Justice Williams was with niee the other day, who maketh no doubt but that the lawe is cleare to burne them. Hee told me also of hia utter dialike of all the Lord Coke his courses,' who seems to have been of a contrary opinion. He died exactly a year after the date of this letter. In his will, which was exe cuted a week before his death, is contained the following curious legac)', which shows the friendly terms on which he Uved with his brethren on the bench : ' And whereas it hath been heretofore agreed between my good and kind brother Warburton and my self that the survivor of us twayne should have the other's best scarlet robes, now I do will that my said good brother War burton shall have the choice of either of my scarlet robes, and he to take that shall best like him, praying him that as he hath lieen a good and kind brother unto me, so he will be a good and kind friend to my children.' He likewise giyea to the lord chanceUor (EUesmere) a great gilt standing cup with a cover, in token of his love and affection, and begs him to be overseer of hia -will. A tablet in old Kingaton church records that his bowels were interred there, but his body was removed for burial to the church of St. John the Evangelist at Bre con, where there is a sumptuous monument to his memory, presenting hia effigy in judicial habiliments. The inscription by himself states that out of nine sons and two daughters only four sons and two daughters remained, and concludes with these linea : — Nuper eram judex, nunc judicis ante tribunal Subsistens paveo; judicor ipse niodo. These children were all by hia first wife, Margaret, a daughter of John Games, of WILLIAMS Aberbran in the county of Brecon, Esq., by a daughter of Sir WiUiam Vaughan, of Porthaml. His second wife was Dorothy, daughter and coheiress of OUver Wells- born, of East Hanney, Berks, Esq., and widow of John Latton, of Kingston in that county, Esq., by whom he had no children. Henry, the eldest of Sir David's surviving sons, received in 1644 the dignity of baronet. He was described of Guernevet, where he entertained King Charles when he was a fugitive after the battle of Naseby. The title became extinct in 1798. WILLIAMS, John ("Bishop oe Lin coln aud Aechbishop oe Yoek), was the youngest of five sons of Edmund WUliams, Esq., a gentleman of an ancient Welsh family, by Mary, the daughter of Owen Wynne, Esq., and was bom at Aberconway in Carnarvonshire, the residence of hia father, on March 25, 1582. From the grammar school of Ruthin he was removed in 1598 to St. John's College, Cambridge. There he pursued his atudiea so diligently, taking it ia said but three hours' sleep out of the twenty-four, and acquired such commendation for his proficency, that when he commenced bachelor of arts in 1603 he was immediately elected fellow of his col lege. His degi-ee of master he took m 1605, and about the same time was ad mitted into clerical orders. He soon after was called to preach before the king at Royston, and was so much admired for his learning and eloquence that Lord Chancellor EUesmere in 1611 appointed him one of his chaplains. In the next year he became proctor to the university, and, though he performed its duties with general applause, he incurred the enmity of the vice-chancel lor. Dr. Gouch, by the activity and earnest ness he displayed in the elections of the headship of St. John's and the chanceUor ship of the university, both of which be came vacant in his year of office. (Royal Tribes of Wales, 149, 163.) At its ter mination he resumed his position as chap lain, and sat in the convocation of 1613 as one of the archdeacons of Wales. The Uvings of Walgrave and Grafton-Dnder- wood in Northamptonshire were soon pre sented to him, to which were added a residentiaryship m Lincoln Cathedral, and a choral place in those of Peterborough, Hereford, and St. David's. Increasing in favour, he was treated with the greatest confidence by the lord chancellor, who frequently discussed with him the causes before tbe court, entrusted him during his illness with various mesaagea on state affairs to the king, and, just previous to his death in 1616, presented him with his manuscript collections for the regulation of parliament and the council board, and the different courts over which he presided, as ' tools to work with,' a legacy of which WILLIAMS Williams soon leamed the value. Bacon offered to retain him in his service, but he declined the honour, and was forthwith sworn one of the royal chaplains. In 1617 he disputed in the schools for his doctor's degree, on the occasion of tbe Archbishop of Spalatro's visit to the university. In September 1619 he was presented with the deanery of Salisbury. In his personal attendance on the king, from being at first conversed with for his learning' and his wit, he came by degrees to be consulted for the wisdom of his counsel. He ingra tiated himself with Buckingham by for warding the favourite's marriage with Lady Katherine Manners, and converting her from the Romish faith. Thus favoured, he waa advanced on July 12, 1620, to the deanery of Westminster; and when the parliament that met in the foUowing .Janu ary began to cry out against the oppressions of the people, and to proceed against Sir Giles Mompesson and other offenders, Buckingham, who feared that be himself might be hit, and the Mng, who knew not where the bolt might fly, appealed for advice to the dean. He gave them this counsel : ' Swim with the tide, and you cannot be drowned. , . . Throw the cor morants overboard in the storm. , , , Cast all monopolies and patents of griping pro jections into the Dead Sea after them, , , . Damn all these by one proclamation, that the world may see that the king, who is the pilot that sits at the helm, is ready to play the pump to eject such fllth as grew noysome to the nostrils of his people,' Acting on this advice, the storm passed over with only one other victim, Lord Chancellor Bacon, Hacket, with regard to this event, exhi bits a somewhat suspicious reserve, stating merely the fact of Bacon's downfaU, and the dean's surprise at his own elevation. There seems, however, to be no sufficient ground for charging Williams with assist ing in the chancellor's disgrace, and still less with advising the Mng and Buckingham to prevent him from defending himself Any defence was hopeless, and WilUams's recommendation not to dissolve the par liament for the purpose of stopping the proceedings appears to havebeenashonestly aa it was 'wisely offered, Ben Jonson (Gifford, viii. 462), whose partiality for Bacon is evident more than once in his works, both in prose and verse, would scarcely have addressed a compliniental epigram to Williams on his removal from the Seal, had he been suspected of any underhand or unfriendly dealing towards Bacon. The Seal for the next two months waa placed in the bauds of commissioners, .and, according to Hacket, the dean was con sulted as to the difi'erent candidates for the WILLIAMS 741 office, and was himself selected by the king and Buckingham in preference" to all of them without any application on his own behalf. The latter fact is conflrmed by the record itself, which, in stating his appointment on July 10, 1621, as lord keeper, adds, ' prseter suam expeotationem.' In the previous month he had been swom of the privy council, and designated for tbe bishopric of Lincoln, His consecration was delayed by the unfortunate occurrence which happened to Archbishop Abbot in accidentally killing a man while aiming at a buck ; and at last, in consideration of the lord keeper's scruples, that ceremony was performed by four bishops on November IL Being allowed to retain his deanerjr, his canonry in Lincoln Cathedral, and his living of 'Walgrave, he was fairly subject to the remark made of him, ' that he was a perfect diocese m himself, being at the same time bishop, dean, prebendary, and parson.' He took his seat in the Court of Chancery ou October 9, the flrst day of Michaelmas Term, no ecclesiastic having presided there since Archbishop Heath in the reign of Queen Mary. In the performance of his legal functions he supplied his want of knowledge of the rules of the court by obtaining the frequent assistance of two of the judges. His in dustry was extraordinary, leaving him scarcely any leisure, and, though he was in the habit of checking any unnecessary argument, he became soon a general favourite with the bar. At flrst some of the advocates endeavoured to take advan tage of his inexperience, and one of them, to puzzle him, ' trouled out a motion crammed Uke a granado with obsolete words,, coins of far-fetched antiquity, which had long been disused.' The lord keeper, nothing baffied, answered him ' in a cluster of most crabbed notions, picked out of metaphysics and logic, as categorematical and syncategorematical, and a deal of such drumming stufi',' so that the motioner was foiled at his own weapon, and weU laughed at by the court. In tbe Star Chamber he was ever merci ful in his judgments, and where they were heavy for the sake of example, he intei- ceded with the king to lighten the penalty. He would not only with soft words turn away wrath, but would often venture on a facetious jest to pacify the royal dis pleasure. By his leniency he incurred by turns the suspicions of the antagonistic religious parties, at one time being stig matised as a favourer of Roman Catholics, and at another as one nf tbe Puritans. The former charge may be answered by his opposition to the erection of titular Popish prelates in the kingdom, and the latter by his addition of four scholars to Westininster College, with a Uberal endowment to St, 742 WILLIAMS John's College, Cambridge, and two fellow ships to be chosen out of them, with four rich beneflces for their ultimate provision. In the parliaments over which he pre sided his speeches were marked -with in genuity and vrit, the customary flattery to the king not being altogether omitted, but more delicately administered. But the brightness of his fortune began to be obscured. The fickleness of Buck ingham, and his jealousy of the reliance shown by the king on the lord keeper's judgment, with probably, too, his dis pleasure at Williams's occasional insubjec- tion to his will, were soon exhibited in his attempts to sink the man whom he had aided to raise. His favour had been trans ferred to Bishop Laud, and, taking pre tended offence at some of the lord keeper's proceedings, and indignant at some expres sions of confidence which the king had used, all the cunning of the duke was exerted to hasten Williams's ruin. It was ineffectual, however, during the life of [ King James, who, appreciating his keeper's loyalty and prudence, and admiring his learning and wit, acted steadily as his friend, and preserved him in his office to the end of his reign. But some of the ill eft'ects of the want of the favourite's coun tenance could not fail to be experienced. As soon aa it was perceived that Bucking ham's eye began to look frowningly on the lord keeper, disappointed suitors were ready to complain ol his decrees, and accusations accumulated against him in both houses of parliament. He triumphed over them all. The Commons dismissed seven-and-thirty in one day, and the Lords punished one with the pillory for alander. (Pari. Hist. i. 1399.) King James died in March 1625, and Williams preached his funeral sermon, drawing a parallel between him and Solomon. Though King- Charles retained WilUams as lord keeper, the latter soon felt the instability of his position. Buckingham was more thau ever resolved to effect his ruin, and endeavoured to induce Chief Justice Hobart to complain of his unfitness for his place on account of hia ignorance and inability. The honest judge, though tempted with the promise of the post on Williams's removal, answered, ' My lord, somewhat might have been said at first, but he should do the lord keeper great wrong that said so now.' Buckingham was not_ easily thwarted. The king waa already prejudiced against WUliams, and the grave advice which Jie gave to his majesty and the favomite not to quarrel with the parUament completed hia diafavour. The Seal was taken from him on the 26th of October 1626, and placed in the hands of Sir Thomas Coventry, There was a kind of reconciliation with WILLIAMS Buckingham just before his assas.sination in 1628 ; but Bishop Laud, whom Williams had formerly befriended, then became his bitter enemy, under the supposition that he was a promoter of the Petition of Right, and, what was considered worse, an en courager of the Puritans, Continuing thus in disgrace at court, vexatious com plaints were made against him, all of which failed in their object until 1637, when his enemies succeeded in procuring a con viction in the Star Chamber for a pretended offence committed nine or ten years before, in having revealed the king's secrets, and on a false accusation of tampering ¦with the witnesses, for which he was sentenced to pay a fine of 10,000/., to be imprisoned, and to be suspended from his ecclesiastical functions. This sentence was executed with the greatest rigour. His property was wantonly despoiled under pretence of raising his fine, his person was incarcerated for three years and a half, and his desire to ofl'er submis sion was met by the demand of such degrading and ruinous terms that he felt compeUed to reject them. He only pro-, cured his liberation at last by presenting a petition to the House of Lords m No vember 1640, detailmg his grievances and demanding his writ. On his discharge he forgot his personal complaints in tbe dis tress of the state, and boldly stood up fof Ms order and the monarchy. His conduct, of course, pleased as much as it surprised the king, who not only erased all memorial of the proceedings against him, but admit ted him to his favour, took counsel of him in the difficulties that surrounded the throne, and on December 4, 1641, trans lated him to the archbishopric of York, The cry against the bishops at that time ran high, and twelve of them, of whom the archbishop waa at the head, were soon after his ta^anslation committed to the Tower under a ludicrous accusation of high treason for presentmg a petition to the Peers, complaining that the mob prevented their access to the house, and declaring that whatsoever was done there during their forced absence was invalid and of none effect, Tbe act excluding tbe bishops from parliament having passed during their confinement, the prosecution dropped, and the archbishop and his colleagues were released, after being detained for eighteen weeks, in the course of which Williams was reconciled to Archbishop Laud, then an inmate of the same prison. Retiring to his diocese, the archbishop waa aoon obliged hurriedly to leave his castle of Cawood, in consequence of the advance of Sir Jolm Hotham's son against it ; and after having supplied the king with what aid in men and money he could, he fied to his native country, where he WILLIAMS exerted himself to defend the royal cause. After fortifying Conway Castle at his own expense, he attended the king at Oxford, where he is said to have cautioned his majesty particularly against Cromwell, and to have urged his being either won by great promises or cut off' by stratagem. His subsequent advice to the king to submit to the parliament on terms not being relished, he returned to Conway Castie, in the government of which he was ' superseded the year after by Sir John Owen, under a commission from Prince Rupert. Those who had deposited their money and jewels there were refused resti tution, and the archbishop's appeal to the Mng on their and his own behalf was sUghted; so that when Colonel Milton, with an overpowering force, came into the country on the part of the parliament, they represented their case to the colonel, and, upon his promise to restore to them their property, agreed to assist him in obtaining possession. In doing this they were aided by the archbishop, whose conduct on the occasion subjected him to the imputation of having deserted the king and assisted the rebels. He defended himself by assert ing that, as the king's cause in Wales was past hope, he was justified in obtaimng the restoration of the property of his friends, and in making the best terms he could for his countrymen's immunities. ' From the fideUty of the king he never,' says Bishop Hacket, ' went back an inch,' and when the last scene of the tragedy was over, he deeply mourned his royal master's death in solitary retirement ; his cheerful ness forsook him, and he seldom spoke. He survived the king little more than a year, and died on his birthday, March 25, 1660, at Clodded, in the parish of Egl-wysrose, Carnarvonshire, the house of his kinswoman Lady Mostyn. His body was removed for burial to the church of Llandegai, where his nephew and heir, pir Griffith WiUiams, erected a monument to him, to which his former chaplain. Bishop Hacket, supplied the inscription. It is difficult to form a just estimate of the character of any individual who lived in the times during which Archbishop WilUams flourished. Men's passions were so strong, their prejudices so great, and their animosity against opposite opinions 80 violent, that acts in themselves indif ferent were frequently misinterpreted, and what was lauded by ore party was abused by the other. Clarendon and Heylin, enemies of the archbishop, look with a .jaundiced eye on his whole career; and Bishop Hacket, his chaplain and friend, and Wilson the historian, give perhaps too partial a colouring to everything he did ; so that entire reUance is not to be placed on either. The weight of evidence. WILLIAMS 743 however, clearly preponderates in his favour, though it must be aUowed that, as a counsellor of state, he was too much of a temporiser, and no excuse can justify the casuistry with which he recommended Charles to consent to Strafford's death. But he was honest and sincere, and gene rally wise, in the advice which he offered ; and to the monarchs whom he served he was faithful and true. In person he was dignifled and comely ; in manner affable and kind ; and though in temper he was warm, as most Welshmen are, yet his anger was quickly mollified ; and, notwithstanding the oppressions which he suffered, he showed no wish for revenge. He was laborious in the performance of his duties, both political and clerical, and refined m the choice of his relaxations, music, in which he was a proficient, being his delight. His learning was undoubted ; and his eloquence, according to' tbe fashion of the times, was superior to that of most of hia contemporaries, his allusions and illustrations being more apt and ingenious, and his wit more lively and delicately pointed. He was profusely hospitable in his household, and liberal to leamed poverty, and the sums which he expended in repairing Westminster Abbey, and in building the library at St. John's College,, Cambridge, and the chapel at that of Lincoln, in Oxford, witness his generous munificence. His works were principally on clerical subjects, but that which excited the most observation was entitled ' 'The Holy Table, Name, and Thing,' published in opposition to the innovations introduced by Arch bishop Laud. (Lives by Bishop Hacket and A. Philips ; Clarendon ; and Heylin's Refoi-mation LRobertson].) WILLIAMS, Edwaed Vaubhan, who in 1866 retired from the bench, having served for nearly nineteen years as one of the judges- of the Common Pleas, during the whole of which time he fully maintained the high reputation he bad previously earned by his useful and learned publications, was a law yer from his birth, his father, John Wil liams, Esq., being the serjeant in the reign of George III, who added valuable notes to an edition of Chief Justice Saunders's Reports. 'Though of Welsh extraction, he was born in London, and was educated at Westminster School. He was called to the bar by the society of Lincoln's Inn on June 17, 1828, and na turaUy chose the South Wales and Chester Circuit. In the very next year he com menced his career as an author by publishing an edition of Saunders's Reports, enriching it, in conjunction with the late Mr. Justice Patteson, with admirable notes to his father's edition, bringing the history of the law down to the date of the work. For 744 WILLIAMS the twenty-three years that he remained at the bar he varied his forensic occupations by issuing from the press several other works, among which were a ' Treatise on the Law of Executors,' in 1882, which is in high estimation ; and an edition of Burn's ' Jus tice,' in 1886, in conjunction with Mr, Serjeant D'Oyley, He served ap apprenticeship to the ju dicial office as recorder of Kidwelly, the corporation of which on his resignation ex pressed their high estimation of him for his ' undeniable integrity aa a citizen, and his well-deserved reputation as a profound lawyer.' He was raised to the bench ofthe Common Pleas in October 1846, from -vs'hich failing health obliged bim to retire at the end of Hilary Term 1866, when he was sworn ofthe pri-vy council. He married Jane Margaret, a daughter of the Rev. Walter Bagot, of Pype Hall in Staffordshire. WILLIAMS, John, in whom we had an other example of the union of law and Uterature, and an additional proof that the deepest scholastic attainments are not m- compatible with professional success, was of Welsh extraction, being descended from an ancient family in Merionethshire, but was born at Bunbury in Cheshire, of which his father was vicar, as well as holding a Uving in the former county. He was born in Ja nuary 1777, and imbibed his classical tastes at the grammar school of Manchester, from whence proceeding to the university of Cambridge, he gained a scholarship at Trinity CoUege at the age of eighteen. In his progress he won many prizes, and, gr.-i- duating as B.A. in 1798, he succeeded in obtaining a feUowship after a strenuous conipetition. His legal school was the Middle Temple, where he took his degree of barrister in 1804. On the Northern Circuit and at the Man chester and Chester sessions he made his first attempts, where, though hia progress was slow, his merits were so gi-eat, and his reputation for accuracy, ingenuity, and boldness became so well established, that m 1820 he was selected to assist Mr. Brougham and Mr. Denman in the defence of Queen Caroline, in the course of which he fully confirmed the character he had obtained. This naturally made him a marked man ; but, though it increased bis professional em ployment, it delayed his acquisition of pro fessional rank. This, however, may perhaps be accounted for by his attacks upon Lord Chancellor Eldon in the House of Commons, of which he had been elected a member for Lincoln in 1823. No sooner had parliament met thau Mr. WiUiams commenced that series of motions upon tbe delays in Chan cery which ultimately, after some years, led to a commission of enquiry and the introduction of bills for reforming the pro- WILLOUGHBY ceedings in that court, Theae motions ek-J hibited undoubtedly too much acerbity, and seemed to be dictated as much by personal as they certainly were by political feelings against Lord Eldon, In 1827 he attained a silk gown ; and on the accession of Wil liam IV, he was appointed, first solicitor, and then attorney general, to Queen Ade laide, and on February 28, 1834, was ad vanced to the bench as a baron of the Exchequer. In the following term, however, changing places with Mr. Justice Parke, he took hia seat in the Court of King's Bench, having received the accustomed honour of knighthood. During the whole of this period he never deserted his classical favourites, contribut ing several articles on the Greek Orators to the ' Edinburgh Beriew,' and translating some of their best orations. He was also an adept in the turn of a Greek epigram, and Lord Tenterden speaks of several that he had written when queen's solicitor, speaking of him as ' an admirable scholar.' He af terwards published a coUection under the title of ' Nugse Metricse,' He remained on the bench for a Uttle less than thirteen years, when he died on Sep tember 14, 1846, at his seat, Livermore Park, near Bury St. Edmund's. At his outset in the judge's office he was ignorant ofthe minor details of practice, and many curious anecdotes are told of his perplexing counsel and attorney by refusing to grant orders of course, which involved some absurd and since disused fiction of law. He soon over came this difficulty, and became an excellent judge. With much eccentricity of manner, and a strong and decided way of expressing his opinions, he was a great favourite both with his brethren and the bar, from the cordiality and kindness of his nature. To the last he would spout Horace and De mosthenes by the hour if he could obtain an audience ; and there was nothing so annoyed him as to hear counsel perpetrate a false quantity. He married Harriet Catherine, the daugh ter of Davies Davenport, Esq., of Capes- thorne Hall, Macclesfield, for many years M.P. for Cheshire. (Law Mag Feb. 1847.) WILLOUGHBY, Thomas, was the fourth son of Sir Christopher Willoughby, whose grandfather vras the second son of WUUam, tbe fifth Baron Willoughby de Eresby, and whose eldest son, William, the judge's bro ther, succeeded to that title in 1608, as seventh baron, on failure of the senior branch. Thomaa, as was common with younger brothers, was destined to the law ; and preparing himself for his forensic career in Lincoln's Inn (of which he was admitted a member on July 16, 1502), be was nomi nated reader iu 1517, In 1521 he became a serjeant-at-law, and in 1630 was consti- I tuted king's serjeant. While holding that WILMOT dignity he and John Baldwin were made knights m 1534, being the first serjeant who had then ever accepted that distinction. He was raised to the bench as a j udge of the Common Pleas on October 9, 1537, and dying on September 29, 1546, lies buried in the church of Chidingstone, Kent. By his marriage with Bridget, or, as some call her, Catherine, daughter and coheir of Chief Justice Sir Robert Read, he acquired the estate of Bore Place, in Chidingstone, wMch devolved on his son Robert, whose descendant Francis was made a baronet in 1677, and his successor, 'Thomas, was in 1712 created Lord Middleton of Middleton, W-arwick, a title which still survives. WILMOT, John Eaedlby, the antiquity of whose family extends beyond the Con quest, was tbe son of Robert Wilmot, of Ormaston in Derbyshire, by Ursula, one of the daughters and coheiresses of Sir Samuel Marow, of Berkswell iu Warwickshire, Bart, ; and the brother of Robert Wilmot, who became secretary of the lord lieutenant of Ireland, and was rewarded with the baronetcy of Ormaston in 1772, He was born on August 16, 1709, at Derby, in the free school of which to-wn he received his first instruction. He was then placed under the Rev. Mr. Hunter of Lichfleld, where he numbered Samuel Johnson and David Garrick among his schoolfellows, and where no less than four of hia contemporary judges were educated. He next was removed to Westminster School, and afterwards to Trinity Hall, Cambridge. His great ambition was to become a feUow of that society, and to de vote himself to the Church ; but, in obedi ence to his father's -wish, he adopted the profession of the law, and in December 1728 was entered at the Inner Temple. He was called to the bar in June 1732, and for many years confined himaelf prin cipally to country practice, with occasional attendance on the London courts, and in the House of Commons on contested elec tions. In the latter arena Horace Walpole {Memoirs of Geo. II. ii. 107) tells ua that ' he was an admired pleader, but being re primanded on the contested election for Wareham with great haughtiness by Pitt, who told him he had brought thither the pertness of his profession, and being pro hibited by the speaker from making a re ply, he flung down his brief in a passion, and never would return to plead there any more,' The same lively author describes him as ' a man of great vivacity of parts, and loving hunting and wine, and not his profession.' Though his merits were so conspicuous as to gain the esteem of Sir Dudley Ryder and Lord Hardwicke, yet public life was so distasteful to him that he not only declined the offer of a silk gown, but resolved on retiring entirely to his WILMOT 74.5 native county, and in 1764 made a farewell speech in the Court of Exchequer. He was not long however allowed to enjoy his repose. In the next year, persuaded by his friends and the demands of an increasing family, he was sworn m as ajudge of the King's Bench on February II, 1755, and knighted. Nothing can show more clearly the high estimation in which he was held than his being appointed ou the resignation of Lord Hardwicke, although the junior judge upon the bench, one of the three commissioners to whom the Great Seal was entrusted on November 19, 1756, and who held it for upwards of seven months, till June 30, 1757, So ably did he perform his duties in the office that it was confidently reported that he was likely td be appointed lord keeper. On hearing this rumour he expressed his repugnance to hia brother in these words : 'The acting junior in the commiaaion is a spectre I started at ; but the sustaining tbe office alone I must and will refuse at all events. I will not give up the peace of my mind to any earthly consideration what ever. . , , Bread and water are nectar and ambrosia, when contrasted with the supre macy of a court of justice,' While engaged as lord commissioner be still went the cir cuit, and in the spring as.sizes of 1757 he had a narrow escape of his life by the faU ing of a stack of chimneys through the roof of tbe court at Worcester. Several persons were killed by the accident, but the judge, though his clerk who was sitting under him was one of the victims, escaped with out inj ury. By an epitaph which he composed for himself it is evident that he contemplated his retirement from Westminster Hall after a service of ten years ; and when that period had expired he endeavoured to obtain a re moval to the quiet post of chief justice of Chester. The negotiations however failed ; but ere another year had passed his hopes of retirement were to be severely tested. The elevation of Lord Camden to the chan- cellorahip made a vacancy in the office of chief justice ofthe Common Pleas, and the government without hesitation offered Sir Eardley tbe place, feeling that, from his learning, his judgment, and hia character, he was the only flt and proper person to fiU that station. Though he endeavoured to divert the offer, and had actually -written a letter declining it, yet at the earnest per- suosious of his friends he was at last induced reluctantly to give way ; and he was sworn lord chief justice of the Common Pleas on August 21, 1766. The appointment waa universally approved, and was especially satisfactory to the legal world, which both admired and respected his talents and urbanity. The pubUcation of No, 45 of the ' North 746 WILMOT Briton ' occurred during his judicial career, and his conduct in regard to it fully exem plified his impartiality. On the part of the crown, as a judge of the King's Bench, in pronouncing judgment against John Wil liams, the pubUsher, he unhesitatingly stig matised the libel aa most scandalous and seditious, most malignant and dangerous to the state ; and as chief justice of the Com mon Pleas, on the appeal to the Houae of Lords, he delivered in a learned speech the unanimous opinion of hia colleagues and himself in confirmation of the judgment and sentence pronounced against IVlr.'Wilkes, the author of the libel, {State Trials, xix. 1127,) On the other hand, on the part of the people, his summing up in the action brought by Wilkes again.st Lord Halifax is a bold exposure of the illegality of general warrants, with the expression of his opinion that the plaiutiff was entitled to liberal damages for the injury he had auff'ered by that iasued in his case. The Great Seal was presaed upon him on the resignation of Lord Chancellor Camden, and again on the death ofthe Hon, Charlea Yorke, and also during the subsequent com mission; but he showed the sincerity of his wish for privacy by refusing the proff'ered honour, and took advantage of the last op portunity to tender his resignation of the office which he held. His retirement took place on January 24, I77I ; and, notwith standing his repugnance to a pension, the king insisted that he should receive one of 2400/. a year as a mark of approbation for his exemplary services. In return for this liberal allowance, he thought it his duty to assist in hearing appeals to the privy council, till hia increasing infirmities obliged him wholly to retire in 1782. He lived for ten years more, and dying on February 5, 1792, at the age of eighty-two, he was buried in Berkswell Church in "Warwick shire, The 'Opinions and Judgments' of Sir Eardley, and an affectionate memoir of his life, were pubUshed by his son, and both contain ample evidence to prove that the judge was not only an erudite lawyer, but a good man ; that he was devoted to his duties as an advocate, a judge, and a Chris tian; that his merit solely raised him to the places which his modesty and diffidence would have declined ; and that in the pri vate relations of life — as a friend, a husband, and a father — he acquired the love and vene ration of all around him. By his marriage with Sarah, the daughter of Thomas Rivett, Esq., of Derby, he had issue three sons and two daughters. The second son, who was the author of the memoir, became a master in Chancery, and was the father of Sir John Eardley Wilmot, who received a baronetcy (of Berkswell) in 1831, being thethird baronetcy in thefamily. WILTON WILSON, John, is regarded as one of thg worthies of Winandermere. He was bom on August 6, 1741, at the Howe in Apple- thwaite, where his father, whose Christian name he bore, resided. He matriculated at Peterhouse, Cambridge; and while an undergraduate in 1760 he distinguished himself by a very able reply to an attack which Dr. Powell, master of St. John's, had made upon the 'Miscellanea Analytica' of Dr. Waring, the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics, (Nicholls's Lit. Anecd. ii, 717,) In 1761 he was senior wrangler, and then became a private tutor, one of his pupils being Dr, Paley, He took his legal degree at the Inner Temple in January 1768, and soon, by his talents and mdustry, gained a considerable practice. Attending the Northem Circmt, Dunning thought so much of him that he employed him to answer many of hia caaea, and several of the opmions signed by Dunning were reaUy the opinions of Mr. Wilson, who soon became a leader himself ; and to his encouragement, and that of Sir James Mansfield, is to be attributed the continuance in Westminster Hall of that great luminary of the law John Scott, Earl of Eldon, who, not succeeding so rapidly as he expected, had determmed in 1780 to retire to the country, when Mr. Wilson, earnestly advising him to give up the idea, generously offered to insure him 400/. the next year. (Twiss' s Eldon, i. 123.) Mr, Wilson, keeping entirely aloof from politics, never sought a seat in parUament ; and for his professional merit alone was re commended by Lord Thurlow, -with whom he had had no previous acquaintance, to fill a vacant seat in the Common Pleas, to which he was appointed on November 7, 1786, re ceiving the honour of knighthood. He was so highly respected as a judge, and per formed his duties with so much patience and discrimination, that he was, on the re tirement of Lord Chancellor Thurlow, ap pointed one of the commissioners of the Great Seal, from June 15, 1792, to January 28, 1793. Before the end of that year he was seized -with paralysis, and died on Oc tober 18, 1793, at Kendal, where, on his tomb, is an inscription from the pen of Bishop Watson, eloquently descriptive of his merits as a lawyer, his uprightness as a judge, and his worth as a man. In 1788 he became a fellow of the Royal Society, He married the daughter of Mr. Serjeant Adair, and left a small infant family. (//. Black stone, 211 ; Gent Mag. Ixii. 965, Ixiv, 1051,) WILTON, Richaed db, was sheriff of Wiltshfre from 10 to 27 Henry IL In the I9th year of that reign, 1173, he set the assize as one of the justices itinerant in Devonshire, and in the following year in his own county. (Madox, i. 123, 701.) WILTON, Latteence de, was an eccle siastic, and one of the justices itmerant in WILTON 3 Henry IIL, 1219, for Cumberiand, West moreland, and Lancashire. (Rymer, i. 154.) The only previous notice of him is in 7 John, when he obtained, on a fine of two palfreys, the Mng's charter, confirming to him a certain Stone House in Cunning Street, York, which Robert de StuteviUe had granted to him and his heirs at the annual rent of a pafr of gilt spurs. (Rot, Chart. 163.) WILTON, William de, had flnes levied before him in Trinity 1247, 31 Henry III., and the two following years. In 1248, 1248, and 1250 he acted as a justice itine rant, as his brethren did (Dugdale's Oiig. 43), but from that date till August 1253 his name does not occur. Duiing the latter and the two next years there are several entries of payments for writs of assize to be taken before Mm; and then there is another omiaaion of his name for three suc cessive years more. These payments are resumed in July 1269 (Abb. Placit 134) ; and in the next two years he appears among the justices itinerant, in the last of which, 1261, he is placed at the head of three of the commissions. On December II, 1261, he had a grant of 100/. per annum to support him ' in officio justiciarise,' being the allowance then made to those who held the chief place. Whether the court over which he presided was the King's Bench or the Common Pleas does not distinctly appear; but there seem suffi cient grounds to show he was then chief justice of the King's Bench, That at flrst he belonged to the Common Pleas has been presumed from fines having been ¦acknowledged before him. But, as none were so acknowledged after 38 Henry IIL, he was in all likelihood, on his restoration to office (ioT that he was twice removed there is reason to conjecture), placed in tbe King's Bench, and continued there till he was raised to the head of it. Writs of assize to be taken before him were granted up to November 1263, 48 Henry IU, (Ex cerpt e Rot. Fin. U, 407,) While some of the judges of this period were evidently members ofthe ecclesiastical body, others did not consider military service inconsistent with their judicial character. According to a manuscript preserved in Leland's 'Collections' (i, 175), William de Wilton was Mlled at the battle of Lewes, on May 14, 1264, fighting on the side of his royal master. He and his wife, Roesa, had a charter for a market m an unnamed place in Kent m 1266, (Excerpt e Rot Fin. ii. 245,) WILUGHBY, Philip de (whose name is variously spelled), was appointed a baron of the Exchequer before Michaelmas, 3 Edward I,, 1275, when he is mentioned as being present with that title. He soon after received the custody of one of the four keys of the royal treasury, his annual WILUGHBY 747 fee in the former capacity being forty marks, and in the latter 10/. He was raised to the office of chancellor of the Exchequer about 1283, and filled it till his death in 1305, a period of twenty-two years. During this time he frequently acted as locum tenens of the treasurer, and seems to have been so indefatigable in his attention to the duties of his office that in 30 Edward I, the king, taking into consideration the length of his service, gave him a licence to attend at the Exchequer when it suited his leisure and convenience. (Madox, ii, 54, 96, &c,, 820- 326 ; Abb. Placit 281,-) Like most of the officers of Ihe court, he was of the clerical profession, and flrst ob tained as his reward a canonry of St. Paul's, from which he was advanced in June 1288 to the deanery of Lincoln. (Le Neve, 145.) At his death he was possessed of the manor of Byflete in Kent, and lands in Notts and Middlesex. (CaL Inq. p. m. i. 196.) WILUGHBY, Richaed db, the original surname of whose family was Bugge, which was changed to Wilughby from their lord ship of that name in Nottinghamshire, was the son of Richard de Wilughby, who pur chased the manors of WoUatJon in the same county, and Risley in Derbyshire. In 17 Edward II. he was substituted for his father aa the representative in parliament for his native county, and was about the same time appointed chief juatice of the Common Pleas in Ireland. (Pari Writs, ii. p. ii. 1616 ; Cal Rot Pat 78, 94, 97,) On the accession of Edward III, he was removed from this porition, and it would appear that he resumed his practice at tbe English bar, as he is mentioned in the Year Book as an advocate in the first year. On March 6, 1328, in the second year, how ever, he was placed on the bench of the Common Pleas in England, and was further advanced on September 2, 1829, to be the second justice of that court. On December 15, 13.30, he was removed into the Court of King's Bench ; and when Geoffrey le Scrope, the chief justice, went abroad vrith the king, Wilughby occupied the chief seat during his absence, at diff'erent times from 1332 till Geoffrey le Scrope ultimately resigned in the middle of 1338. From this time there is no doubt that Wilughby pre sided in the court until he was displaced on July 24, 1340, and on the 9th of October following he was restored to the Common Pleas. Stephen Birchington (Angl. Sac. i. 21) says that he was one of the judges who were arrested by the king on his hasty return to England at the end of November 1840, for some alleged misconduct ; and it is to be remarked that neither in the Book of Assizes, nor in the Rolls of Parliament, nor in any other document, does bis name appear as ajudge till the seventeenth year. 748 WIMER He then certainly had a new patent (Cal. Rot. Pat. 146), and from that date flnes were levied before hini tUl Trinity, 31 Edward III, (Dugdale's Orig. 45), when, as the Year Book does not record any of his judgments of a later date, he probably retired from the bench, though he lived for flve years afterwards. It is related of him that about Christmas 1331, which was before he was chief jus tice, he was attacked on bis way to Grant ham by one Richard Fulville, and forcibly taken into a wood, where a gang of lawless men, large bodies of whom then infested the country, compelled him to pay a ransom for his life of ninety marks, (Barnes's Edw. III. 62.) Tbis violence, however disagreeable to its object, had the happy effect of causing measures to he taken to put a stop to these combinations. He died iu 36 Edward IIL, possessed of extensive estates in the coimties of Notting ham, Derby, and Lincoln, &c., besides a great house situate in ' le Baly' in London. (Cal. Inq. p. m. ii. 266.) He married three wives — 1, Isabel, daughter of Sir Roger Mortein ; 2, Joanna ; and 8, Isabella — and had several children. Two of his descendants, Sir Henry Willough by of Risley, and Sir WiUiam Willoughby of Selston,were created baronets, the former in 1611, and the latter in 1660 ; but both titles became extinct on their deaths, WIMEB is called 'the Chaplain' in every place where his name occurs, no doubt as fllbng that office in the king's court. He held the sheriffalty of Norfolk and Suffolk for seventeen years and a half, commencing 16 Henry ll., 1170. He is mentioned in the Chronicle of JoceUne de Brakelonda (19) as being present as sheriff at the inauguration of Samson to the abbacy of St. Edmund's in 1182. In the 1st year of Richard I. (Pipe Roll, 44) he paid a fine of two hundred marks for his quittance from that sheriffalty, and from all com plaints against him and his Serjeants during the time he bad held it; offered probably by the sheriff as an easy diacharge of long- continued accounts, and received by the king as a convenient addition to his funds for the crusade. His name occurs once only as a juatice itinerant in 1173, when he and three others assessed the tallage on the king's demesnes in Essex and Hertfordshire, He also ac counted for the abbey of Hulme, then vacant and in the king's hands, (Madox, i. 308, 701.) Possibly he may be the same with Winemerus, mentioned in Le Neve (153, 161) as subdean of Lincoln in 1185, and archdeacon of Northampton in 1195. WINCH, HuMFEEV, of l^verton in the county of Bedford, was born about 1545, and was called to the bar at Lincoln's WINCHESTER Inn in I58I, became a bencher there in 1596, and reader in 1598. He must have acquired some character as a lawyer, for he sat in the last three of EUzabeth's parUa ments for the town of Bedford, and was in vested with the degree of the coif in Trinity Term 1606, for the purpose of t.aking upon Mm the office of chief baron of the Ex chequer in Ireland, to which he was ap pointed on November 8, He was then knighted, and two years afterwards he suc ceeded Sir James Ley as lord chief justice of the King's Bench in that country, with a salary of 300/. a year. He only retained that appointment from December 8, 1608, tiU November 7, 1611 (Smyth's Law Of, Ireland, 88, 140), during wMch his charac ter for ' quickness, industry, and dispatch ' is recommended for imitation by Bacon, iu his speech to Sir William Jones, on taking the same place. (Bacon's Works [Montagu], vii. 2, 64.) Sir Humfrey was immediately translated into England, and constituted a judge of the Common Pleas, where he sat for the next flfteen years. In August 1613 he was sent into Ireland with three other commissioners to examine into the com plaints of the people. (PeU Recoi-ds, 169.) Three years after he feU deservedly into some disgrace, in consequence of condemn ing and executmg, at the summer assizes at Leicester, no less than nine women as witches, on the evidence of a boy, who pre tended that he had been bewitched and tormented by them. The kmg, on a visit to the town a month after the trial, per sonally examining the boy, discovered and exposed the imposture, but too late to save the unfortunate victims of this absurd superstition. (Leicester Records, MISS.) He died suddenly while robing to go into court on February 4, 1625, and was buried in the cloisters of Pembroke Hall, Cambridge. Hiareportaof ' Choice Caaes' in hia own court were published in 1667 ; and Croke (Jac 700), his coUeague on the bench, calls him a ' learned and religious judge.' By his -wife, Cecily, daughter of Richard Onslow, Esq., recorder of London and speaker of the Houte of Commons, be left, besides other issue, a son named Onslow Winch, who -n-as sheriff' of Bedfordshire in 1633 ; but his male representatives termi nated with Humfrey Winch, of Hawnes iu that county, who was created a baronet in 1660, and died without male issue in 1703, ( Wotton's Baronet, iv. 476.) WINCHESTEDE, John de, stands the laat of six justices itinerant before whom a flne was levied at Westminster in 3 Henry III., 1219, but no further mention of him occurs in any of the records of that period, WINCHESTEE, Eael oe. See S, db QiriNcy. WINCHESTEE, Maequis OE. See W. Paulet. 'WINGHAM WINGHAM, Henet de (Bishop op London), was born at Wingham in Kent, fi^om which he took his name. He was probably brought up in one of the offices of the Exchequer, since 200/. was entrusted to him in 26 Henry III, to be expended in the king's service, and he was assigned in 30 Henry HL, 1245, m conjunction with John de Grey, the justice of Chester, to assess the tallage for that city. (Pell Records, iii. 25 ; Madox, i. 735.) He was then one of the king's escheators (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. i, 458-464, ii. 4-36), and, besides being appointed chamberlain of Gascony, was employed in two embassies into France, The patent, dated July 2, 1258, 87 Henry III, ' De provisione facta ad gubernationem regni,' when the king left the govemment in the hands of hia queen during hia absence, is signed ' per manus H. de Weng- ham,' showing, probably, that he was then connected with the Chancery. On January 5, 1255, the Great Seal was delivered into his custody ; but the title of chancellor does not appear to have accompanied it. (Madox, i. 68, 69.) In 1257 he was coUated to the chancellorship of Exeter, and soon after wards was advanced to the valuable deanery of St. Martin's. He was one of the twelve selected- on the part of the king when the Mad ParUament of Oxford, in June 1258, appointed twenty-four barons to draw up prorisions for the government of the king dom; and was continued in his office on swearing not to put the Seal to any writ which had not the approbation of the council as well as of the Mng. Soon after this, on the flight of the king's half-brotber, Ethelmar, who had been elected Bishop of Winchester, the monks of that church chose Henry de Wingham for their bishop ; but he, being unwiUing to mix in their dissensions, and doubtful perhaps of King Henry's real approbation, decUned the proffered mitre, alleging his insufficiency. This, however, did not pre vent his acceptance of the bishopric of London, to which he was shortly after wards appointed, and consecrated on February 16, 1260. On October 18 he retired from the Chancery, and the king's approval of his conduct was shown by the permission he received to retain his dean eries and all his other ecclesiastical prefer ments, consisting of ten valuable prebends and rectories. This discreet and circumspect courtier died on July 13, 1262, and was buried in his own cathedral. {Godwin, 182, 221; Le Neve, 88, 177; Weever, 359; Brady's Engl i. 625-6.85, Apii. 188, 199; Raptn, in 188.) WISEBEC, Resinald de, so called pro bably from having been born at Wisbeach, was among the clergy named as justices itinerant at the council held at Windsor in WODEHOUSE 749 25 Henry IL, when the kingdom was di vided into four parts for judicial circuits. He was one of the king's chaplains, and no doubt was selected on that account. He does not appear to have acted in any sub sequent year. WITEFELD, Robert de, was a justicier appointed by the same great council held iu 26 Henry iL, 1179. His presence in the Curia Regis when, flnes were taken is also noticed in the 30th, 83rd, and 35th Henry II, (Hunter's Preface.) In 1 Richard I. he was associated with other judges to aid the chief justiciaries in the government of the kingdom during his absence (Madox, i. 34), and his name ap pears as witness to a flnal concord in 3 Ri chard I. (Introd. to Rot. Cur, Regis, cvii.) There are two notices of his pleas among those of the reign of King John, one in tbe flrst year, and the other without date ; but they apparently refer to the previous reign. (Abh. Placit. 25, 69.) He was sheriff of the county of Glou cester in the 29th and 30th Henry II. WODEHOUSE, Robeet de, was the son of Sir Bertram de Wodehouse, a Norfolk knight of great possessions, who is thus described in a rhyming pedigree of tbe family. He Attended that brave king, Edward the First, Into the north, -when he the Scots disperst. Slew twenty thousand, Edinborough shook, Dunbar and Barwick, where they homage took. His mother was Muriel, daughter and heir of Hamo, lord of Felton ; and his eldest brother. Sir William, was the ancestor of the present Baron Wodehouse of Kimberly, Norfolk. Being brought up to the Church, he be came chaplain to Edward II., from whom he received the office of escheator. (Abb. Rot Ong. i. 174-194.) On July 24, 1318, 12 Edward IL, he was constituted a baron of the Exchequer, and was summoned to parliament among tbe judges as late as No vember 1322, 16 Edward IL, when he pro bably resigned or was removed, as about this time he became keeper of the king's wardrobe, an office which he held at the end of that reign, and at the commencement ofthe next. (Rot ParL U. 888.) In 1 Edward HI. he was presented to the archdeaconry of Richmond, and on April 16, 1329, was replaced on the Exchequer bench as second baron ; but again resigned his seat on September 16, when he was mad e chancellor of the Exchequer, by which title he had a grant to him in the next year of the manor of Ashele, ¦with the bailiwick of the forests of Bere in Hampshire. (Abb. Rot Orig. ii. 43, 127,) On March 10, 1839, he was promoted to the office of treasurer of the Exchequer, but seems only to have continued in it till the following December, He probably died in Januaiy 1345, 19 750 WODESTOKE Edward IIL, as his vrill was proved on the 8rd of the following February, wherein he ordered his body to be buried in the choir of the Augustine monks at Stamford, (Le Neve, 325.) WODESTOKE, James de, of Holshute in Hampshire, was member for the county of Berks in 1336, He wore the judicial er mine for a very short period, his patent, as ajudge of the Common Pleas, being dated on February 4, 1340, 14 Edward IIL, and his death occurring either at the end of that or the beginning of the next year. From the eighth year of that reign his name occurs in several commiaaions for the trial of offencea, gradually riaing from the loweat to the highest step in them. His place of birth may be presumed from his name, and from his being employed in 9 Edward III, to raise money for the king in Oxfordshire. At his death he was in posseaaion of the manor of Brunes Norton in that county, and of that of Holshute and Appleton in Berkshire. (Dugdale's Oiig. 45 ; Cal. Inq. p. m. U. 99 ; Rot ParL ii, 78, 449 ; Abb. Rot Orig. U. 99 ; N. Fmdera, ii. 875, 897.) WOGAN, John, w^s a referee, in conjunc tion with Hugo de Cressingham, of the dispute between the queen and William de Valence and his wife, the result of which waa stated to the parliament of 18 Edward I. At the same parUament Hugo de Cres singham complained against him that he entered the queen's court at Haverford, and impeded the proceedings, to which Wogan answered that he did ao only to prevent one of the tenanta from doing fealty ¦to the queen for a tenement he held of William de "Valence ; and the case was re ferred for enquiry, but the decision does not appear. (Rot Pari i. 31, 38.) In 20 Ed ward I., 1292, he was one of the justices itinerant assigned for the four northern counties; and was appointed chief justice of Ireland on October 18, 1295 (CaL Rot Pat.), continuing to hold that important post for the remainder of that, and for the first twelve years of the next reign, when Roger de Mortimer was put in his place. During the whole of this period he is occasionally mentioned in parliament, but does not appear to have acted judicially in England in the reign of Edward II. ; for though he was named as a justice itinerant into Kent on May 13, 1813, 6 Edward IL, he was removed from the commission ten days afterwards, on account of other busi ness requiring his attention, and another was substituted for him, (Pari Writs, i. 910, U. 1631.) WOLLAVESTON, or WOLLAVINTON, Heney de, is mentioned under tbe former name as a justice itinerant, in 62 Henry III., 1268, into eleven oounties j and again, under the latter name, in 1272, into Essex. (Rot, Claus, i. 459.) From May 1260 there are WOLSELEY entries of payments made for assizes to be held before him, in each year, till May 1272, which raises a question whether he may not be considered as a regular justicier, 'There are parishes of the name of Wool- avington both in Somersetshire and Sussex, from which the latter name might have been derived ; but if the former is the cor rect one, it was probably taken from the manor of WoUaston m Staffordshire, where a family so designated was seated at this period. WOLLOEE, David de, named from the town of Wollore in Northumberland, is little known before he became master of the Rolls. The only previous notice we have met vrith is that he was sent to attend the parliament which King Edward Ealiol summoned in Scotland in 8 Edward HI,, that his mission occupied eighteen days, and that he was allowed three shillmgs a day for his expenses. (N. Fmdei-a, ii. 876,' 897.) There is no evidence to show that he was a clerk in the Chancery, nor does the date of his appointment as master of the Rolls appear. He is first mentioned in that office on July 2, 1346, 20 Edwai^d UL (Ibid. Ui. 86.) He contmued in thaf office about five- and-twenty years, during which time he frequently bad the, custody of the Great Seal— in 1349, 1351, and 1358. He was re ceiver of petitions in the parUaments from 86 to 43 Edward IH, (Rot Pari U, 268- 299.) In his clerical character he was a canon of St. Paul's and rector of Bishop's Weai^- mouth, his successor in which was inducted in 1370, the year of his death. (Surtees' Durham, i. 231.) WOLSELEY, Ralph, belonged to one of the most ancient famUies in StaffordsMre, whose principal estate was caUed Wlselia, He was the son of Thomas de Wolseley,by Margery, daughter of WiUiam Brocton, of Longdon in the same county. Brought up in the Exchequer, he received a grant of the office of victualler to the town of Calais, This he surrendered in December 1466, and on the 29th of September fol lowing he was raised to the bench of the Exchequer as a fourth baron. In the same yeai- a grant he had received of aU the wood and underwood called Hopwashay in Staffordshire was excepted out of the act of resumption then passed, (Rot, ParL v. 602, 616.) He waa auperseded as baron on June 14, 1470, 10 Edward I"V^., but was re-ap pointed on Miirch 8, 1478, 18 Edward I'V., and retained his place on the accessions pf Edward 'V. and Richard III. He died in the early part of the second year of the latter reign. He was twice married. By his first wife, who was a daugliter of Lord Mountjoy, he WOLSEY tad no issue. By his second, Margaret, daughter of Sir Robert Aston, of Hey wood, knight, he left a son, John, in whose pos terity two baronetcies now flourish — one created in 1628, and the other m 1744. (Wotton's Baronet U. 133.) WOLSEY, Thomas (Aechbishop of Yoek and Caedinal). The events of no man's life have been so frequently recorded as those of Cardinal Wolsey, No history of this country, nor indeed of any other European state during the period in which he flourished, can avoid the introduction of his name, or omit the scenes in which he acted ; and numerous have been the sepa rate biographies which have described his career. The picturesque memoirs by his faithful gentleman usher George Cavendish, ably illustrated as they have beeu by Dr, Wordsworth and Mr, Singer; the pithy 'Observations' of David Lloyd in his ' State Worthies ; ' the fearful folio of Dr, Fiddes, rendered valuable by his ' Collec tions ' of original documents ; the earliest Uterary effort of John Gait ; the various articles in biographical dictionaries ; the interesting summary by Anthony Wood : the able ' Life ' m the Library of Useful ¦ Knowledge ; and, lastly, the elegant and excellent contribution to Lardner's Cabi net Cyclopsedia, render it almost a work of supererogation to repeat the oft-told tale. The followmg slight sketch is formed prin cipally from the materials which these authors have supplied. Thomas Wolsey was bom at Ipswich in March 1471, The Christian names of his parents were Robert and Joan ; and tbe surname is spelled Wuley in the father's wiU, and so did the cardinal himself spell it as late as August 1508, if a bull of Pope Julius II, of that date, confirming a dis pensation granted to him by Pope Alex ander 'VI, in 1501, in both of which he is so called, may be taken as authority. But in letters of his preserved in the State « Paper Office his signature is 'Thomas Wulcy,' which name is also used in apetition from one of his relatives. Some error there fore must have crept into the former docu ments, which is not unlikely in the careless writing of the day ; and the letter e, by an easy mistake in reading or tranacribing, may have beeu aubstituted for c. The letters are so subscribed as late as September 1513, a few months after which he became Bishop of Lincoln, when he signed with his spiritual titie. He altered it in 1509, when he be came almoner to the king, (Rymer, xii, 783, xiii. 217, 267 ; Fiddci, ColL i.) Tradition states that his father was a butcher ; and the popular voice and satiri cal song ofthe time make the tale probable. Some of his biographers have gi-yen no credit to the story ; but it may certainlj^ be mferred, from the absence of aU mention. WOLSEY 751 and apparently the careful concealment, of his employment, that, if not a butcher, he followed some other obscure trade, of which his son in his pride did not delight to speak. His first biographer, George Caven dish, who had been his gentleman usher, describes him as ' an honest poor man's son;' and the father, in his will, refrains from introducing any designation of his calling. This wiU was proved on October II, 1496, having been made eleven days pre viously. In it he gives to his son, who was then twenty-five years old, ten marks, ' if he be a priest ' within a year after his death, as a salary for singing for him and his friends for the space of a year ; ' but if he be not a priest, then another- honest priest ' was to have the ten marks for the same service. He then devises all his lands, &c., in the parishes of St. Nicholas, in Ipswich, and in St. Stoke, to his wife, the extent and value of which may be fairly presumed not to be larger in amount than would be sufficient for her maintenance, as he makes no provision whatever for his son. Cavendish, therefore, is probably correct in stating that he was maintained ' by means of his good friends' at the university of Oxford, to which he was sent at a very early age. There the first proof he gave of his capa city — as it was perhaps the first incentive to his ambition — was the attainment of the degree of bachelor of arts at the early age of fifteen; and in after times he used to pride himself in having been called the boy bachelor. Such an early proficiency soon placed him as a fellow of Magdalen College, and shortly afterwards raised him to the mastership of the grammar school attached to that foundation. He was bursar of the college in 1498, when the great tower was finished that goes by his name. There is an idle story of his having misapplied the college funds towards its erection; but it is supported by no authority. He could not have availed himself of the conditional legacy, for he was not ad mitted into orders till nearly four years after his father's death. In October 1500 he was instituted to the living of Lyming ton in Somersetshire, on the presentation of the Marquis of Dorset, not only in grate ful acknowledgment of his pains and success in the education of that nobleman's three sons, who had been put under his charge at Magdalen School, but in admiration of the agreeable manners and conversational talent which he displayed when he accom panied his three noble pupils to their father's mansion in the previous Christmas. As if it were in anticipation of his future prefer ments, he immediately applied for and ob tained a dispensation from the pope (that already referred to of 1501) for holding more benefices than one, and for non-resi- 752 WOLSEY dence on any, ' The honesty of his life and manners, and his other laudable merita of probity and virtue,' which are aaaigned in the bull aa motives for granting it, to gether with the presentation of the living itself, afford a sufficient refutation of the traditionary scandal about the misapplica tion of the college funds. Wolsey is represented as a very hand some man at this time, though afterwards he had a blemish in hia right eye, so dis figuring him that in his portraits he is .-ilways^represented in profile. He was also rather more free and easy in his manners and habits than modern ideas of what a clergyman should be warrant. An event is stated to have occurred soon after_ he took up hia residence at Lymington, -which, though the particulars may be embeUished, is undoubtedly true in the main. Though attended with unpleasant consequences .it the moment, it was perhaps a fortunate incident for him, as it taught him to be more circumspect in his pubUc conduct for the future. It is said that, going with some boon companions to a fair in the vicinity, he got into a drunken row, and that there upon Sir Amyas Paulet, a neighbouring justice, to whom probably he had not paid sufficient deference, set him in the stocks. This was an insult to hispositiou as a priest which it must be allowed no pretence could justify ; but it would have been more dignified in him to forget it when he had overcome the disgrace, and fllled the high post of lord chancellor. Instead of doing so, he sent for the inconsiderate knight, and, after giving him a sharp re primand, dismissed him from his presence with an injunction not to leave London without licence. In no very enviable state of suapenae, he remained in the Middle Temple for four or five years, till at last, thinking that the beat mode of appeasing tbe cardinal's displeasure was to flatter hia vanity, he rebuilt the gate-house there, and embellished it with Wolsey's arms and ecclesiastical badges — an offering which had the desired effect. The disgrace in flicted on Wolsey of course obliged him to retire from hi's parish, but he did not resign the preferment till 1509. (Fasti Oxon. i. 28.) In the interval between this retirement and bis resignation he became chaplain to Henry Dene, Archbishop of Canterbury, when he was for a short time lord keeper of the Great Seal ; and subsequently, on tbe archbishop's death in February 1503, he proceeded to Calais as chaplain to Sir ,Iohn Nanphant, the treasurer there. Sir John was a man stricken with age, and was glad to avail himself of the assistance of his chaplain in performing the dutic.'s attached to his place ; and it is not unlikely that Wolsey by his assiduity in these transao- WOLSEY tions acquired hia flrst insight into state- iiff'airs. By the interest of Sir John, who ^ was soon after compelled by his infirmities to return to England, he obtained the ap pointment of one of the king's chaplains — his flrst step on the ladder of preferment. In this capacity he succeeded in ingratiating" himself with Bishop Fox and Sir Thomas Level — the former holding theoffice of lord privy seal, and the latter being treasurer of the household. His tact and cleverness, joined to his courtly manners and a com manding address, induced them to recom mend him to Henry 'VII. to be employed on a delicate mission which that kmg was desiroua of aending to the Emperor Maxi milian in Flandera, with reference to his projected marriage with Margaret Duchess of Savoy, the emperor's daughter. Th« king, in a personal interview -with Wolsey, baring aati.afied himself of the singular capa city of the new diplomatiat, at once gave him his instructions, and so extraordinary waa the expedition Wolsey used on the occasion that he presented himself at the English court four days afterwards. The king, on seeing him, angrily rebuked him for delaying his departure so long; great therefore was his majesty's surprise when Wolsey delivered to him the emperor's letters in reply, and soon was added the royal admiration of his envoy's acuteness in supplying a defect in his credentials which had not been discovered tiU after he waa gone. The deanery of Lincoln soon becoming vacant, the grateful king was enabled to present it to his active servant on February 2, 1 509, about two months before his reign was terminated by his death. To this dig nity two prebends in the same church were afterwards added, he having been previ ously instituted to the rectory of Redgrave in Suffolk, and the livings of Lyde in Kent, and St. Bride's, London. On the accession of Henry VIIL, Wolsey had completed his thirty-eighth year. Tbe recent activity he had displayed was not likely to be overlooked; and his clerical position giving him ready access at the court, he soon recommended himself to hia new sovereign by his wit and gaiety, which he managed so to temper -with discretion as not to outrage his ecclesiastical cha racter, nor yet to conceal those more solid qualities which he must have been con scious of possessing. Henry was not long in availing himself of his services, appoint ing him one of hia council, and on November 8, 1500, granting him theoffice of almoner, (Rymer, xiii, 267.) Thus placed in inti mate communication with the king, he gra dually relieved the youthful monarch of most of hia political labours ; and thus, an acknowledged favourite, he not only re ceived the usual royal compensations for WOLSEY his assiduity, but, according to Cavendish, 'presents, gifts, and rewards came in so '' plentifully that he lacked nothing that might either please his fantasy or enrich his coffers,' Professional preferment naturally fol lowed. First the rectory of Torrington in Devonshire was given to him, and then a canonry of Windsor; he was next made registrar of the order of the Garter, and dean of Hereford ; and on resigning the latter, he received in February 1513 the deanery of York, holding each with his former preferment as dean of Lincoln ; in addition to which he was collated in the following July to the precentorship of St, Paul's, When King Henry undertook the expe dition against France in June 1518, Wolsey not only accompanied him, but had the sole direction of the supplies and provision for the royal army. He was present at the fjaking of Terouenne and Tournay, and was rewarded with the bishopric of the latter. He derived, however, very little profit from this piece of preferment, a French com petitor, who had been previously elected, intercepting the revenues. But he was soon compensated by an EngUsh see, being raised in February 1514 to the episcopal bench as Bishop of Lincoln, He rapidly rose to the highest position he held in the Church, for within six months he was translated to the archbiahopric of York ; and on September 7 in the following year he received the car dinal's hat from Pope Leo X., with the title of St. Cecilia, which was quickly suc ceeded by a commission from the pontiff as legate a. latere, ¦ Although the only ostensible office in the king's court hitherto held by Wolsey was that of the royal almoner, he had for some time been the principfil adviser and mover in all affairs of .state. That he was considered as having the greatest influence with his royal master is evidenced by the flatteries he received from foreign princes, and the applications for his intercession from eminent personages who sought the king's favour. The dignities granted to him by the Roman pontiff were mani festly prompted by the wish to conciliate King Henry; the confidential letters he received from Queen Catherine herself so eai'ly as 1513, and his correspondence with the king's sister, the Princess Mary, in reference to her two marriages with King Louis XII. of France, and Charles Bran don Duke of Suffolk, show how highly his assistance was estimated ; and the annuity of 10,000 ducats granted to him by the Duke of Milan incontestably exhibits the ascendency which was attributed to him. That his influence was not overrated may be judged from the quick succession of ecclesiaatical preferments that were heaped WOLSEY 753 upon him, and more particularly by the familiar and confidential style of the letters addressed to him by the king. In July 1515 the "Venetian ambassador says of him, ' He really seems to have the manage ment of the whole of this kingdom,' and in the next year calls him ' ipse rex,' and ' rex et autor omnium.' (Ellis's Letters, Ist S. i. 78-89 ; Fiddes sCoU. 14, 15, c. ; Four Years at the Court of Heniy VIII, 110, 156, 160.) That such a rapid advance in the short period of ten years from the comparatively humble position of a court chaplain to the elevated ranks of cardinal and legate in the Church, and chief minister of the kingdom, should have made an ordinary man ' in ebriated with prosperity,' as Archbishop Warham described him, would cause no wonder; but that it should prodjice such an effect upon a person possessing the supe rior endowments and flrmness of character that distinguished Wolsey may well excite surprise. And yet it is manifest from hia whole history that not merely the charge of vanity, but also that of an insatiable appetite for the accumulation of riches, had some foundation. Of the latter we have proof in his holding two deaneries and various prebends and livings at the same time ; in the rewards, which would now be caUed bribes, acknowledged by his friendly biographer to have been taken by Mm in his office; and in the pension which he accepted from a foreign power. Of the former there are too many childish ex amples — in the state he observed in his household, in his assumption of the cross of York within the prohibited province of Canterbury, and in the anxiety he evinced to give a greater degree of consequence to the mission sent by the pope with the car dinal's hat, by staying the journey of the messengers till he could procure a retinue which he considered more suitable to his high estate. Wolsey was not yet satisfied. There was still another dignity to which he aspired. The lord chancellor had for a long series of years, previous to the present reign, been looked up to as the head of the councU, and as the prime minister. Wolsey accord ingly thought his power would be incom plete without the possession of the Great Seal. Archbishop Warham had held it for thfrteen years; and, though Wolsey had for some time deprived him of the real power of the chancellorahip, there can be no doubt that his great aim was to super sede the modest primate in the title also. The indignities with which he treated the archbishop have so much the appearance of an attempt to enforce his resignation that Wolsey's resistance, when the resigna tion at last took place, can only be regarded as a mere pretence. The entry on the rolls of Wolsey's 3c 754 WOLSEY appointment as lord chancellor, which is dated on December 22, 1515, affords an instance of Ms fondness for vain display, and of his desire to depreciate others. In stead of the simple manner in which former transfers of the Great Seal were generally made, he has caused all his titles to be written at length, even that of ' Primate of England,' while Archbishop Warham is described in the same instrument in the most curt manner, andis docked of his title of 'Primate of aU England,' The same ostentation is visible in all the numerous documents which are contained in Rymer's 'Fcedera.' Even, to gratify this love of show, the simple bag in which the Great Seal was deposited, which for centuries before had been composed of Imen or of leather, and which, when delivered to him, waa ' a bag of white leather,' was trans formed to a magnificent purse, something like that which is now carried before the chancellor, being described as 'a bag or purse of crimson velvet, ornamented -with the arms and emblems of England,' The preaent practice also of bearing a silver gilt mace before the chancellor is supposed to have originated -with him. The description given by Cavendish (in Wordsworth, i, 486) of hia daily processions to Westminster HaU, besides showing the studied formality of his household, amirds another specimen of his love of ostentatious diaplay. For the manner in which he exercised the jurisdiction of the Chancery during the fourteen years he presided in it his repu tation stands high. Nowithstanding the perpetual and varied demands on his time, and the importance of hia political duties, his attendance on the court was regular and punctual, and, whatever opinion may be formed by diff'erent writers of his cha racter as a statesman, his decrees as chan cellor are acknowledged to have been equitable and just, Holinahed says (iii, 616) that, being tired of hearing so many causes himself, Wolsey, by the king's commission, erected four ' under-courts to hear complaints ; ' and Lord Campbell, in his recent work, has at once designated these as ' four new courts of equity. For this there exists no authority whatever. The only other court iu which causes iu Chancery were heard was that of the master of the Rolls, and that waa by no nieana newly introduced by Wolsey, the ancient records proving that bills in Chancery were addressed to and suits heard by the master of the Rolls separately, as now, so early as the reign of Henry YI. The only proof of Wolsey requiring assistance in the court of equity is a commiasion from the king, isaued shortly before the close of his career — only four monthsj in fact, previous to his re- WOLSEY nioval — when the perplexities of the di vorce case, the trial of which was then proceeding, were added to his other anxieties. This patent was dated on June II, 1529, and it authorised the master of the RoUs, three of the judges, six of the masters in Chancery, and ten other per sons, to hear all causes in Chancery, not less than four being present, of whom two were to be of the first-named ten. (Rymer, xiv, 299,) The other courts referred to by HoUn shed were probably the Star Chamber, in which he usually presided, the legantine courts, which he held under the pope's authority, and other minor courts connected with the various offices he held. The powers granted him by the pontiff were most extensive, and the manner in which he used them was the subject of universal complaint. Had he confined himself to the enforcement of a more strict discipline and moraUty among the clergy, which at that time was sufficiently lax, he might have expected and despised the enmity of those whose actions were subjected to his censure; but he is charged with employing under him a judge of had character, who took bribes to stifle ex posure, with arrogating an authority m reference to -wills and admmistrations wMch was beyond his commission, and, what was far worse in the estimation of the bishops aud nobles, with encroachmg on their general patronage. When these arbitrary proceedings came to the Mng's ear, Arch bishop Warham was ordered to admonish him — an mfUction we may suppose not very grateful to the proud cardinal, — and the king himself afterwards found it ne cessary to admmister a rebuke. The account given of him by Sebastian Giustinian, ambassador fi-om the Seigmory of Venice from 1616 to 1619, describes him as subject to violent fits of bad temper. He would sometimes keep the ambassador waiting for an audience for three hours, though he admitted others. Nor was this indignity peculiar to the representative of a powerful state, for such Venice then was ; even the pope's nuncio did not escape his indecent violence. When irritated, he would keep gnawing with his teeth on a little cane which it was his custom to carry in his hand, and the ambassador declares himself unable to convey an idea of his rabid and msolent language dm-ing these paroxysms, but he adds that he sometimes had the good sense to retire to his bed when theae mad fits of rage came upon him, and not to see any one. Notwithstanding these failings, which were of course kept out of the royal sight, the favour with which Wolsey had been regarded by the king before he became chancellor continued to increase after he WOLSEY was possessed of the Great Seal, The most unbounded reUance was placed on his judgment, and no transaction in the state of the slightest importance was decided without his advice and concurrence. The multitudinous series of documents in the thfrteenth and fourteenth volumes of Ry mer's 'Fcedera' give some idea pf the variety and extent of his labours, and plainly prove the consideration in which he was held, not only m this country, but by all the foreign potentates of the age. The estimation of the importance of his services was not merely expressed in letters of complimental flattery, which were nume rous and fulsome, but in the more sub stantial form of pensions from the differ ent contending powers in Europe, from the pope, from Castile, from the emperor, and from France, So large a space did he flll, so great an influence did he exercise in aU the events of the time, that a detail of the poUtical occurrences of Ms Ufe would com prehend the history of the civilised world during the period of his unbounded power. For his successive negotiations -with the Em peror of Germany and the King of France, and the motives that dictated his change able policy with regard to those two great antagonists, — ^for the splendour of Ms em bassies to both powers, and the extra ordinary consideration with which he was treated by each, — for a description of the Field of the Cloth of Gold, arranged under his sole direction, and of the alternate meetings of Kmg Henry vrith these princes, — and for the varied transactions vrith the minor governments of Europe, reference must be made to those historical works where they have been gi-acefuUy and phi losophically treated. The income of Wolsey must have been enormous in amount, and is said to have even exceeded the royal revenue. Besides the proceeds of the archbishopric, of the Chancery, and of the legantine commission, the various pensions he received from foreign crowns, and the profits derived from nume rous grants of lands and offices, he secured to himself the abbacy of St, Alban's, and was allowed to hold the bishopric of Bath and Wells in commendam in 1518, This he afterwards resigned for that of Durham in 1522, which in 1629 he again changed for the stUl more valuable see of Winchester. His expenditure was on a proportionate scale. The Venetian ambassador says, ' He always has a sideboard of plate worth 26,000 du cats, wherever he may be, and his silver is estimated at 150,000 ducats. In his own chamber there is always a cupboard -with vessels to the amount of 80,000 ducats, this being customary with the EngUsh nobility.' Cavendish delights in detailing the state and magnificence of his household, the number nnd rank of his attendants, the WOLSEY 755 sumptuousness of his banquets, and tho glories of Ms masques. Nobles were proud, or professed to be proud, to wait on him, and their sons were sent to be educated iu Ms palace. Such universal homage made him forget his original littleness, and prompted him to yet higher aspirations. The popedom was the object at which he now aimed ; and twice did it seem within his gi-asp, supported as he was by the hearty -wishes of his own sovereign, and by the ap parently as hearty promises of the emperor. But on both occasions was he doomed to disappointment — in 1522 by the election of Adrian VI, , and two years afterwards by that of Clement VII. According to the report of the Venetian ambassador four years before, one would have supposed that he might well have been satisfled ¦with his actual position ; for he is described as ' in very gTcat repute, seven times more so than if he were pope,' and as ruling both the king and the kingdom. He relates that on his flrst arrival the cardinal used to say to him, ' His majesty -wiU do so-and-so ; ' that sub sequently by degrees he went forgetting himself, and commenced saying, ' We shall do so-and-so ; ' but at laat he reached such a pitch that he says, ' I shall do so-and-so,' In the deference paid to one thus mvested with almost absolute authority, it is diffi cult to distinguish between flattery aud truth. It is impossible, however, not to see that the respect shown to Wolsey by both the umversities, in submitting their statutes to his correction and amendment, was dic tated as much by a sincere appreciation of his wisdom as by a consideration of his power ; and, besides other evidences before adverted to, the ascendency he acquired over such a man as Henry 'VIIL, enabling him to resist so long the machmations of those who were disgusted with his pride and jealous of his greatness, could not have been attained without the possession of mental powers and personal qualities which would warrant the expression of unsuspected admiration. That he was too fond of adu lation was one of his foibles, and that he was jealous of any attempt to turn him into ridicule, or to derogate from his high repu tation, was a natural consequence. This feeling he exhibited byimprisoning Serjeant Roe, the author of a masque performed by the students of Gray's Inn, in the allegory of which he discovered, and not perhaps without some cause, an attack upon himself and his government. His anger does not seem to have been long in appeasing, and the punishments he inflicted on other occa sions were in no instance accompanied by personal cruelty. The only charge to the contrary is the trial and death of the Duke of Buckingham ; but, in the total absence during the cardinal's ministiy of any other evidence of a sanguinary disposition, that 3c2 756 WOLSEY execution may, with greater justice and pro bability, be attributed to the jealous suspi cions of the Mng, and the imprudent bearing of the duke. He preserved the reputation of a scholar which he had attained in the commence ment of his career. He encouraged leaming and learned men. He waa long the corre spondent of Erasmus, and in the university where he was educated he established and endowed various lectures, and otherwise pro moted classical studies, which were pecu liarly obnoxious to tbe bigotry of the times. As a more lasting record of his fame, he founded two colleges, one at Oxford and the other at Ipswich — the latter being a sort of nursery to the other — thereby imitating the two similar establishments, by William of Wykeham, of New CoUege and Win chester. To the college at O.xford, for the erection of which several priories and smaller houses were dissolved, was given the name of ' Cardinal College,' which, on Wolsey's fall, the king, to deprive him of the merit of the establiahment, refounded under the name of Kmg's College, A few yeara after wards, however, when the episcopal see was translated to Oxford, its name was again changed to its present designation, Christ Church ; Ipswich feU with its founder. The fall of Wolsey waa aa sudden as his elevation. The efforts of hia enemiea proved unavailing until the resentment of Anne Boleyn at his supposed opposition to her advance was added to the scale. Her charms formed the weight that pulled him down ; their power suggested the flrst doubt in the king's mind, whether real or pre tended, as to the legality of Ms union with Queen Catherine. Wolsey could not but see the difficulties that surrounded the question, nor overlook the political dangers which it involved ; but kno-wing, as he did, the wilfulness of Ms royal master, he was obliged to qualify his real sentiments. The consequence was that he wavered in his proceedings, appearing now to encourage enquiry, and now to delay the decision, so that he made both the queen and the in tended usurper of her bed equally doubtful of his sincerity. The enmity of the latter waa the most dangerous, and was flnally effective. The pretended trial before him and Cardinal Campeggio was scarcely over before Wolsey found that hia power was slipping away; and although in his last audience with the king at Grafton on Sep tember 19, 1529, the friendly numner in which he was treated gave bim hopes that the royal displeasure was abated, within a little month those hopes were entirely dis sipated. On the first day of Michaelmas Term legal proceedings were commenced against him, on the absurd charge of baying, by the exercise of his legantine powers uudiu' the WOLSEY pope's bull, transgressed an old statute of the reign of Richard II. Although two days afterwards he received the royal autho rity to appoint two attorneys to appear for him, under which he selected John Scuse^ and Christopher Jenney, the future judge (Rymer, xiv, 348, 350), and although he had a complete defence to the indictment, in the royal licence confirming the authority under which he acted, he at once saw, in this revival of an obsolete statute, which had been violated m numberless previous instances vrith impunity, a preconcerted determination to effect his ruin. Feeling, therefore, the mutility of resistance, and hoping to mitigate the royal displeasure by submission, he not only allowed the judg ment to go against him, but gave up all he had to the king. The Great Seal, which he surrendered on October 17, was almost immediately placed in the hands of Sir Thomas More, who, after a few years, fell also a victim to the cruelty of his capricious master. Wolsey was commanded to retire to Esher, an unfurnished house belonging to his bi shopric of Winchester ; and, though kind messages from the king had been presented to him, both m his way thither and after wards, and letters had been even issued on November 18 taMng him under the royal protection, he soon found that his trials were not termmated. In the parliament then sitting a bill of impeachment was m- troduced by his enemies, consisting of forty- four mostly frivolous articles. It was dated on December 1, and was signed by Sir Thomas More, the new chancellor, and by fourteen peers and two judges ; but how far it was approved by the king may be questioned, since CromweU, who had been in Wolsey's service, and was either then or soon after admitted into that of Henry, was aUowed to oppose its adoption in the House of Commons. There his zealous and eloquent advocacy of his old master's cause was so effective that the bill was rejected, a course upon which neither Cromwell nor the Com mons would have ventured without some assurance of hia new master's approbation. There are manyproofs that, notwithstand ing the efforts of his enemies, the king re tained much affection for his fallen mimster. He sent his own physician. Dr. Butts, to Esher, when the cui-dinal was ill ; he per mitted him, when convalescent, to remove to a more commodious and healthy resi dence at Richmond ; and eventuaUy, on February 12, 1530, he granted to him a free pardon in the fullest terms. In considera tion however of these favours, the whole of Wolsey's personal property was sacrificed, except 6374/. 3s. 9^d., which he received back in money and goods as a donation from the king. The revenues of the bishopric of Winchester and the abbacy of St. Alban's WOLSEY were given up, except an annuity of 1000 marks from the former ; and from the arch bishopric of York, which alone he was per mitted to retain, he was compelled, by an illegal grant to the king, to dismember York Place, which had been the London re sidence of his predecessors for three cen turies. When urged to do this by Judge Shelley, after a long resistance he at length consented, but said, ' I say unto you in this case, although you and other of your pro fession perceive by the orders of the lawe, that the king may lawfully doe the thmg which ye require of me ; how say you, Mr, Shelley, may I doe it with conscience, to give that away which is none of mine, from me and my successors ? ' He was obliged to submit ; and the king, having obtained .'possession of this magmficent palace, changed •its name to Whitehall, In the foUowing April, Wolsey was re quired to go to his diocese ; but even this command was accompanied by proofs of the king's consideration for him, in royal letters warmly recommendmg him to the attention of the Northem nobility. There he spent six months, and so ingratiated himself vrith all ranks by his piety, courtesy, and hospi tality that when he was taken from his palace at Cawood on a charge of high treason he was accompanied by the tears and the blessings of the people. His increasing popularity in the North excited Ms enemies at court by the fear that he would in time re-establish his for mer ascendency, and they took their steps accordingly. He had never visited his cathedral, and by the custom of the place he could not do so without being installed as its archbishop. Preparations were there fore made for the ceremony, when, three days before it was to take place, he was arrested by the Earl of Northumberland on November 4, 1530, The charges then made against him have not been recorded, and it is difficult to imagine what they could be, after the general pardon he had received from the king. He was allowed to travel towards London by easy journeys, which, indeed, the state of his health rendered necessary. • At Sheffield he was entertained by the Earl of Shrewsbury, with whom he remained a fortnight, at the end of which a violent dysentery had re duced his strength so much that on his arrival on the 26th at the monastery of Leicester he was so conscious of his ap proaching end that he said to the abbot, ' Father abbot, I am come to lay my bones among you.' There he died on the moi'n- ing of the 29th, closing his life with the well-known and deeply suggestive address to Sir WiUiam Kingston, the govemor of the Tower : ' I do assure you, I have often kneeled before the king, sometimes for three hours WOLSEY 757 together, to persuade him from his wiU and appetite, but could not prevail. And, Master Kingston, had I but served my God as diUgently as I have served my king. He would not have given me over in my grey hairs. But this is the just reward that I must receive for my diligent pains and study, not regarding my service to God, but only to my prince.' He was buried in the abbey with decent solemnity, but no monument covered his remains. It is remarkable that the king's divorce from Queen Catherine, and his marriage ¦with Anne BoMyn, the cause of Wolsey's fall, were not completed till two years and a half after his death. Altogether, Wolsey was certainly the most extraordinary man that, as favourite or minister, ever ruled the destinies of this Mngdom, By his own abilities he raised himself from a humble origin to a position of respectabiUty and character in the uni versity ; by his patient -wisdom he counter acted an early disgrace; and by hia assiduity and willingness to assist those whom he served, he attained the stepping-stone from which he was to spring almost at once to his topmost height. The first matter with which he was entrusted so fully manifested Ms actirity and political dexterity that he secured the approbation not only of an aged and wise monarch, but also of a young and ambitious prince. Over the latter, almost from the moment of his ac cession, Wolsey acquired such an influence as to set all other favourites, and almost all other counsellors, aside, and to engross, solely and singly, the whole government of the realm. During his sway, which ex tended over nearly twenty years, there are no such mstances of cruelty, or of oppres sion, or even of caprice on his part, as too often disgraced the career of powerful favourites in former reigns ; the interior of the kingdom was peaceful, its commerce flourishing, and its wars triumphant; it assumed a higher rank in the scale of nations than it had before attained, and its aid and alUance was sought by popes, em perors, and kings. To conclude with the summary of the historian Lingard : ' The best eulogy on his character is to be found in the contrast between the conduct of Henry before and after the cardinal's fall. As long as Wolsey contmued in favour, the royal passions were conflned within certam bounds ; the moment his influence was extinguished, they burst through every restiaint, and by their caprice and violence alarmed his subjects and astonished the other nations of Europe,' Yet, notwithstanding these undoubted claims to our admiration, there is some thing about Wolsey's character th.at pre cludes the possibUity of regarding it with 758 WOOD entire respect. There was too much of statecraft in his policy, too great an absence of straightfor-ward dealing, and too little i-egard for the sacred obligation of an oath in the ti^eaties he negotiated. His personal vanity and pompous assumption, his greediness in accumulating wealth, his delight in the obsequiousness of those around him, the arrogance of his demeanour and his fondness for parade and ostentatious display, all exhibit a littleness of mind which it is very distiiateful to contemplate. He was too proud in his prosperity, too ab ject when misfortune overtook him. During Ms long career there is a total absence of any atriking personal incident or noble act on which we can delight to dwell, all the transactions in which he was engaged seeming to be tinged with an attempt to glorify and benefit himaelf. Even Ms mag nificent erection of Hampton Court Palace, and the foundation of hia two colleges at Oxford and Ipswich, are disfigured by marks of vainglory and a disregard to the property of others. It is a remark of Bacon, that ' prosperity doth best discover vice, and adversity doth best discover virtue,' The truth of this apophthegm is exemplified in Wolsey's career. If Me faults and frailties clouded tbe day of his success, his excellences shone the more brightly in the evening of his downfall. The only part of his life in which an undivided interest can be felt for him are the six months of his exile in the North, His whole conduct in those his last days was so exemplary that he becomes the object of our commiseration, and we cannot but exclaim with our poet — Nothing in his life Became him like the leaving it, WOO'D, Thomas, is said {Ly son's Cheshire, 601) to have built Hali o' Wood, in Bal- terley, which, though now occupied as a (farmhouse, was the seat of the family for many generations. His appearance in court as an advocate is first noticed in the Y«ar Book of Trinity Term 1477, and he was included in the first call of Serjeants by Henry VII, in 1485. He received a patent as kmg's ser jeant on June 8, 1488, and was elevated to tbe bench as ajudge ofthe Common Pleas on November 24, 1495, After sitting in that court for about five years, ho was advanced to its head on October 28, 1500, and presided there till his death, which occurred in 1602, (Keilwey's Reports, 46.) He married a daughter of Sir Thomas d'e la More, and Sir Henry Wood of Lowd- ham Hall in -Suffolk is stated by H. Phillips to have been his descendant in 1684, (Grandeur ofthe Laiv [1684].) WOOD, Geoege, was a native of Roy- stone, near Barnsley, in Yorlcshire, his father residing as the clci^yman there. He WOOD was bom in 1740, and, being intended for the junior branch of the legal profession, was articled to Mr, West, an attomey at Cawthome. He was so assiduous in hia studies, and showed so much ability during his articles, that at the end of them his master urged him to try his fortune at the bar. This advice he fortunately took, and, entering the Middle Temple, he commenced as a special pleader on Ms o-wn account. He soon got into fuU practice, and esta blished such a reputation that pupils flocked to him. Among them he gave the initiatory instructions to Mr, Law, after wards Lord EUenborough, in 1773, to Mr,, afterwai'ds Lord Erskine, in 1779, and to Mr, Abbott, afterwards Lord Tenterden, in 1787, besides many others of the most eminent la-wyers of the day. So great was his celebrity as a master of the science that when he was called to the bar he was engaged on the part of the crown in all the state prosecutions commencmg in December 1792, He joined the Northem Circuit, and was as successful in his practice in the country as he was in Westminster Hall, On one occasion he was the cause of a special pleading joke from the bench. He had bought a horse -with a warranty that it was ' a good roadster, and free from vice ; ' but when he attempted to leave the stables nothing could induce the horse to move. On hearing tMs eridence at the trial, Lord Mansfleld gravely exclaimed, 'Who would have thought that Mr. Wood's horse would have demurred, when he ought to have gone to the country f ' This excellent joke, in. the changes of the art of pleading, may possibly soon become unintelUgible. A character so distinguished for legal erudition -was not Ukely to be long neg lected by those whose duty it was to supply tbe vacancies on the bench, Mr. Wood accordingly received his promotion as a baron of the Exchequer in April 1807, and was knighted. He performed his judicial functions for nearly sixteen years, with great advantag-e to the community, and with all the credit to himself which was anticipated from bis« previous career. In February 1823 he resigned his seat, and lived little more than a year afterwards. His death occurred on July 7, 1824, at his house in Bedford Square, and he was buried in the Temple Church, He printed for private circulation some valuable ' Observations on Tit'nes and Tithe Laws,' discussing the subject with great shrewdness and ability. This treatise was afterwards published, and the principle he recommended for the arrangement of the charge was partially adopted in the bUl for the commuta'tion of tithes, (State Ti;ials, xxii.-xxix. ; Law and Lawfas, i. 29, 142; Gent Mag. Aug. 1824, p. 177.) WOOD WOOD, William Page (Loed Hathee- let), the present Lord Chancellor of Eng land, is descended from a branch of ancient family of some note in the counties of Comwall and Devon, called by the names of Att-wood and Wood. (Gilbert's Com- loall, ii. 832.) One of his immediate an cestors acted as squire at the funeral of Catherine Countess of Devon, sister of Edward IV. ; but the family gradually be coming reduced in circumstances, his grand father, who carried on the business of a serge manufacturer, was incapable of making any provision for a numerous progeny. The eldest of his children, Matthew Wood, by his persevering industry aud commercial integrity as a hop-merchant in Falcon Square, London, restored the fortunes of the house, flrst becoming a common coun cilman and then an alderman of the city of London. Extremely popular, from the liberal opmions he entertained, he was re tumed member for the city in 1815, and retained that honourable post, through nine successive parliaments, to the end of his life — a period of 28 years. In the same year he was elected lord mayor, and in the next year, such was the activity and intelligence he displayed that he had the honour, which for centuries had been un known, of being elected a second time. Uniformly liberal in politics, he was vehe mently opposed to the Corn Laws and to the Test and Corporation Acts, and a firm advocate for Catholic emancipation and parliamentary reform ; and before his death he had the satisfaction of seeing both the latter effected, and all the former repealed. He took a most prominent part in support of Queen Caroline on the accession of George IV,, and was created in December 1837 a baronet by Queen Victoria, It was owing to his recommendation to the Duke of Kent, for whom he acted as trustee, that the duke retumed to England from Bruaaels, in order that his eldest child might be born a Briton, He married Maria, daughter of John Page, of Wood- bridge in Suffolk, surgeon, and upon his death in 1843 he left flve surviving chil dren — two daughters, both married ; and three sons, the eldest of whom. Sir John Page Wood, the present baronet, is rector of St, Peter's, ComMU, and vicar of Creping in Essex ; the youngest, Westem Wood, Esq., died recently as representative of the city of London ; and the second is the subject of the present memoir. Sir Matthew's brother, Benjamin Wood, Esq., successfully contested a seat in parliament for the borough of Southwark with the late Mr, Walter, proprietor of the ' Times,' and represented that borough till his death, WilUam Page Wood was born on No vember 29, I80I, and was named after his uncle WiUiam "Woods Page, to whom ia to WOOD 759 be attributed the early taste he acquired for literature. Spending Ms infancy at Ms grandmother's at Woodbridge, he received the rudiments of his education at the free grammar school of that town. After stay ing there for a year, he went to Dr. Lind say's at Bow for three years. In 1812 he was removed to Winchester College, where, under the able instruction of Dr, Gabell and Dr, Williams, head master and second master of theschool,he acquired, besides the complete mastery of the usual branches of leaming, that clearness and precision of state ment which is his peculiar characteristic. In May I8I8, being then a prefect, he was en gaged in tbe rebellion which was organised against the master, and which was not sup pressed vrithout th e aid of the military. When taken, he refused an escape from expulsion, to which the other prefects were subjected, which was offered him on account of the favour which he had acquired -with the master by the general regularity of his conduct, and his success in gaining the prize in every class through which he had passed. The lord chanceUor must look back to this period of his life, notwithstand ing its unfortunate termination, with pecu liar pleasure, not only for the learning and experience he acquired, but still more for the lasting friendship which he formed at school with Dr. Hook, the present dean of Chichester, who, besides the excellence of his literary compositions, is deservedly re nowned for his untiring energy and extra ordinary success in his former incumbencies of Coventry and Leeds. To his appoint ment to the latter pariah tbe lord chan cellor had the deUght of being accident ally, or rather providentially, inatrumental ; and it is worthy of record that during each of the twenty-three years of his ministry there he procured the erection of a church, a school, and a parsonage ; and so effective was his influence -with the in habitants that he was able to levy 10,000/, a year among them. The calamity which lately befell Chichester Cathedral has now made a new demand on his exertions, which have beeu equaUy successful. With this remarkable man the lord chan cellor imited m forming among their schoolfellows an order of Shakspeare and Milton knighthood, they being of course the flrst members. Their reading was not confined to those authors, but extended to all the EKzabethan classics, the study of which was much encouraged by Dr, GabeU. During the vacations the lord chancellor obtamed his first experience of law by ac companying his father the alderman to the Old Bailey sessions, and took an early dis gust at the proceedings there, especially at the wholesale sentences of death then pro nounced against prisoners, few of whom ¦were intended to suffer the extremity of 760 WOOD the law. In accompanying hia father to the House of Commons also he had the advantage of hearing all the principal parliamentary orators ; and during the two years of his father's mayoralties his mind was further opened by as.9ociation with the great men of all parties, who were entertained at the Mansion House ; and in a short visit to Paris at the conclusion of the mayoralty he was admitted, whilst yet a boy, into the highest French society. Such intercourae formed an important part in young Wood's education, and he naturaUy imbibed his father's political sentiments, then enter tained by a comparatively small but in creasing class, which subjected him to much ridicule among his church-and-state contemporaries at Winchester. After leaving Winchester College he .spent the next two years at Geneva, profit ing greatly under the excellent lecturers of that university, among whom was the eloquent and learned Rossi, who was after wards murdered when minister to Pope Pius IX. From his instruction young Wood acquired a knowledge of the Roman law; and from the association with Genevan society, and that of the variety of foreigners (if all nations who flocked there, he gained such an acquaintance with their several languages as gave him great advantages in his future intercourse with the world. He passed his flrst year's examination with great credit, but unfortunately was pre vented taking his degree in the second year, by being obliged, by direction of his father a fortnight before the examination took place, to come to England in the suite of Queen Caroline. Being then in his nine- leenth year, he was naturally much em ployed in the previoua negotiations, and deeply interested in the subsequent pro- greaa, of the lamentable proceedings against iier ; accompanying from June till October tbe persons sent to Italy to collect evidence on her behalf, and occasionally acting as tran.slator of the necessary documents, and aa interpreter on the examination of the v.arious witnesses. The result upon his mind, from their testimony, from his own observation, and from the esteem with which many Italian families of the Mghest respectability regarded her, was that she waa wholly innocent of the charge brought againat her, aud guilty of nothing beyond imprudence. In October 1820 he joined his brother at 'Trinity College, Cambridge, where he obtained a scholarship on his flrst trial, and was always in the first class at the ex aminations. In the second year he gained one of the declamation prizes, the question being ' Whether the Revolution or the Restoration had conferred the greater benefit on our country,' he arguing in favour of the former. Notwithstanding the WOOD rank he had earned in his college liy his attainments, yet, owing to a serious illness, occasioned by too laborious an appUcation to hia studies, he failed in obtaming a higher place in the list of honours, in ' January 1824, than that of twenty-fourth wrangler. In October of that year, how ever, he stood for a fellowship in his college, and succeeded in obtaining it, though nearly rejected by the veto of the master and one fellow, in consequence of the supposed radicalism of his prize declamation. The threatened veto was, however, withdrawn, and as a Cambridge University commis sioner he has since assisted in abolishing this power on the part of the master. In the previous Trinity Term he had been entered at LincoM's Inn, ha-ring afready placed himself under the late Master Roupell foi; instructions in eqmt}' dra-wmg. During his Cambridge career he promi nently assisted in his father's energetic measures on behalf of the Spanish and Italian refugees, then flockmg to this coun try in extreme destitution, by which a sub scription of above 100,000/. was collected for their support. WhUe studying for the bar he placed himself as a pupil under that great master of the law of real property, John Tyrrell, Esq., when that branch of learning was in a transition state between the mass of verbi age that had disgraced the conveyances of land, and the more simple forms which were then in a gradual course of adoption. By Mr, Tyrrell's careful mode of instruc tion and indefatigable attention to his young pupils, Mr, Wood acquired that deep insight into English law which he ex hibits on the bench. Our student's labours in this period were relaxed by another visit to Italy, where he was inta^oduced to that extraordinary liiiguiat Cardinal Mezzofanti, and by associating with many celebrities of the time, among whom were Irving, Car- lyle, Procter (Barry Cornwall), and Cole ridge, Most of these he met at the house of Basil Montagu, for whose edition of Bacon's Works he translated the ' Novum Organum,' which has beeu since separately printed, and is described in the late Oxford edition as the best rendering of that wonder ful work, and is now used in that university. Just before his call to the bar, after the battle of Navarmo, he wrote a long letter, which was flrst published in the ' Times ' and afterwards in the 'Pamphleteer,' re commending an alliance between France and England for the purpose of strengthen ing Turkey against Russia ; in consequence of which he was offered by the then editor of that influential paper full employment if he would undertalte to write for the press. Mr. Wood, however, feeling that it would interfere with his professional prospects, decUned the flattering proposal. WOOD Mr, Wood waa called to the bar on November 27, 1827, and established him- , self in the same chambers with a learned ¦ andintellectual barrister, William Lowndes, Esq., afterwards ajudge of the local court at Liverpool. He was soon well employed as an equity draftsman and conveyancer, and when engaged in court .experienced the different but characteristic treatment of the two principal judges, being visited by one of the usual rebuffs of Sir John Leach, and being encouraged by the natural courtesy of Lord Lyndhurst, On the in troduction in the next year of the railway system he was fortunate in obtaining a large share in the new business then brought before the committees of the Houses of Commons and Lords, as either the supporter or opposer of the various speculations to which it gave rise. In January 1830 he married Charlotte, the only daughter of Major Edward Moor, F.R.S., of Great Dealings, near Wood- bridge, the author of the 'Hindoo Pan theon,' and of various other works on interesting Indian subjects. In 1834 he was himself elected a fellow of the Royal Society, and has smce served as a member of the council and as a vice-president of the society. Although largely engaged in parliamentary practice, he did not neglect his business m Chancery, and both fully employed him. In the year 1841, how ever, the increased labour and demand on his time consequent on the appointment of two additional vice-chancellors compelled him to conflne himself to one or the other practice. He wisely selected the latter, though then inflnitely less profitable ; and, attaching himself to Vice-Chancellor Wi- gram's court, found his account by the encouragement he received in a great accession of business. About this time the long litigation relative to the will of Mr, James "Wood of Gloucester was terminated, by which Sir Matthew Wood's right to a very large portion of the testator's estate was fully estabUshed, and his son's pro spects materially benefited. In February 1846 he was appointed queen's counsel, and in 1847 was returned to parliament aa member for the city of Oxford, which he continued to represent till his elevation to tbe bench. In parliament he took a very prominent part, advocating the admisai- bUity of Jew members on taking a modified oath, and introducing bills to allow the testimony of scrupulous persons to be received on such declarations as would bind their own consciences, but under the usual penalties for perjury. He was a friend to reform in the representation, and even to vote by ballot ; but, though advo cating these liberal views, he avowed him self a firm supporter of the Church esta blishment, and resisted 'the motions for the WOOD 761 abolition of church-rates and for legalising marriages with a deceased wife's aiater. In May 1849 he accepted the office of vice-chancellor of the county palatine of Lancaater, offered to him by Lord Camp bell, then the chancellor of the duchy, on condition that a bill should be passed for the reform of the court there, which from its antiquated proceedings was then nearly useless ; and he had the satisfaction of obtaining the desired enactment, by which the jurisdiction has been since rendered highly effective. On March 28, 1861, Mr. Wood was selected by Lord John Russell for tbe office of solicitor-general, and was soon afterwards knighted. He was then ap pointed one of the commissioners for re forming the Court of Chancery, the result of whose labours was that the master's offices were abolished, and tbe expense and delay of the proceedings materially dimi- niahed. This and other improvements, proposed while Lord John Ruasell was prime minister, were so much approved by the succeeding government that they were at once adopted and passed the legislature. The act for the appointment of the lord justices of appeal was passed while Sir William Page Wood was solicitor-general, and Lord Chancellor Truro then offered Sir William the post of vice-chancellor, which at the request of Lord John Russell he declined. In 1861 the university of Oxford conferred on him the honorary degree of D.CL. He of course retired from office on the resignation of Lord John in Fe bruary 1852, when Lord Derby succeeded and remained miniater till December. The government being then surrendered to Lord Aberdeen, and Sir George Turner being soon after constituted one of the lorda juatioes, the vacant vice-chancellor- ahip waa oft'ered to Sir WUliam Page Wood, who was appointed on January 10, 1853. Both before and after his elevation his services were put into active requisition on numerous commissions connected both with the Church and the law, which involved him in perpetual labour. But he felt himself repaid by the knowledge of the benefits produced by tbe legislature's adop tion of many of the recommendations con tained in tiieir reports. He was selected by Lord Chancellor Cranworth to act with Lord Wensleydale and Sir Lawrence Peel as arbitrators between her majesty and the King of Hanover with reference to certain crown jewels claimed by that king. A decided and conscientious Churchman, he has actively assisted the exertions of seve ral societies for the promotion of Church objects and the instruction of the people. In his own district, that of St. Margaret's and St, John's, Westminster, where, when 162 WOTTON he first knew it, there were only two churches, a dilapidated chapel of ease, and five clergymen, with little more than two hundred children at school, there are now ten churches, twenty-six clergy, and more than ten times the original number of schools. To this amendment Sir Williiim Page Wood greatly contributed by his personal activity and extensive influence ; and he had the satisfaction of materially aiding in the establishment in his district of the only free library under Mr, Ewart's act in the metropolis, the beneflt of which is proved by ita being visited by 3000 persons every month, and by 4000 books being lent for reading during the same time. In 1867 he published "The Con tinuity of Scripture,' a most valuable work, which has passed through several editions. On March 5, 1868, he was promoted to the office of lord justice of the Court of Appeal in Chancery, whenhis coUeague Lord Jus tice Selwyn, though previously appointed, gracefully gave up to him the seniority, in deference to his long services and greater experience. But ere that year had ended he was called upon to vacate this high position, in order to fUl one of more elevated rank. On Mr. Gladstone's ap pointment as prime minister. Sir WilUam Page Wood was selected as lord chancellor on December 9, 1868, and was called up to the House of Peers by the title of Lord Hatherley, in both which characters he now retains that deserved estimation which he had attained in all Ms previous judicial career. Of the manner in which he has exercised his judicial functions for the seventeen years during wMch he has presided in his different courts, it would be unbecoming to say more than that whUe he was vice- chancellor litigants were generally desirous of having their causes set down in his paper. He is in. the habit of pronouncing his judgments ore tenus, not from prepared notes, and,notwithstanding the discourteous and somewhat indecorous reflectiona made upon the practice by Lord Chancellor- Campbell, he stUl continues it, satisfied with revising his judgments before they are printed by the regular reporters of his court, and justifying himself by the con sciousness that so much writing ia injurious to his health, and by the conviction that the delay th® preparation of them would occasion wouldbemuch more detrimental to the suitor than could be compenaatedby any suppoaed clearneaa in the composition, WOTTON, William, waa probably of Norfolk extraction, as in 1510 he was placed on the commission of the peace for that county, and on that for gaol delivery for the city of Norwich. (Cal St. Papers [1609-14], 191-198.) He was admitted a member of Lincoln's Inn in July 1493, and WRAY appointed to read there in autumn 1508, 23 Henry VIL, his name appearing among the governors of the house as late as 1627, He was appointed second baron of the Exchequer on July 10, 1621, and in No vember 1528 he acted as collector of the anticipation of the subsidy assessed on the judges and barons, his own property being valued at 200/, (3 Report Pub. Rec, App. U. 63.) WEAY, Cheistophee. Various are the accounts of the lineage of Sir Christopher Wray, but three of them agree that he was born at Bedale in Yorkshire, (Fuller's Worthies, ii, 506 ; Wotton's Baronet, i. 242; Plowden's Reports, 342.) As to his paremt- age, the tales are so different and contra dictory that it would be absurd to judge which of them is the most probable one ; enough is sho-wn from all of them to indi cate the humble state of the family, tUl the chief justice by his honourable exertions raised it from obscurity. The unquestioned part of the story is- that he was a student at BucMngham CoL lege, Cambridge, which, durmg his resi dence, was refounded as Magdalen College, to which he was afterwards a great bene factor; and that he removed thence to LincoM's Inn, where be was caUed to the bar on February 2, 1550. He attained the rank of reader in 1562, and agam in 1667, when, according to Plowden, he d-welt at Glentworth in LincoMshire, as a compli ment then frequently paid when a member was caUed serjeant, to wMch degree he -was admitted in Easter Term, and was further- honoured by being appointed queen's ser jeant on June 18, (!Dvgddle's Orig. 263.) That he was a favourite vrith his brethren at the bar appears from the following order in Chancery in the suit ' Blind v. Hyl- drache,' on April 27, 1562 : ' Forasmuch as it is informed that, because the mafteim question toucheth Mr. Wray, of LincoM's Inn, the plaintiff cannot get any to be of counsel with him, therefore Mr. BeU and Mr. Manwood are appointed by this court to be of counsel with the said plaintiff.' His eminence in the profession is evinced by his being returned as member for Borough bridge, or Grimsby, or Litdgershall, in all the parUaments during Mary's reign, as well as in those of EUzabeth up to. the thirteenth year, when he was chosen speaker of that which assembled on April 2, 1571. His speech, to the queen on the occasion is re markable for nothing but its length; its delivery is said to have occupiedtwo hours. This parliament was dissolved in less than. two months, and was the last in which Wray had a seat, (ParL Hist i, 728, 772.) On May 14, 1572, he was promoted to the bench, not, as stated by Dugdale, as a judge of the Common Pleas, but as a judge of the Queen's Bench, a special commission, 'WRAY preserved in the 'BagadeSecretis,'and dated the same day as his patent, distmctly calling him ' another justice ofthe Queen's Bench,' (4 Report Pub. Rec, App. ii, 270,) He was raised to the head of the Queen's Bench on November 8, 1674 ; and he pre sided there, being then knighted, above sixteen years, with a character which Sir Edward Coke (3 Reports, 26) sums up by describing him as ' a most reverend judge, of profound and judicial knowledge, accom panied with a ready and singular capacity, grave and sensible elocution, and continual and admirable patience,' A letter of his to the Bishop of Chester, relative to an appU cation from the prelate and the Earl of Derby to dissolve a prohibition to the ec clesiastical commissioners granted by the Court of Queen's Bench, affords a proof of the manliness and independence of his cha racter. (Peck's Desid. Ckir. b. iii. 86.) His judgments in the Queen's Bench are reported by Dyer, Plowden, and Coke ; and the ' State Trials ' contain some over which he presided. Whatever may be thought of the criminal judicature of the period, it must be acknowledged that Chief Justice Wray not only abstained from all intempe- r.ance and partiaUty, but exhibited great calmness and forbearance. He was present during the proceedings against the Scottish queen, but does not appear to have taken any part in them; and in the farcical arraignment of Secretary Davison in the Star Chamber for sending down the warrant for Mary's execution, the chief justice (in consequence of the illness of Lord Chancel lor Bromley) presided m the temporary character of lord privy seal. It is ludicrous to note how on this latter occasion all the commissioners in tum began by praising the secretary's intent, but finished hy punishing him for his act ; a chorus which was wound up by the chief justice's well-known dis tinction, ' Surely I think you meant well, and it was honum, but not bene! (State ' Trials, i. 1049-1239.) He performed his duties so much to Queen Elizabeth's satisfaction that she granted to him tho profits of the coinage till he had built his noble house at Glent worth ; and he retained her favour till his death, which occurred on May 7, 1692, He was buried in the chancel of Glentworth Church, under a magnificent monument, on which he is represented in his robes. He was as exemplary in his private as in his judicial life ; and he appears to have been fond of puttmg his rules of conduct into pithy forms. He is said by David Lloyd (State Worthies, 580), who -wrote in the next century, to have been ' choice in flve particulars : 1, his friend, which was always wise and equal ; 2, hia wife j 3, his book ; 4, his secrets ; 6, his expression and By four things he would say an WRIGHT 763 estate was kept : 1, by understanding it ; 2, by spending not till it comes ; 3, by keeping old servants ; and 4, by a quarterly audit. He was mindful of what is past, observant of things present, and provident of things to come.' By his will, in which his servants and the poor are charitably re membered, besides giving directions for the maintenance by his heirs for ever of six poor persons in the almshouse at Glentworth, he orders that they shall have their dinner every Sunday at Glentworth Hall, and in ease of default he authorises the dean and chapter of Lincoln to distrain upon the land. By his wife, Anne, daughter of Nicholas Girlington, of Normanby, Yorkshire, Esq., he had a son, William, who was created a baronet in 1612, as waa Ma grandaon in 1660, but both the titles have become ex tinct. ( Wotton's Baronet i. 242-249.) -WRIGHT, Robeet, waa the son of Jer myn Wright, settled at Wangford in Suf folk, by his wife, Anne, daughter of Richfird Bachcroft, of Bexwell. He was educated first at the free school of Thetford, and then at Peterhouse, Cambridge, where he took the degrees of B.A. inl668, and of M.A, in 1661, Previously to his admission to the Inner Temple he had been included in the list of those who were qualified to be made knights of the intended order of the Royal Oak, with an estate in Norfolk of the value of 1000/. a year, (Blomefields Norfolk, i. 868 ; Weston's Baronet iv. 372.) _ Roger North informs us in his life of Lord Keeper Guilford (p. 347) that Wright went the Norfolk Circuit, and that by his marriage with Susan, one of the daughters of Bishop Wren, he was ' set in credit in the country. . . Of a comely person, aii-y and flourishing in his habits and manner of living,' he for some time commanded a greater share of business than his companion Mr. North, but ' was ,so poor a lawyer that he could not give an opinion on a -written case, but used to bring his cases to his friend Mr. North, who wrote the opinion on a paper, which Wright copied and signed as if it were his own.' This practice he con tmued even when Mr. North was in London, and put off his clients upon pretence of taking more consideration. His deficiency could not be long concealed ; and, not getting much by the law, he ' by favour was made treasurer of the chest at Chatham, and by his voluptuous unthinking course of life ' became embarrassed to so considerable a degree that his friend North, from whom he had occasionaUy borrowed money, paid off his other debts and took a mortgage of his estate for 1500/. The author adds the dis graceful fact that some years afterwards he obtained of Sir Walter Plummer 500/. more upon an original mortgage of the same estate, and made an .affidavit that it was clear from all incumbr.ances. 764 WEIGHT In the meantime his name appears as representing King's Lynn on a vacancy during- the second parliament of Charlea II. In 1078 he was appointed counsel for the imiversity, and in August 1679 waa elected deputy recorder of the town of Uambridge. Having contracted a close friendship with Sir George Jeffreys, he had been in the Easter preceding raised to the coif and kuighted, and was further promoted to be king's serjeant on May 17, 1680, In the next year he was made chief juatice of Glamorgan, and on October 80, 1684, waa appointed a baron of the Exchequer, (T. Raymond, 481.) Roger North relates that Wright, being on the brink of ruin, applied to Jeffi-eys (then chief juatice) to rescue bim by getting him made ¦ a judge. On the king suggesting his name. Lord Keeper North answered that ' he knew him but too weU, and waa satisfied that he was the most unfit man to be made a judge.' It was therefore for some time delayed, but upon being again pressed the lord keeper detailed what he knew of him — that he was a dunce, and no lawyer, of no truth or honesty, guilty of perjury, and not worth a groat, having spent all his estate in debauched Uving. Having thus done his duty, the lord keeper left the decision to the king, who, urged by Jeffreys, at last gave way, and sent his warrant for the appointment. He was elected recorder of Cambridge on February 10, 1686, four days after the accession of James it., who not only re newed his patent as judge, but selected liim to accompany his patron Jeffreys on the bloody western assize, and on October 11, immediately after his return there from, removed him to the King's Bench. Eighteen months afterwards he was further promoted to the chief justiceship of the Common Pleas, ou April 16, 1687. This office he held only five days, during which tlie case of the deserter came before the Court of King's Bench, when Chief Justice Herbert, having given an opinion adverse to the king's claim to exercise martial law in time of peace, was removed to the Common Pleas -to make way for Sir Robert Wright, as more willing to forward the king's designs. He was therefore appointed chief justice of the King's Bench on April 21, aud the flrst proof of his servility was to grant the order for hanging the poor soldier, which his predecessor was dismissed for refusing. The next was in flning the Earl of Devonshire, who had always distinguished himself by his oppo sition to the court, for an assault on Colonel Culpepper in the king's presence-chamber, in the exorbitant sum of 30,000/., and committing him to prison till it was paid, the chief justice saying that the ofl'ence was ' next door to pulling the king out of WRIGHT his throne.' Next he was one of the- ecclesiastical commissioners, and was sent down with Bishop Cartwright and Baron Jenner on the famous visitation of Mag dalen College, Oxford, when the president and all the feUows except three Papists were expeUed. (Athen. Oxon. iv. 505 ; State Trials, ix, 1354, xii, 26.) From Ms being selected as a member of that com mission, from his saying to one of the fellows, ' Your Oxford law is no better than your Oxford divmity,' and from King James granting him dispensation from taking the oaths and subscribing the test, it would seem not improbable that he had been, or was -willing to be, converted to the reUgion of the court. In the following June he presided at the trial of the seven bishops, when, though he so far accommo dated himself to the king's anxiety to condemn them as to declare their petition to be a libel, he was at the same time so evidently awed by the general voice in their favour as to conduct the proceedings with great apparent decency and impar tiality. (Bramston's Autob. 283 ; State Trials, xii, 42.) Within six months from this time, when the king deseited the throne, the chief justice, conscious of his danger, retired to some place of concealment. The character he bore among his contemporaries may be judged from the foUowing Unes m a lam poon of the time : — FareweU Brent, fare-well William, Farewell Wright, worse than TresUian ; Farewell chancellor, farewell mace. Farewell prince, farewell race. His retreat was discovered on January 16, 1689, by Sir WilUam WaUer, who took him before Sfr- John Chapman, tbe lord mayor, by whom he was committed to Newgate on a charge ' that hee, being one of the judges of the Court of King's Bench, hee had endeavoured the subver sion of the established government by alloweing of a power to dispence with the laws ; and that hee was one of the commis sioners for ecclesiastical affairs,' (Jesse's Court of England,'\v. 419 ; Bramston, 346.) He was brought before the House of Lords on May 6, in relation to the case of the Earl of Devonshire, when, though the committing of the earl was declared a manifest breach of privilege, and tbe fine of 30,000/, to be excessive and exorbitant, no further proceedings appear to have been talfen against the judges. On the 18th of the same month Sir Robert died in New gate of a fever, and thus escaped being excepted from the Act of Indemnity. In the debate on June 18 it was resolved that he should be excepted, though dead; but in the ai't itself, which was not passed till May 1090, his name was omitted, though that of Lord Chancellor Jeffreys, also WRIGHT deceased, was retained, (State Trials, ix, 1367 ; ParL Hist v. 839,) He was thrice married. His first wife was Dorothy Moor, of Wiggenhall St. Germans ; his second was Susan, daughter of Matthew Wren, Bishop of Ely; and Ms third was Elizabeth, daughter of Chief Justice Scroggs, by the two latter of whom he had several children. "WEIGHT, Nathan, was the son of Dr. Ezekiel Wright, rector of Thurcaston in Leicestershire, and Dorothy, sister and co heir of Sir John Onebye. Two baronetcies granted to the elder branches of the family are now extinct. He was bom in 1653, and was educated at Emmanuel College, Cambridge, but took no degree, and becoming a student at the Inner Temple, was called to the bar on November 29, 1677 ; but more than a year before had married Elizabeth, daughter of George Ashby, of Quenby, who had been sheriff of Leicestershire, In 1679 he was enabled to purchase the estate of the Earl of Stamford at Broughton Astley (Nichols's Leicester), and thus obtained such an in fluence in his native county that he was chosen recorder of Leicester in 1680, He held the office (with a short interval when the town was deprived of its charter) till he was made lord keeper. On his resig nation he presented to the corporation what was long after known as ' the loving cup of Leicester,' which was sacrificed under the Municipal Corporation Act of 1835, but preserved by a private gentle man and exhibited to tbe Society of Antiquaries in 1851. (Proceedings, ii. 147.) In the trial of the seven bishops in 1688 Mr. Wright was engaged for the prosecu tion, and Luttrell then calls him ' Young Mr. Wright.' He was the junior counsel, and only opened the proceedings, taking no other part in the discussion. In 1692 he was called to the degree of the coif, and in January 1697 he was made king's Serjeant, and knighted. Luttrell states that he received these honours for his learned arguments in the House of Lords in support of the bill of attainder against Sir John Fenwick; and Speaker Onslow in his notes on Burnet says that he managed the business so well aa to raiae his character very much at the time. Unfortunately his speech is not reported in the 'StateTrials,' but that collection contains those made by him as counsel for the crown against the Earl of War-wick for murder, against Mr. Buncombe for falsely indorsing Exchequer bills, and against Mary Butier for forging a bond for 40,000/. ; aud also when em ployed in 1700 for the Duke of Norfolk in support of the bill for dissolving his mar riage. Luttrell also frequently notices his legal engHgenients. (Luttrell, i. 440, iv. WRIGHT 765 164; Bumet, v. 219; State Trials, xiii. 964, &c.) When King WilUam in 1700 took the tory party into power and dismissed Lord Chancellor Somers on April 17, he must have been somewhat surprised at the difficulty he found in fiUing the vacant office. The two chief justices and other great lawyers of the time decUned to accept the Seal. Easter Term was then about to commence, and the business of the Chancery could not be mtermpted without great inconvenience. The Seal was therefore temporarily placed on May 5 in the hands of the chiefs of tbe three other courts, together with the master of the Rolls, and in the meantime negotiations were going on, which were at last ended by Sir Nathan Wright accepting the re- ,_?ponsible office of lord keeper on May 21. In the next parliament he presided on the trial and pronounced the acquittal of his predecessor, and at the end of the session he waa appointed one of the lords justices during the kmg's absence abroad, A new parliament met in December 1701, but before the termination of its first session the king died on March 8, 1702. Queen Anne confirmed the tories in the ministry, retaining the lord keeper. The only sub sequent proceedings connected with Ms name of any importance are his acting on a commission for the union with Scotland, which owing to the difficulties raised by the Scots. was not at that time successful, and his returning the thanks of the House of Lords to the Duke of Marlborough ou the close of the campaign of 1704, which was signaUsed by the battle of Blenheim. (I Lord Raymond, 567 ; Pari. Hist. v. 131.3, vi. 27, 374.) In the following year, the whigs having regained their ascendency. Sir Nathan, who had failed to acquire the respect of either party, was obliged to retire. Though be was a good common lawyer, he was ac counted a weak and inefficient keeper ; but still there was no complaint of his decisions in equity. Bumet, with no friendly feeling towards him, though he says that money did everything with the lord keeper, who was sordidly covetous, yet acknowledges that he never heard him charged with bribery iu his court. A story is told of a watchmaker, a day or two before the hear ing of a suit in which he was a party, send ing a very fine timepiece to the lord keeper, who returned it with a message, ' That he had no doubt of the goodness of the piece, but it had one motion in it too much fo him.' Burnet alludes to a ' foul rumour ' »f livings being set up for sale by the officers under him ; and Speaker Onslow adds in a note that in Baron Bury's book of accounts it appeared that the baron had given the lord keeper 1000/. for making '66 WRIGHT Mm ajudge. Whatever truth there may be in this scandal, there is no doubt that he became extremely rich, that he ob tained a valuable office for his son, and bestowed the best livings on his poor re lations. He survived his removal from the Seal for sixteen years, and died on August 4, 1721, at Cancot HaU in Warwickshire. His remains were removed to a manor he had purchased at Gothmst, near NevvportPag- nell, m the church of which there is a monu ment with his effigy in white marble. His wife was EUzabeth, daughter of George Ashby, by whom he left several children. One of hia sons was clerk of the cro-wn, another was recorder of Leicester, and a third was a clergyman, andmarried a grand daughter of the Marquis of Winchester, {Burnet,v. 139,218 ; Maxhy's Secret Sei-vice, 41 ; Noble's Granger, i. 35; Evelyn, iU, 382.) WEIGHT, Maetdt, is believed to have been of a Hampshire family, Ms posses sions and his purchases being principaUy in that county. He was born on March 24, 1691, and was the younger brother of Thomas Wright, Esq., whose daughter EUzabeth married Sir John Guise, of High- nam, Bart. He received his legal education at the Inner Temple, and was called to the bar in June 1718. His pubUcation in 1730, 'An Intro duction to the Law of Tenures,' which went through many editions, no doubt as sisted his elevation to the bench of the Exchequer in November 1739, and his removal to the Court of King's Bench on November 28, 1740. He waa not knighted till November 28, 1745, when he went up with the judges' address on the rebeUion; and after being nearly sixteen yeara on the bench he resigned his seat on February 1, 1755. He lived more than twelve years after, and died at Fulham on September 26, 1767, leaving by his wife, Elizabeth, daughter and coheir of Hugh WUloughby, Esq., M.D., of Barton Stacey in Hamp shire, two sons and two daughters, who all died without issue. The youngest son, an eccentric character, on his decease in 1814, at the ageof eighty-seven,bequeathed his estates, amounting to 3000/. a year, to Lady Frances Wilson, the wife of Sir Henry Wilson of Chelsea Park, with whom he was totaUy unacquainted, but had seen and admired her at the opera nearly twenty years before, when she was Lady Frances Bruce. (Strange, 1148 ; Gent Mag. vols, ix, X. xv. xxxvii. Ixxxiv.) WEIOTHESLEY, Thomas (Loed Weio- theslev, Eael op Southampton), be- lonoed to a family of heralds. His grand father Sir John, first noticed as Faucon herald was advanced successively in the reio'U of Edward IV. to the offices of Nor- roy° and Garter king at arms. Both the sous of Sir John were brought up to the WRIOTHESLEY same study — the elder, Thomas, becoming Garter ; and the younger, William, being York herald, and the father of the chan cellor, by his wife Agnes Drayton. He was born at Garter Court in Barbican, and educated at St. John's College or Trinity Hall, Cambridge, (Fuller's Worthies, ii. 70; Athen, Cantab, i, 98.) In 1529 he ap pears in the position of clerk to the coft'erer of the household (Trevelyan Papers, 160), and in 1530 he obtained the place of clerk to the Signet under Henry 'VIIL ; and it was probably in the latter character that he accompanied Mr. Brereton, one of the gentlemen of the privy chamber, on a mes sage from the king to Wolsey at Southwell, when Cavendish mtimates that they were not friends to the cardmal and disdamfuUy accepted his reward. According to Dug dale, he- was entered at Gray's Inn in 1584 ; but he does not appear to have taken any office m that society, nor does his name occur in any law report. In 1537, however, he was appointed coroner and attomey in the Court of Common Pleas, and m 1538 he was placed in the responsible post of one of the king's secretaries, and kmghted. Attached to the principles of the old re ligion, he had afready secretly favoured those who were devoted to it, by changing the rigours with which the Friars Obser vants were pursued, into banishment from our shores. Yet he so accommodated him self to the Mng's caprices that he was em ployed on several important missions, one of which was the negotiation of a treaty of marriage between Henry and CMistiana Duchess of Milan, the second daughter of the king of Denmark, m which he failed. (Kennet's Hist, ii, 214,) He was aftei-wards one of the special council assigned to re ceive the declaration of Anne of Cleves, by which she abandoned her matrimonial rights, (KaL E.vch. i,, Introd. cU.) In 1540 he was made constable of South ampton Castle, and two years afterwards of that of Porchester ; and to these honour able appointments was added the profitable one of chamberlain of the Exchequer, In 1546 he acted as one of the commissioners for managing the treaty of league with the Emperor Charles, aud on January I, 1544, waa raised to the peerage by the title of Baron Wriothelsey of Tichfield in Hants, the monastery of which had been granted to him. The sickness of Lord Audley quickly following, the Great Seal was placed in Wriothesley's hands on April 22 as keeper, a title which was changed on May 3 to that of lord chancellor, on Aud ley's death. Before the end of the year he was installed a knight of the Garter. The change from Lord Chancellor Audley to Lord Chancellor Wriothesley was a fatal one to many of those who were proselytes to the new religious tenets. The liing WRIOTHESLEY having publicly exhibited his own senti ments, by passing the act ofthe Six Articles, Wriothesley, always a secret supporter of these extreme doctrines, now pursued to extremity those who impugned them. His zeal even attempted to prejudice the Mng against his new wife, Catherine Parr, whose attachment to the reformed opinions he dreaded as dangerous to himself, and whose imprudence in disputing on the subject with her opinionative husband gave him too easy a handle. Had it not been for her ready vrit, she would perhaps have followed her predecessors to the scaffold ; but by an artful submission, she foiled her maUcious foe, who, having prepared articles against her, when he came to take her into custody, instead of receiving his intended victim, was met by reproaches from her pacified lord. (Kennet, ii. 268.) Connected with this was the charge against Anne Askew, for the purpose of obtaining from whom matter to implicate the queen, Wriothesley is (perhaps wrongfully) accused of having himself applied the torture, when the common executioner appeared to com passionate the suft'erer. (Lingard, vi. 853.) By the will of Henry VIIL, Lord Wrio thesley (-with a legacy of 600/,) was made one of the sixteen executors of it, and ' councillors of the privy council with our son Edward, both in his private and pub lic affairs.' (Testam. Vetust. 41.) Imme diately after the accession of Edward VI. the Earl of Hertford, the king's uncle, was appomted protector of the realm and guardian of the king's person, not-with standing the warm opposition of Wriothes ley, who contended that under the -will all the executors were invested with equal power. His resistance was the more ear nest because Hertford was a kno-wn sup porter of the new doctrines ; but he was quieted by being elevated within three weeks of the king's death to the earldom of Southampton, and by having an addi tional income granted to him for the sup port of his new dignity. This title had not been long extinct ; and it is curious that the late earl, the great naval com mander, left Wriothesley by his will the best of his gilt cups. (Ibid. 708.) At the same time the Earl of Hertford became Duke of Somerset. The majority of the council of regency were reformers. Wriothesley was impe rious and dogmatical, and so troublesome in his mtercourse with his brethren that every endeavour might be expected to put an end to his power. By his own in advertence he soon gave them an oppor tunity. On February 18 he put the Great Seal to a commission empowering the master of the Rolls and three masters in Chancery to hear causes and pronounce decrees m his absence. Although this was WRIOTHESLEY 767 a mere renewal of a commission issued to the same parties for the same purpose in 1544, it was immediately seized hold of as an illegal act, in.osmuch as he had no licence for it, either fi-om the king or the regency, while for the former he had the late king"'s authority. The judges, who were formally appealed to, gave this as their decision, and that the offence was punishable -with the loss of office and fine and imprisonment at the king's pleasure. The council hastened to act on this opinion, and, after au ineffec tual resistance, Wriothesley was obliged on March 6, 1647, to give up the Seal to Lord St, .Tohn, and to remain a prisoner in his house in Ely Place till June 29, when he was discharged on entering into a bond to pay any fine the Mng might impose upon Mm. Though thus deprived of his office, he was not excluded from the council ; but, cautioned by what had passed, and intimi dated by the severity -with which Somerset enforced his absolute sway, he -was obliged to submit to those active measures, so re pugnant to his known sentiments, by which the Reformation was advanced. The pro tector's turn of unpopularity at length arrived, and Wriothesley, as might be expected, joined the Earl of Warwick in the proceedings which hastened Somerset's ruin. The satisfaction of his revenge, how ever, was unaccompanied by any restora tion of his own power ; for Warwick as well as Somerset looked with suspicion on his intriguing spirit, and passed him over in the distribution of office. Wriothesley withdrew from the court a disappointed man, and within a few months his vexation at the slight thus put upon him produced the illness which terminated in his death. That event occurred on July 30, 1550, at his house in Holborn, then caUed Lincoln Place, but afterwards from bim Southamp ton House. He was buried in St. Andrew's Church, but his body was removed thence to a chapel in the parish church of Tich field, where a sumptuous monument still exists. Few persons who have held a prominent position in th e state hay e h ad so little said to their credit as Wriothesley, Earl of South ampton. He seems to have been looked upon as haughty towards hia inferiors, and slavishly subservient to those who were above him. When advanced to high office, his conceited opinion of his own superiority made him treat with disdain those who differed from him, and thia disposition ope rated with peculiar force against those who advocated the reformed doctrines. His severity and cruelty towards them, even if they could be ascribed to the dictates of his conscience, necessarily raised a pre judice against him in all moderate minds ; and not having tho wisdom to modify his 758 WROTHAM views where he must have seen that his party was powerless, the majority of the council risked no loss of popularity by silencing so intractable a member of their body. Though devotedly attached to the Romish religion, he showed no scruples in sharing the plunder arising from ita destruc tion, and not only enriched himself with grants from King Henry, but even accepted others from the council that was planning his disgrace. By his -wife, Jane, the heiress of William Cheney, of Obeshamboys, Bucks, he had one son and five daughters. His titlea were held after him by three succeeding genera tions, when they all became extinct, together with the earldom of Chichester, which the fourth Earl of Southampton had acqmred by a special remainder on tbe death of that nobleman in 1667 with no other issue than Rachel his daughter and heiress, whose name has been handed do-wn to us as the devoted wife of the illustrious but unfor- iiate William Lord Russell, and as the author of letters which still continue to delight all virtuous minds. (Baronage, ii. 383 ; Hayward ; Rapin ; Lingard!) WEOTHAM, William de, was the grand son of Geoffrey de Wrotham, of Radenville, near Wrotham, in Kent, .who had been a domestic servant of several Archbishops of Canterbury, and whose son William, by his wife, Maud de Comhill, was the father of the judge. (CoUinson' s Somerset, iii. 63.) As both Williams, father and son, held similar offices, some of tbe following entries may apply to the elder, for the name fre quently occurs in the Curia Regis. In 10 Richard I., and iu 8 and 10 John, fines were acknowledged before him at West minster ; and there are entries on tbe rolls showing that he acted as a j usticier in some of the intervening years. His career was an active one, and he filled many offices of responaibility and trust. He was for a long period custoa of the stannaries of Devonshire and Cornwall, his accounts for the issues of the mines there appearing on tbe rolls from 10 Richard I., 1199, to 14 John, 1213. {Rot Cancel 28 ; Madox, ii. 132.) In tbe early part of John's reign he waa evidently in great favour, both with his sovereign and the people, for be had grants of Newenton and Linte- more, with other privileges from the king (Rot. Chart. 29) ; and the inhabitants of Dorset and Somerset paid a fine of 100/; for his appointment as forester for those counties. In tbe same year he was con stituted sheriff' of Devonshire, and four years afterwards he appears as one of the collectors of the quinzime of merchandise (Madox, i. 771.) He is mentioned in 5 John aa one of the canona of "Wells, and in the foUowing he was raised to the arch deaconry of Taunton, and was soon after WYKEHAM further gratified with presentations to the churches of Warden in Shepey, and of East MaUing in Kent. (Rot Chart 183 ; Rot Pat 69, 66 ; Le Neve, 46.) By an entry on the Fine Roll of 9 John (412), it appears that he paid 2800 marks forthe king's favour, 'benevolentiam regis.' Were it not for the continued marks of honour and grants of personal advantage that distinguished him at this time, and that the other rolls of that and the previous year show that there was no interruption of the royal confidence, this fine might be considered as proving that he had incurred the king's displeasure. It was probably, however, no more than a donum presented to the king at the time of his father's death, as much with hopes of future benefit as in acknowledgment of past favours. In 11 and 12 John he was warden of the seaports, and in that character he is ordered, as late as 16 John, to proride a ship to William de Percy, on the king's service, (Rot de Fin. 647.) The Rotulus Misfe of li John, and that de Pr».stito of 14 John, show that he was with the king m those years ; and in 16 John he had an additional ecclesiastical benefice, in the grant of a prebend m the church of Hast ings. He is mentioned by Roger de Wen dover (Ui. 287) as one of the king's advisers durmg the time of the interdict. In the wars at the end of the reign he quitted the country, whether in conse quence of his having joined tbe barons or on his O'wn affairs does not appear ; but in 17 John letters were granted to him, per mitting him to come to England and return in safety. (Rot Pat 106, 180.) His death occurred m 2 Henry III. (Rot. Claus. i, 362-8.) Le Neve says he was archdeacon of Can terbury in 1206 ; and there ia certainly an entry on the Close Rolls (70), dated May 19 in that year, in which he is called ' W. de Wrotham, Arch. Cant. ;' but, inasmuch aa he is on no other occasion so styled, and a.-^ five days afterwards he is designated by his title of archdeacon of Taunton, it is pro bable that the word 'Cant.' is a misread ing, or an error of the transcriber for ' Tant.,' the usual abbreviation for Taunton. "WYKEHAM, William oe (Bishop oe Winches'tee). The name of William of Wjlceham is held in such universal reve rence, and the interest felt in every parti cular of his life is extended over so many classes of society, whether as admirers of his works or partakers of his bounty, that we cannot wonder at the more thau ordi nary degree of diligence which has beeu exercised in seeking out and recording every thing that can illustrate his history. The results exhibit an active mind never unoc cupied ; an energy subdued by no difficul ties ; foresight in the contrivance, caution WYKEHAM in the development, and an union of judg ment and taste in the execution of his works ; an absence of aU arrogance through out his rapid advance in clerical honours ; and that discreet exercise of poUtical power which, enabled him to hold the first place in the royal counsels vrithout incurring the jealousy of the people. Few men haye Uved whose career has displayed such contmued exertions for the public good, and none have left so many examples of prac tical vrisdom and well-applied munificence. He was bom at Wykeham in Hamp shire between July and September 1324,' 18 Edward II. ; and, notwithstanding some doubts which had been expressed on the subject, the eridence that has been col lected supports the presumption that the name of his birthplace, by which he is known, was not that of his family. His father and mother, according to that evidence, were John and Sybil Longe, who were of good reputation and character, but not sufficiently prosperous in their circum stances to be able to advance the education of their son. His mother was of gentle ex traction, being the daughter of William Bowade, whose wife was the daughter of William and Amicia Stratton, of Stratton, near Selbome. They and his sister were \ bmied in the church of Suthwyk Priory, , not far from Wykeham. (Archceol. Journ. iii. 221.) 'Tradition says that Nicholas de Uvedale, lord of the manor of Wykeham, and go vernor of Winchester Castle, was the bene factor who sent him to school at Win chester ; and it is recorded that he after wards acted as the governor's secretary. There is no evidence whatever of his having studied at either university, althoug'h some writers have stated that he was at Oxford for nearly six years. The presumption is strongly in opposition]to this assertion ; but whatever he lo^t of scholastic knowledge hy the want of that advantage was more than compensated by the zeal and industry with which he pursued the sciences which were more practically useful, in the acquisi tion of which he evinced so much mastery, and in their appUcation so much taste, that he was soon, by the recommendation of his first patron, distinguished by the notice of WUUam de Edington, Bishop of Win chester, who, finding his personal merits equalled the talents be exhibited, employed him in his service, and availed Mmself of his architectural talents in the improve ments he projected at Winchester, As Bishop Edington had not possession of his see tiU February 1346, 20 Edward HI,, Wykeham was then little more than twenty-one years of age. There is a record of a beneficial grant to him, in 1850, of the custody of the manor of Rokeford, in his native county, at a small annual rent, until WYKEHAM 769 the heir of Sir WilUam Bottreaux attained his majority (Abb. Rot. Orig. ii, 209), which he probably owed to the intercession of his patron the bishop. There is no record of his actual employ ment for the next six years, except that he was attorney for the bishop in 1352, in taking possession of certain lands ; but it is suggested that he probably assisted in the erection of the great tower at Windsor Castle, called the Tabula Rotunda, about which the king was then engaged. His merits must have been prominently dis played at an early period, as on May 10, 1366, he had advanced so far as to be placed in the responsible position of clerk of all the king's works in his manors of Henle and Yestamp- sted. There is a curious enti-y on August 20 in that year of an allowance to him of 2/. 10s, for the keep of the king's eight dogs at Windsor for nine weeks, taking for each dog three-farthings a day, and twopence a day for a boy to keep them. (PeU Records, iii. 163.) In the following October he was appointed surveyor of the works at the castle and in the park of Windsor, with power to press artificers and provide mate rials and carriages, and -with the then libe ral payment of two shillings a day besides extra allowances. In the next year the sale of all the beasts in Windsor Park was committed to him and two other persona (Ibid. 244) ; and in 1364 he had another royal patent, constituting him chief custos and supervisor of the castles of Windsor and Ledes, and of the manors and parks belonging to them. During this period he projected and accomplished those splendid works at Windsor Castle which at tbis day give celebrity to his name. Q.ueenborough Castle, erected under hia direction between 1361 and 1367, abowed hia extraordinary akill and abilities as an architect, but no longer exists as an example of them. This, however, is not the place to enlarge on his architectural excellences, although to them, aud his readiness in executing the king's magnificent projects, he no doubt primarily owed his future fortunes. But we know too much of Edward's character to suppose that these alone would have been sufficient ; and it , is evident that Wykeham must have exhibited other quali fications of greater weight to have sug gested his employment in the important offices, both lay and ecclesiastical, which he was called upon to fill. It seems probable that Bishop Edington induced him to take the clerical tonsure ; for he is called ' clericus ' as early as 1362, and in 1359 the king describes him as ' clericum suum,' showing he was then one of tbe royal chaplains. He was not or dained priest till June 12, 1362. Before this he had received in succession, from the kinn-'s presentation, the rectory of Pulham 3d 770 WYKEHAM in Norfolk in 1357 ; the prebend of FUx- ton, in Lichfield Cathedral, in 1859 ; and in the next year the deanery of St. Martin's- le-Grand in London, The latter he re tained for three years, during which he gave the first proof of his liberality by rebuild ing the cloisters of the chapter-house and the body of the church. (Monasticon, vi, 1823.) In 1863 he became archdeacon of Northampton, which he exchanged for that of Lincoln, aud according to Le Neve (156, 162, 167) waa also archdeacon of Buck ingham, In addition to these benefices he received several other prebends and Uvings, the list of which is contained in the certifi cate delivered in October 1866, by virtue of the pope's bull requiring a return of all pluralities. The value of the whole ia stated to have amounted to the gross sum of 873/. 6s. 8d., an enormous provision in those days, even on the assumption, sug gested by Dr. Lowth, that he held high offices in the state, and was designed for the earliest vacancy on the episcopal bench. But it ia truly said that he only received the revenues of the Church with one hand to expend them in her service with the other. During this period he had been appointed, in 1361, custos of the forests south of the Trent, in conjunction with Peter Attewode (Ahb. Rot. Orig. U. 263) : and on April 2, 1864, he is described as holding the office of keeper of tbe privy seal. (PeU Records, iii, 182.) Although the pope addresses him in the foUo-wing June as the king's secre tary, he did not flll that position till two years afterwards, holding it with the privy seal, which he retained till he was ap pointed chancellor. In 1366 he was one of the commissioners to treat of the ransom of the King of Scotland, and the prolonga tion of the truce with that country; and, besides many records of his presence in the king's council, his influence with hia royal maater is evidenced by the expression of Froissart, that at this time ' everything was done by him, and nothing was done with out him.' In hia letters of pardon in 1 Richard II. he is described aa being at that period ' clericus privati sigilli, et capitalis secreti consilii, ac crubernator niagui con- silii.' {Rot. ParL iii. 388.) The death of Bishop Edington on Octo ber 7, 1366, enabled King .Edward to gra tify his wishes by rewarding Wyk-cham with the vacant see of Winchester. ' Before his consecration, -n^hich did not tulce place till October 10, 1367, he was constituted chanceUor in the place of Simon Langham Archbishop of Canterbury, The date of his appointment does uot appear; but on September 16 he ia so caUed in a grant of free warren to Archbishop Islip. He held this high dignity for three yeai',s and a half. During his administration WYKEHAM King Edward resumed the title of King of France, which he had dropped for nine years, and renewed the war with some dis advantage. The chancellor's speeches on opening the parliament were distinguished by the omission of quotations from Scrip ture, which his predecessors had been in the habit of introduchig into their addresses, and by his conflning them in a judicious and business-like manner to a clear state ment of the emergencies of the state, and a lucid exposition of the object of their as sembling. His removal from the office arose from the necessity the king felt of giving way to the repeated representations of the Lords and Commons that the affairs of the kingdom were prejudiced by the govemment being always in the hands of the Church ; and he accordingly made room for a lay chancellor, Sir Robert de Thorpe, by resigning on March 24, 1371. He stiU, however, retained the confi dence of hia sovereign, and faithfully sided with him in his declining years, when the Duke of Lancaster and Alice Ferrers were taMng advantage of his weakness, and as suming the govemment of the kingdom. When the Prmce of Wales, then in a desperate state of health, made a strong effort in the ' good parUament ' of 1376 to break this party, the bishop was one of the council then appointed to adrise the king, and on the prince's death m June, Richard his son was declared Prince of Wnles. No sooner was the parliament dismissed than the duke and his adherents resumed their power, and vented on the bishop part of their resentment. They exhibited against him seven charges of crimes alleged to have been committed during his admmistration, on which they relied so little as to offer no proof in their support, but added au eighth, as to canceUing a roll, and reducing a fine from 80/. to 40/. in favour of John Grey, of Retherfeld. Upon this trifling charge his temporalities were adjudged, on November 17, to be seized into the kmg's hands, and he was forbidden to come within twenty miles of tbe court. The further proceed ing thereon had been adjourned till Januai'y 20, 1377, but it was never brought to a hearing, although the Duke of Lancaster, iu the parliament of that month, procured his exception from the general pardon then granted to all offenders on occasion of the jubilee of the king's reign. From this par liament the bishop had been excluded ; but the convocation, to which he had beea summoned as usu:il by the mandate of the Archbishop of Canterbury, made strong representations to the king of the injuries which the bishop had unjustly suti'ered. The duke induced the king, instead of complying with tbe clergy's petition, to grant the toinpi-iralities of tbe bishopric to tbe Prince of Wales ; but the people were WYKEHAM so little satisfied with these proceedings that they attacked the duke's palace and insulted his person, refusing to desist unless he would suffer the bishop to be brought to his answer, and be judged according to law. The eff'ect of this was the restoration of the temporalities on June 18, for which, how ever, a contribution to a considerable amount in ships and men, towards the defence of the kingdom, was demanded from him. The total extent of his dis grace, therefore, did not exceed seven months. Three days afterwards King Edward died, and one of the earliest acts of the new reign was to pronounce the bishop's pardon in the fullest and most extensive terms, declaring him wholly innocent and guiltless of all the matters alleged against him, and remitting the burdens to which he had been subjected (Rymer, vii, 163), a proceeding which was ratified and conflrmed by the petition of the Commons in the next parliament. The confldence of the parliament in the bishop's integrity was still further evinced, in 1880, by his being appointed one of the commissioners to enquire into the abuses of the late and the present reigns, and afterwards to mvestigate the causes of the great msurrections which had recently dis turbed the kingdom. Indeed, his influence with both the Lords and the Commons is ap parent by their frequent recurrence to him on points of difficulty, availing themselves of his wisdom and experience, and giving to his advice that weight and authority wMch in such times could have been only secured hy the complete reliance they had on his honesty and prudence. Although avoiding as much as possible any unnecessary interference in state affairs, such was his reputation that in the sub sequent contests occasioned by the extra vagance and weakness of the king, the bishop was always one of the persons appointed by the popular party to check the royal prerogative and control the government expenditure. Yet no proof can be stronger that, in the exercise of these duties, his conduct was tempered with mildness and moderation, than the fact that when King Richard, claiming the rights of his majority, took the govern ment into his o-wn hands, and discharged the officers who had been imposed upon him, he compelled the bishop, much against Ms incUnation, to accept the office of chan cellor, and he accordingly received the Great Seal for a second time on May 4, 1389. His flrst step was to quiet the appre hensions which naturally arose in the people's minds on the hazardous course the king had taken. He obtained a confirma tion of aU the pardons granted for the late WYKEHAM 771 disturbances, and a suspension of the press ing subsidies that had been imposed. He announced to the parliament the king's desire to preserve peace, to secure to every rank the enjoyment of its privileges, to cause all evils to be redressed, and justice and right to be administered as well to the poor as to the rich ; and he acted with so much caution and forbearance that the Commons, on his resigning the Seal into the kmg's hands, expressed their appro bation of his fldelity and good conduct, upon which he immediately resumed his fimctions. During the two years and a half that he retained the Great Seal he had the happi ness to restore the public tranquiUity so effectually that the parliament thanked the king for his good government ; and could he have been induced to remain in office, it is probable that his wise counsels might have checked the king's intemperance, and prevented the fatal consequences that fol lowed. He finally gave up the Seal on September 27, I-39I, and never appeared prominently in any subsequent poUtical transaction of the reign. He seems to have been still treated with respect by the king, although the party with whom he had acted incurred the royal vengeance ; but as a payment for this escape from the reaction by which his friends were sacrificed, a loan of 1000/. was extorted from him, which he was not in a condition safely to refuse. Richard II. resigned his crown on Sep tember 30, ,1399, and Wykeham, being then very far advanced in years, seems no further to have interfered in public affairs. His coming infirmities had warned him to procure a 'bull from the pope, enabling him to appoint one or more coadjutors to per form the duties of his diocese when he found himself incapable, and of this he occasionally availed himself during the laat two years of his life. Still, however, he continued to transact business till within four days of his death, which occurred at South Waltham on September 27, 1404, when he had attained the full age of eighty years. He was buried in the splendid oratory in the cathedral, which he had erected in the very place where he had been accustomed to perform his daUy de votions in his youth. He had presided over the see of Win chester for thirty-seven years, and, notwith standing his almost constant employment in the public service, he had been_ unre mitting in his attention to his episcopal duties, and in preserving the rights of his church. He lost no time in putting all the episcopal buildings into substantial repair, expending therein above 20,000 marks. He corrected the abuaea of the various re Ugious houses in his diocese, and introduced a complete reform in the hospital of St. .-? B 2 772 WYKEHAM Cross, The other houses subject to his visitation submitted to his authority, and suppressed the irregularities which he dis covered. But the great and noble object of his life was to found an institution for the educa tion of youth, with the intent of supplying the deficiency in the priesthood occasioned by the recent plagues, which were said to have swept away nine parts out of ten of tbe clergy. The earlier years of his pre lacy were occupied in a careful formation of hia plana, and, having fully arranged them, he proceeded to take measures to secure their execution. He determined to erect two colleges — one at Winchester, the place of his own education, for elementary leaming ; and the other at Oxford, for the completion of the studies and for the pro vision of the scholars. He commenced the flrst in 1378 by establishing a temporary school at Winchester for such poor scholars as he chose to send there ; and he prepared for the last, not only by making a similar arrangement at Oxford by forming a society there under a warden, and lodging them in various parts of the city, but by gradually making such purchases as would eventually put him in possession of the site which he had resolved on, so that from the very out set he was devoting Ms income to this wise and charitable purpose, and raising a supply of occupants for his Oxford College when it was finished. The erection of the latter was his first care. The foundation stone of New Col lege, or more properly of St. Mary College of Winchester, in Oxford, was laid on March 5, 1380, and the building was finished for occupation on April 14, 1386. The society consisted of a warden and seventy poor scholars, whose studies were specially regulated by atatutea, on tbe pre paration of which he beatowed the greatest attention and care. These were amended by him at various .subsequent periods, the last of which was in 1400, and, as then enlarged, they still remain in force. On the completion of this building- he began that at Winchester, on the very spot where he had received his own education. The flrst stone of St. Mary College there was laid on March 26, 1387, and full possession was taken on March 28, 1398. it afforded instruction to seventy poor scholars, aud waa governed by a -warden, with ten fellows, and other officers and masters. Tbe statutes were formed in accordance with those at Oxford, and re ceived similar corrections from his hand, Hia lawa were found so practically use ful that they were adopted by Henry Chicheley, Archbishop of Canterbury, one of his own scholars, in the foundation of All Souls' College at Oxford, and after- waixis by King Henry VI. in the colleges -VYYKEHAM of Eton and Cambridge, The bishop him self had the gratiflcation not only of wit nessing the full success and good effects of both his establishments, but of selecting from those who were educated iu them men of leaming and character to assist him in his business, and to be rewarded with the preferments in his gift. No sooner had he finished his two col leges, which he most liberally endowed, than he undertook the reparation of Ms own cathedral, great part of which, being in a very decayed state, he soon found it necessary to rebuild. This he did in a truly magnificent manner, thus occupying the remaining ten years of his life. His works there are most lucidly detailed by Professors WilUs and Cockerell in the ' Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at Win- cheater, 1845.' His wiU is a most extiaordiuary docu ment, and shows that he preserved to the last that precision and considerate pre- arrangement for which he was so remark able. It is of very great length, and the legacies bequeathed by it are numerous and liberal. No person, high or low, who had a claim on his respect or gratitude, or who waa attached to his coUeges, is omitted, all his connections and his servants are re membered, his piety and devotion are ex emplified by various bequests for prayers on his behalf, and due care is taken that charity to the poor shall not be forgotten. In this disposition of Ms property he was merely carrying on the daily practice of his Ufe. During its whole continuance he seems to have employed his riches in aid ing his tenants, advancmg his friends, relieving the needy, and in a large and mu nificent hospitality, besides assisting in the repair of churches, highways, and bridges. It seems astonishing that there could ever be two opinions as to the meaning of William of Wykeham's motto, assumed no doubt soon after the commencement of Ms prosperity — • Manners makyth man. It is difficult to suppose that any one could seriously believe that a parson of his cha racter intended to intimate that man's worldly interests are best forwarded by elegant behaviour aud general politeness, or that he could possibly be so absurd as to hold himself up as an example of the truth of the sentiment. Without raising tbe question whether the advocates of this interpretation can produce a single instance in which the writers of the age have used the word ' manners ' in the sense they as cribe to it, it may be fairly asked — looking at the obscurity of hia origin (which he could not hope, and -which there is no evi dence that he -wished, to conceal) and to the active industry and practical employ- WYMBURN ment of his earUer years, and considering the sacredness of his profession, and the ¦ frequent and ostentatious use of this motto in his educational colleges — whether it is not palpable that it was his intention, by its adoption, to inculcate the principle -that man's success and estimation, even in this world, depended not on his birth, or his fortune, or his talents, but on his conduct and moral worth. (Life hy Dr. Lowth.) WYMBTJEN, Waltee de, is called in 46 Henry IIL, 1261, the king's clerk, but whether civil or ecclesiastic is uncertain. He had then a grant of the king's year and a day on some land which had been es cheated. (Excerpt, e Rot. Fin. ii. 863.) In 4 Edward I., 1276, he was appointed a judge of the King's Bench, and we find him acting in the same character as late as October 1288. Spelman (Ghss. 342) erro neously states that during the tenth and thirteenth years of the reign he was chief justice, WYMUNDHAM, Thomas db, was ordered to be paid thirty shillings, for writing thirty pair of statutes, 'triginta paria statutorum,' to be sent to all the justices in eyre and sheriffs throughout the realm, and also four shillings and sixpence for the parchment on which they were -written. (4 Report Pub. Rec, App. U. 152.) In 42 Henry HI, 1268, he is inserted in Madox's list of barons of the Exchequer, and Dugdale mentions his appointment as treasurer of the Exchequer in the same year. In 50 Henry III. he was addressed by that title, and the Mng granted to him the first wardship that should fall in worth 50/. a year, together with the marriage of the heir, unless he should first provide him with some dignity, prebend, or benefice of the annual value of 200 marks. In less than two years he accordingly received the precentorship of Lichfield, being first so called in a record of 62 Henry III, This ia the last year in which he is described as freasurer, but according to Le Neve (128) he was alive in 1275, 3 Edward I, (6 !Report Pub. Rec, App. ii, 68 ; Madox, U, 42, 48, 52, 186, 307, 819.) 'WYNDHAM, Feancis, belonged to a branch of an ancient family which took its surname from the town so called in Norfolk, and which have been distinguished from the reign of Edward II. both m the council and the field. Sir Thomas, of Felbrigge and Crounthorpe, the grandfather of the judge, was vice-admiral to Henry VIII. ; and Sir Edmund, his father, wMle sheriff of Norfolk in 2 Edward VL, was active in suppress ing Ket's insurrection. His mother was Susan, daughter of Sir Roger Townsend, of Raynham. After an education at Cambridge he pro secuted his legal studies at Lincoln's Inn, and, becoming a bencher there in 1569, was WYNDHAM 773 appointed a reader in 1672, in which year he represented the county of Norfolk, He was elected recorder of Norwich in 1576, and in Michaelmas Term of the foUo-wing year was called to the degree of the coif. The precise date of his becoming a judge of the Common Pleas is not stated, but the first fine acknowledged before him as a judge is dated in October 1579, (Dugdale's Orig. 48, 268.) He is mentioned as one of the judges in the commission for hearing causes in Chancery in the interval between November 1591 and May 1592. His death occurred at hia houae at Nor- -wich in July 1592. Over his remains, in the church of St. Peter's Mancroft in that city, was erected a .stately monument, ou which he is represented in his j udge's robes, and in the Gold-hall of that city there is a picture of him as recorder. By his wife, a daughter of Sir Nicholas Bacon, the lord keeper, he left no issue, (Blomefields Norwich, i. 859, U. 221 ; 4 Re port Pub. Rec, App. i. 272, 273.) WYNDHAM, Hugh, Sir John Wyndham, the uncle of the above Francis Wyndham, was not only the progenitor of this and the next-named judge, but also of three baro netcies, all of which are now extinct. Hugh Wyndham was the sixth son of Sir John, of Orchard- Wyndham in Somerset shire, and of Felbrigge in Norfolk, knight, by Joan, the daughter of Sir Henry Port- man. He was bom about 1608, ¦and re ceived his legal education at Lincoln's Inn, where he was called to the bar on June 16, 1629. Though his practice as an advocate is not recorded, he had acquired in 1654 sufficient reputation as a lawyer to be dig nified with the coif, and to be sent as a temporary judge on the Northern Spring Circuit, and afterwards to be raised to the bench of the Common Pleas by Cromwell, notwithstanding his objection to act under the protector's commission, Whiteloeke states that he was appointed on May 80, 1654, and was re-appointed on November 27, 1658, on tbe accession of Richard Cromwell to the protectorship. In July 1659 and in January 1660 Whiteloeke again records his appointment, the former being at the re sumption of the Long Parliament, and the latter after the dissolution of the committee of safety and the rearrangement ofthe courts in consequence of the resignation of Chief Justice Glynne. ( Whiteloeke, 591, 676, 681, 693 ; Burton, U. 840, 488,) The restoration of Charles of course put an end to Wyndham's judicial functions; but he was immediately confirmed _ in his decree of serj eant-at-law. In this cha racter he resumedhia practice,until eighteen months after the death of his younger brother, the next-noticed Judge Wadham Wyndham, when, on June 20, 1670, he 774 WYNDHAM was promoted to the bench as baron of the Exchequer, and received the customary honour of knighthood. On January 22, 1673, he was removed to the Common Pleas. In neither court did he particularly distin guish himself, not mterfering much in those trials arising out of the Popish Plot in which he was among the presiding judges. He died at Norwich while engaged on the cir cuit on July 27, 1684, in his eighty-second year, having sat on the bench, during the Commonwealth and since the Restoration, for twenty years. His monument at Silton in Dorsetshire records the names of his three wives — viz., Jane, daughter of Sir Thomas Woodhouse, of Kimberiey, Norfolk, Bart. ; Elizabeth, daughter of Sir William Minn, of Woodcott, Surrey, and widow of Sir Henry Berkeley, of Wimondham,Leiceater- shire, Bart. ; and Katherine, daughter of ThomasFleming, of North Stoneham, Hants, and widow of Sir Edward Hooper, of Bove- ridge, Dorsetshire, By the firat of -these only he left issue. (1 Siderjvn, 3, 465 ; Hidchins's Dorset, U. 146, 324.) WYNDHAM, Wadham, the younger brother of the above, received his baptismal name from hia grandmother, Florence, daughter of John 'VS'^adham, Esq., of Merri- field in Somersetshire, descended from the before-mentioned judge of the Common Pleas of that name in the reign of Richard II. He was, like his brother, a member of Lmcoln's tun, and was called to the bar on May 17, 1686. His name appears in several law reports during the time of the Com monwealth, and he was oue of the advocates who were imprisoned for pleading the cause of Cony, as related m the life of Judge Twisden, and who, like him, could not pro cure his release until he had petitioned the protector. Not receiving the coif under Cromwell's govemment, he was selected as one of the fourteen who were summoned to be Serjeants a month after the Restoration, having been previously called upon to consult with the judges at Seijeants' Inn, Fleet Street, with respect to the proceedings against the regicides, he bemg one of the counselengaged in the prosecution. (I Sider fin, 4 ; Kelyng, 7 ; State Trials, v. 1028.) At the end of these trials he was, on No vember 24, 1660, promoted to be a judge of the King's Bench, in which court he sat for eight years. During the whole of that time, according to the evidence of his contem poraries, he maintained a high character for learning aud impartiality, Siderfin (393) says of him that he was of ' great discretion, especially in his calm and sedate temper upon the bench ; ' that he was ' in all re spects well qualified for the place ; ' and that he held it for several years 'to the great satisfaction of those at the bar and others.' Sir Thomas Raymond (174) caUs hiin a good and prudent man ; and Sir John WYTHENS Hawles, solicitor-general in the reign of WiUiam IIL, speaks of him as the ' second best judge which sat in Westminster Hall since the king's restoration.' (Slate Trials, ix, 1003,) He died on December 24, 1668, at which time he was seated at Norrington in Wilt shire. By his wife, Barbara, daughter of Sir George Clarke, of Watford, North amptonshire, he left a large family, whose descendants still flourish in various counties and promise a long continuance of the name. Thomas, one of his grandsons, was, like him, a distinguished lawyer, and bemg made, flrst, chief justice of tbe Common Pleas in Ireland, and then lord chanceUor there, was raised to the peerage of that Mngdom, by tbe title of Baron Wyndham of Fmglass, m 1731 , but, leaving no chUdren at his death in 1745, the title became extinct. 'VPYNFOSD, Loed. See W. D. Best. "WYNTON, Elias de. The error which Dugdale has committed in mtroducing Mm as a baron of the EngU.sh, mstead of the Irish, Exchequer, is explained under the name of Richard de Saham. "WYTHENS, Feancis, was of a family originally settled m Cheshfre, but, migrating to the south, one of them, Robert Wythena, became an alderman of London. His eldest son. Sir William, was sheriff' of Kent in 1610, and dying in 1630, his residence at Southend in the parish of Eltham was m the possession of this judge at the time of his death m 1704 ; but whether he inherited it as the son, or grandson, or nephew of Sir William is uncertain, (Hasted, i, 204, 478.) The earliest notice of him is as high steward of the Franchise Court of West minster, and as a successful candidate for that city in Cctober 1679, but the opening of par liament was deferred by seven prorogations to October in the following year, when his return was disputed by Sir William Waller and Sir William Pulteney, In the interval, numerous petitions having been presented to the kmg praying for the meeting of par Uament, which were met by counter-ad dresses expressing abhorrence of the prac tices of the petitioners as interfering -with the king's prerogative, Wythens took an active part in getting up the latter, and on presenting one from the grand inquest of the city of Westminster he received the honour of knighthood on AprU 18, 1680, As soon as the parliament met in October, Sir Francis, as a member, was the first who was charged with the fact as an offence against the rights of the people ; and upon evidence taken and his own confession he was ordered to be expelled the house, and to receive his sentence on his knees at tiie bar. The speaker accordingly addressed him in these terms : ' You, being a lawyer, have offended against your own profession ; WYTHENS you have offended against yourself, your ovm right, your own liberty, as an Eng lishman. This is not only a crime agamst the Uving, but a crime agamst those unbom. You are dismembered from this body,' This castigation^ must haye been doubly painful to the recipient, inasmuch as only a few days after the committee on the petition against his return reported that he was not duly elected. (Luttrell, i. 41 ; Commons' Journals.) Soon after his election for Westminster he was engaged as counsel to defend Thomas Knox on an indictment agamst him and John Lane for a conspfracy to defame the notorious witnesses to the Popish Plot, Titus Oates and William Bedlowe, when, though his client was not acquitted, he was let off with a more merciful judgment than Chief Justice Scroggs waa acouatomed to pro nounce. Sir Francis also assisted in the prosecution of Henry Carr for a libel in pub lishing ' The Weekly Packet of Advice from Rome,' exposing some of the tricks of Popery, The chief justice was called to account by the parliament for his conduct on both of these trials, and was removed from his office. Under his successor. Sir Francis was em ployed by the crown in the cases of Edward Fitzharris, the Earl of Shaftesbury, and Count Coningsmark (State Trials, vii. 801, 1125, viU. 269, II25, ix, 16), and on all these occasions he acted the part, if not of an able, of an intelligent advocate. He was made a judge of the King's Bench on April 23, 1683, and concurred in the following term in the judgment against the charter of the city of London, In the other prosecutions during the life of King Charles in which he acted as one of the judges, though there is nothing harsh or violent in his observations or his language towards the parties on their trials, he was evidently, as Roger North describes him, so weak and timid a man that he had not the courage to differ from his more resolute chiefs. Consequently he assented to all the iniquitous judgments that disgraced that period, and incurred a larger share of odium than the other judges, from his being, according to the form of the court, the mouthpiece which pronounced most of the sentences. Evelyn (iii, 104) is indig nant that Sir Francis was at a city wedding on December 6, 1688, when he and Chief Justice Jeffreys danced with the bride and were exceeding merry, spending ' the rest of the afternoon till eleven at night in drinMng healths, taking tobacco, and talking beneath the gravity of judges who had a day or two before condemned Mr, Algernon Sidney,' But, instead of ' a day or two,' the trial had taken place a fortnight before this time, and it is most probable that Evelyn's disgust at the verdict infiuenced his opi nion as to the private conduct of the judges. WYTHER 775 Without approving the prevalent levity of the time, we must think it rather hard upon judges to expect that they should assume a solemn aspect because they had presided at a capital conviction a fortnia-ht before. On Charles's death, in February 1685, Sir Francis received a new patent, and in the follo-wmg November was elected recorder of Kingston-on-Thames, He accompanied Chief Justice Jeffreys in his bloody cam paign after the Duke of Monmouth's rebel Uon, and continued for two years to exercise his judicial functions with his accustomed pUancy, till a sudden boldness, or a pro phetic policy, prompted him to unite with Chief Justice Herbert in denying that the king could exercise martial law in time of peace without an act of parliament. The consequence was his immediate discharge from his office on AprU 21, 1687, the punish ment usually inflicted by King James on the slightest non-compliance with his will. Shower reports (U, 498) that on the next day he came to Westminster Hall and practised as a serjeant, which seems to evi dence his reUance on the popularity of his decision. _ As this sole instance of Ms insubordina tion was too great to be overlooked by James, so it was too little to plead in his favour in the next reign, for he waa one of the thirty-one persons who were excepted out of the Act of Indemnity, Before this bill waa passed there had been various debates in the House of Commons (Pari. Hist. V. 338) relating to trials in which Judge Wythens had been concerned as one ofthe judges, aud many of the judgments and decisions had been declared arbitrary and iUegal ; but the principal matter urged against Mm was his concurrence in the opinion in favour of the Mng's dispensing power. Beyond the insertion of his name in the act, it does not appear that he waa visited with any penalty, except removal from the recordership of Kingston. He survived his discharge till 1704, when he died at his family seat at Eltham, and was buried in the church there on May 12. Sir Francis married Elizabeth, sister of Sir Thomas Taylor, of Parkhouse, Bart., who, if the account given by Mrs. Mauley in the ' New Atalantis ' (ii. 267) is to be credited, though clever and witty, brought no comfort to her husband, and acquired for, herself a very bad reputation. That she involved him in expenses for the pur pose of putting him in prison appears from an action brought against him in 1693 for extravagant outlay in dresses, &o., which he was obliged to pay. After his death she married Sir Thomas Colepeper, of Ayles ford, Bart. (Wotton's Baronet i. 218 j Skinner, 348.) WYTHEE, William, seems to have been 776 WYVILLE merely a juatice itinerant for pleas of the forest in Lancashire in 16 Edward L, 1287. Tbe only legal or judicial character in which he afterwards appears is aa the laat named of four commissioners appointed in 35 Ed ward I. to hear and determme a cause in North Wales between the Earl of Arundel and others. (Rot ParL i. 206.) WYVILLE, John de, is placed by Dug dale among the barons of the Exchequer in 37 Henry IIL, 1253 ; but he perhaps sat there as one of the justices of the Jews, in which character he is named by Madox (ii. 318) among the barons two years pre viously. Hewas constituted a justice (of the Common Pleaa according to Dugdale) on February I, 1256, from which time till YATES February 1263 he was present at the acknowledgment of fines. In an undated letter he begs the king to excuse him from the office of justice of Oyer and Terminer on account of his bodily infirmity and po verty ; but he acted on the iters in 40, 44, and 47 Henry III. (Dugdale's Orig. 48 ; Excerpt e Rot Mn. U. 280-391 ; 6 Report Pub. Rec, App. ii, 75.) His death may be fixed about the latter year. His property was in Hampshire, If the baronetcy of Wyville in Yorkshire (extinct in 1774) was derived from his lineage, the family still sur-rives at Burton Constable, tracing its descent from Hum phrey de Wyvill, of Slingsby Castle, who came over with the Conqueror, Y YATES, Joseph, descended from an old county family of Lancashire. His grand father and father, both named Joseph Yates, resided at Stanley House in that county, in which the former was a magis trate, and the latter high sheriff in 1728, In 1730 he became possessed, under the ¦will of a relation, of the estate of Peel Hall, near Manchester, with ita large beda of coal, involving so great an expenditure that his means were eventually reduced, and his aff'airs serioualy embarrassed. By his marriage with Ellen, daughter of Wil liam MagbuU of MaghuU, he had two sons, the younger of whom was the future judge, Joseph Yatea was bom in 1722, and from the grammar school of Manchester he went to Queen's College, Oxford, where he could not have continued, owing to his father's difficulties, had it not been for the timely assistance of his relative Mr, Ser jeant Bootle, who generously stepped for ward and enabled him to finish his course at the university, and to pursue his legal studies. For this purpose he entered Staple Inn, on the south window of the hall of which society his arms may still be seen. From Staple Inn he removed to the Inner Temple, and practised as a special pleader from Michaelmas 1748 tiU July 1758, when he waa called to the bar. Here he rapidly roae in reputation, and acquired a practice so large that his fee-book records a profit of 2313/, in one year. He had general retainers for tbe corporation of Liverpool, for Greenwich Hospital, and for the East India Company, and was employed by the crown in the miUtia riots of 1758, and in the proceedings against John Wilkes in 1763, But the only legal rank which he received before his elevation to the bench was that of king's counsel for the duchy of Lancaster in June 1761, His labours re quired frequent and intense application, and when it became burthensome he was in the habit of relieving himself by read ing a few pages in Dean Swift's works, which always sent him back cheerfully to his studies. On some extraordmai^y suc cess in 1760 he was presented -with asUver vase, now preserved in the family, bearing the followmg inscription : — ' Jurisconsulto perito, Josepho Yates, oh auxiUum insigne legum cognitoribus prsestitum, Grati CU- entes D,D,D,' So remarkable were his legal attain ments that when he had been Uttle more than ten years at the bar he was offered a judgeship of the King's Bench, which -with considerable reluctance he was prevailed on to . accept on January 23, 1764, when he received the customary honour of knight hood. In February 1765 the chancellor ship of Durham was added. He ventured sometimes to differ fi-om his noble chief. Lord Mansfield, who chafed so much under any opposition of opmion that Sfr Joseph, to avoid his lordship's covert sarcasms, de termined to take the first opportunity to leave his court. This resolution is the sub ject of strong observation in Junius's first letter to Lord Mansfield, On the resigna tion of Mr. Justice Clive m February 1770 he induced Sir WilUam Blackstone, for whom the place was designed, to exchange it for the King's Bench, He thus obtamed his removal to the Common Pleas on Fe bruary 16, 1770, preferring the quiet of a junior seat in that court to the unseemly contests in which his continuance in the senior place in the King's Bench seemed likely to involve him. Not long did he enjoy the benefit he anticipated. Within four months his mortal career was termi nated. He died on June 7, 1770, of a neg lected cold faUing on his chest, and waa YATTINDEN "buried at Cheam in Surrey, where he had a house, (Blackstone's Reports, 460, 681, 714,) He was universally acknowledged to be a most able and learned judge; and the points on which he differed fi-om Lord Mansfield were subsequently recognised aa food law, and confirmed by the House of lOrds, Of Ms inflexible integrity a story was circulated, that he returned a letter brought to him from the king unopened, the mimster having already tampered with him in vain previous to some trials involv ing the rights of the crown. Though the precise details of this transaction are not known, there seems too good reason to be Ueve that the fact occurred, as it was pub Ucly stated in parliament by Alderman Townshend soon after the judge's death, and, though repeated by another speaker, remained uncontradicted" by any member of the admmistration. (Pari. Hist. xvi. 1228, 1296.) It tells well however for Lord North, that soon after the death of Sir Joseph he called on Lady Yates, and, after saymg much that was most gratifying to her and complimentary to the deceased, deUcately enquired into her circumstances. The visit concluded by his saying that ' the widow of so great a man ought not to be left with so small a provision,' and, regretting that the funds at his disposal would not admit of his offermg more, asked whether a pension of 200/. a year would be worth her acceptance — a graceful act in the go vernment, and a flattering testimony of the estimation in which he was held by a court whose temptations he had the virtue and the courage to resist. Another, less deli cate, but more signiflcant, proof of hia gene ral reputation appeared at the time in the following Unea : — Hadst thou but ta'en each other judge. Grim Death, to Pluto's gates, Thou might'st have done 't without a grudge, Hadst thou but left us Yates. In his private life he was most amiable and considerate. He commenced his career under great pecuniary difficulties, and con siderable feebleness of constitution, but from the time of his leaving college he was able by his industry to contribute largely to his father's comfort, and the advance ment of his brother's children. One of his weaknesses was a great attention to his dress, by which he acquired the character of being 'a. flne gentleman,' and was the subject of some ludicrous stories. At his father's decease he succeeded to the estate of Peel Hall ; and at his own he left one son and one daughter, by his wife, Elizabeth, daughter and coheir of Charles Baldwyn of Munslow in Shropshire, a lady of very ancient Scotch descent. YATTINDEN, Nicholas de, had writs of as.size addressed to him from September 1270, to August 1271, 54 and 56 Henry YELVERTON 777 III. ; and in the next year a record of a trial before him ' et sociis suis ' occurs, in which he is called 'justic. domini regis.' In 86 Henry III, he was pardoned 56s. 2^d. out of the issues of the lands of Stephen de Hampton, the custody of which he had till the heir was of age ; and in 68 Henry IIL the castle and forest of Windsor with other manors were placed in his charge. He married Aliva, the widow of Henry de Bathonia, and died in I Edward I. pos sessed of considerable property in Berkshire and Norfolk. (Excerpt, e Rot Fin. U. 141, 522-546; Abh. Placit 183; Blomefields Norfolk, i. 185 ; Cal Inq. p, m. i. 48, 51.) YELVEETON, William, belonged to an ancient family established in the reign of Edward II. in Norfolk, but apparently previously settled in Dorsetshire. He was the son of John Yelverton, of Rackheath in the former county, recorder of Norwich iu 1408, by his second wife, Elizabeth, daughter and heir of John Read, of Rougham, and widow of Robert Clere, of Stokesby. He is stated to haye been a reader in Gray's Inn, and was called to the degree of serjeant-at-law in Michaelmas, 18 Henry VL, 1489. In 1427 he was one of the justices of the peace in Norwich ; and he held the office of recorder of that city from 1438 to 1460. In the parliament of 14 Henry VL he was returned as member for Yarmouth ; but after his attainment of the coif it does not appear that he was again elected. He was appointed a judge of the King's Bench some time in 1443, 21 Henry "VI. (Cal. Rot. Pat. 285), and sat there till the deposition of that monarch. Edward IV. not only continued him in his place, but created him a knight of the Bath previous to the coronation. It seems probable, indeed, that soon after Edward's accession he was suspected of some implication in the late king's aft'airs, as we are told by one of the Paston letters (i. 131, 150, 172) that a privy seal had come to him requiring his presence at court, and that he refused to go ; and in a subse quent letter we hear that he and Jenney ' are like for to be greatly punished, for be cause they came not to the king.' He how ever must have succeeded in excusing him self, since he still remained ou the bench when Henry VI. was replaced on the throne. Although that luckless king mcluded him in the new patents appointing the judges on October 9, 1470, 'Yelverton appears to have again fallen under suspicion, as Sir John Paston, on November 15, desires his brother to tell him ' that he may not appear of a while in no wise,' and promises to send him word when he may. (Ibid. ii. 67.) The Year Book, however, proves that he acted as a judge of the King's Bench dur ing some part of the short restoration. 778 YELVERTON Whether he died or not in that brief in terval is uncertain ; but on the retum of Edward IV. Ms name was omitted from the list of the King's Bench judges then ap pointed, and no subsequent mention of him occurs. Weever (821) gives the inscription on his monument at Rougham, but unfor tunately the date of his death is omitted. On it he is described ' quondam Justic. dom. Regis de suo Banco,' which would seem to imply that he was not so .at the time of his death. The brave and slandered knight Sir John Fastolf was Sir William Yelverton's early patron and lasting friend till his death. 'There is a letter from Sir William to him, praying his interference with the king, the lord chancellor, and other lorda, in case any attempt to injure the judge should be made by certain parties in opposition to him, ' that no credence be given to mine hurt in mine absence.' He was one of Fastolf 's executors in 1459, and waa engaged in the violent con- troveray which arose out of the wiU, Another letter records the curious and scarcely cre dible fact that iu one of the proceedings he ' came down from the bench and plete the matter,' (Paston, i. 12, 149.) During the progress of the controversy he is described as ' the cursed Norfolk jus tice ; ' but as this is the expression of an antagonist, it decides little as to his cha racter. That seems to have been remark able for its energy; and mention is made of the ' thank he had of the king (Edward, in 1462), at Cambridge, for cause he declared so well the charge of extortion done by sheriffs and other officers, &o., for the which declaration the king took him by the hand, and said he cowde him great thanks, and prayed him ao to do in this country (Nor folk),' An earlier letter shows that he was tainted with the superstitious credulity of the time. Speaking of Our Lady's house at Walsingham, he says, ' for truly if I be drawn to any worship or welfare, and dis charge of my enemies' danger, I ascribe it unto Our Lady,' (lbid 10, 151.) He married Agnes, daughter of Sir Oliver le Gross, of Crostwick, Norfolk, and appa rently widow of John Rands, and was the progenitor of the two next-named judges. (Blomefield's Nonvich, i. 125-156.) YELVEETON, CHEISTOPHEE, was the son of William, who came in direct descent from theabo-ve Sir WiUiam Yelverton, with four generations between them, enjoying the aame property in Norfolk, and pursuing the same profession. He held the office of reader in Gray's Inn in 1635 and 1542, and it waa probably he whoae name appeara iu the debates in the parliaments of 1571 and 1572, (Pari. Hist, i, 747, 762, 770.) He died in 1686, leaving, by his marriage with Anne, daughter and heir of Sir Henry Fermor, of East Barsham in NorfcUc, a YELVERTON large family. Henry, his eldest son, suc ceeded to the estates, and waa father to Sir WilUam, who obtained a baronetcy (of Rougham) in 1620, which expfred in 1649. Christopher was the third son, who, entering himself in 1562 at Gray's Inn, relieved his legal studies there by an occasional offering to the Muses, When ' Jocasta,' a tragedy translated from Euri pides by George Gascoigne and Francis Kynwelmersh, waa performed there in 1666, the epilogue was supplied by Yelverton (Athen. Oxon. i, 436), and he assisted in other devices and shows of the society. He became reader in 1574, and agam in 1583, and in 1589 he was called to the degree of the coif, and made queen's ser jeant in 1598. (Dugdale's Orig. 295, 298.) In the parUament of October 1597 he was elected speaker. His disabUng speech on that occasion gives a description of his person and position ; and the prayer which, according to the custom of those times, he composed and read to the house every morning, has much devotional beauty. In this parliament, which was dissolved in the following February, it is observable that the queen ' refused or quashed forty-eight several bills which had passed both houses,' (Pari. Hist. i. 897, 906.) His conduct m the house was so satisfactory that his pro motion to be queen's serjeant took place three montha after the dissolution. In this character he opened the mdictments agamst the Earl of Essex and the other conspira tors in 1600, but the principal duty of urg ing the evidence fell on Coke and Fleming, the attorney and solicitor general. (State Trials, i. 1336, 1419.) Lord Burleigh thought very highly of bim, and on February 2, 1602, he was nominated a judge of the Kmg's Bench. On the accession of James I. m the foUow ing year his patent was renewed, and he received the honour of knighthood. It fell to his lot to pronounce sentence of death upon Robert Creighton, Lord Sanquire, for procuring the murder of Robert Turner, a fencing master, who had by mischance struck out his eye while playing with the foils. (Ibid ii. 752.) Sir Christopher died in November 1612, at Easton-Mauduit, an estate he had pur chased in Northamptonshire, which has remained the seat of his family up to the present time. About two years before his decease, Robert CecU, Earl of SaUsbury, gave this character of him to his son Henry : ' He is a gentleman, a leai-ned man, and a lawyer; one that will deliver his mind with perspicuous reason and great comeliness.' (Archeeologia, xv. 52.) His wife, IMargaret, daughter of Thomas Catesby, of Ecton and Whiston in North amptonshire, Esq., brought him two sons YELVERTON and four daughters. One of his two sons was the next-noticed Hemy, YELVEETON, Heney, was the eldest son of the above, by his wife, Margaret, daughter of Thomas Catesby, Esq., and was born, as some say, at his father's seat at Easton-Mauduit in Northamptonshire, or, as others assert, at Islington, near Lon don, on June 29, 1666. He was educated in the university of Oxford, but Anthony .Wood does not state at what college, and then became a member of Gray's Inn, where his ancestors had pursued their legal stu dies. Having been in due course called to the bar, he was appointed reader in 1607. (Dugdale's Orig. 296.) But long before that time he had been elected recorder of Northampton, To the first parliament of James I, he was returned as member for Northampton, and as a representative of the people he took au independent, but not a factious, part. He supported the subsidy, but advo cated its gradual instead of its immediate payment, and in all questions brought before the house he freely expressed his real opi- , nions, without considering whether they were acceptable to either party, and with out weighing over-nicely the expressions with which he urged them. But he was popular as an advocate, and consequently had professional enemies jealous of hia fame. His plain dealing and the freedom of his language were accordingly misrepre sented at court, and phrases were singled out of his speeches to prove that he hated the Scotch, and had no respect for the Mng, These reports gradually made their way to James's ear, and Yelverton found after some time that he was looked upon ¦with a suspicious and unfriendly eye, not only by his sovereign, but by the Scotch nobles around him, George Hume, Earl of Dunbar, the lord treasurer of Scotland, took offence, when a question arose in par liament as to the conflrmation of certain land granted to the earl on the confines of Scotland, contiguous to Lord Hume's land on the confines of England, at Yelverton's using the cumulative words ' humus super humum,' conceiving they were intended as a personal reflection. 'The Mng also felt himself grievously offended because one of Yelverton's arguments for the naturaUsa- tion of Lord Kinloss was that he was not all Scot, but half English ; and he was ' much enraged ' that on another occasion Yel verton had said ' that he would weigh the king's reasons as he did his coin.' It was natural, therefore, that a man all whose intentions were loyal should be desirous of understanding and explaining the charges made against him ; and Yelverton took the straightforward course of seeking an inter view both with the earl and the king. This he effected through the means of the Lady | YELVERTON 779 Arabella and the lord chancellor of Scot land, the Earl of Dunfermline, and he gives a very interesting and curious account of his interviews, in which he waa successful in satisfying both. He stated that, so far from opposing the union, he refused the employment when aaaigned to ai-gue the caae of the poat nati ou the part contrary to his majesty's desire. The whole trans action of the reconciliation is very credit able to all the parties. The grounds of complaint are openly avowed, and the inge nious justification generously admitted. No unfair compromise of principle is demanded or promised, and on a subsequent visit to Robert Cecil, the lord treasurer, that nobleman says that he shall assure him self that Yelverton, to please the king, will not speak against his conscience. (Archee ologia, XV. 27-52.) The argument attri buted to him in the 'State Trials' (vol.ii. p. 478) against the impositions of the crown on merchandise, and not published till 1641, eleven years after his death, was really the speech of James WMtelocke, afterwards a j udge. (Notes and Queiies, 2nd S. ix. 383, X. 39 ; ParL Debates in 1610, 85, 108.) Yelverton had to wait nearly four years before he reaped anjr fruits of his recon ciliation with the king. His father, the judge, died in 1612, aud on October 29, 1613, he was made solicitor-general, and knighted. In little more than two years his patron the Earl of Somerset was in dicted for the murder of Sir Thomas Over bury; but Sir Henry, though this was a state prosecution and he held an office under the crown, is said to have decUned to appear agamst his patron, and he is not recorded as having taken any part in the trial. Bacon, who was the attomey-gener.al at the time, must have felt this courageous refusal as a reflection on his o-wn conduct with regard to the Earl of Essex, especially as it waa not visited by any evil conse quences, such as he had pretended to fear. "Yelverton had always acted a friendly part towards Bacon. When the House of Com mons showed some hesitation in allowing the attorney-general to sit as a member, Yelverton came to the rescue and Bacon was admitted ; and when Bacon had become lord keeper, and had got into temporary disgrace 'both with the king and Bucking ham for his interference in respect to tiie marriage of Sir John Villiers with Sir Edward Coke's daughter, Yelverton, who had succeeded as attorney-general on March 7, 1617, wrote him a letter of excellent advice how to act under the circumstances. But whether Bacon was offended, at Sir Henry for not following his example in pleading against the Earl of Somerset, or for his presumption in offering counsel to his superior, or more probably because he wished to ingratiate himself with Buck- 780 YELVERTON ingham, he frequently speaks injuriously of Yelverton in his correspondence with that nobleman, (Bacon's Works [Montagu], xU, 263-5, 331, 387,) Yelverton was no favourite with the duke, who was preju diced against him from his connection with Somerset, from his being suspected of implication in Bacon's interference in regard to the marriage, and particularly from his declared independence of the duke's pro tection. Judge Whiteloeke (Liber Fame licus, 55) gives a curious account, which he had from Yelverton's own mouth, of the ' manner of his coming to the place ' of attorney-s:eneral. Though pressed by the courtiers to apply to Buckingham, who ' was agent to another, and did crosse him,' he refused to ' deal with him about it nor speak to him,' but protested 'he would leave it to the king, who he knew had judgment enough to cliuse his own ser vants.' At last Buckingham sent to him to bring his warrant, and expostulated -with him that he had not used his help, telUng him that he looked not for any recompense, though Sir Jamea Ley had offered 10,000/. for the place. Yelverton proteated to WMtelocke 'that he neither gave to the erl, or to any other subject in the kingdom, one farthing to cum to the place, , , , but when the busine.9se waa done, he went privately to the king, and told him he did acknowledge how like a good master and worthye prince he had dealte with him; and although there was never mention, speech, or expectation of anything to be had for his having of this place, but he came to it fi-eel}', yet out of his duty he wolde give him 4000/. reddy money. Tbe king,' proceeds the relation, ' tooke him in his armes, thanked him, and commended him muche for it, and told him he had need of it, for it must serve even to buy him dishes.' One of the first public duties Yelverton was called upon to perform was to pray an order of the court for execution of Sir Walter Raleigh, on the judgment pro nounced against him fifteen years before ; and the language in which he did it forms a strong contrast with that adopted by Sir Edward Coke on his trial. (State Trials, ii. 33.) He held his office for three years, sup ported by the favour of the king; but Buckingham, whom he further displeased by his opposition to some of the illegal patents -which were afterwards the subject of enquiry, was resolved to remove him. An opportunity was at last found, A new charter had been gi'anted to tbe city of London, into vphich the attorney-general was charged with having introduced cer tain clauses not comprehended iu the king's warrant. Yelverton's submission not being considered satisfactory by the council, they YELVERTON recommended that he should be sequestered and proceeded against in the Star Chamber. He was accordingly superseded on June 27, 1620, and the proceedings in the Star Chamber commenced, in which Yelverton cleared himself of any corruption, but ac knowledged himself guilty through igno rance ; and Bacon making a Jesuitical speech against him, and Coke pressing him hard, he was sentenced to imprisonment during pleasure, and to a fine of 4000/. Bacon's letters, and his expression ' how I stirred the court I leave it to others to speak,' show hia mean endeavours to aid BucMng ham's inveteracy. (Bacon's Works, xii. 266, 446-9.) Yelverton was committed to the Tower, and while there the parliament by which Bacon was condemned met. In the course of their investigations into the grievances of patents the Commons impli cated Yelverton, who, in his answer to the Lords, cleared himself fi-om the charge, boldly asserting his innocence, aud attribu ting his present imprisonment to the course which he had taken in the Patent of Inns, The king thereupon took the matter up, and, though in his speech he acqmtted Sir Henry, who he acknowledged disUked and resisted the proceedings intended against the innkeepers, yet, because in his defence he had inferred that ' all the punishment upon him was for his good service done to his majesty,' he called upon the Lorda, 'who are able to do him justice, to pumsh Sir Henry Yelverton for Ms slander,' Yelver ton, on being afterwards brought up again, made this inference more clear, by dfrectly charging Buckingham with being 'ready, upon every occasion, to hew him do-wn,' and with threatenmg that he ' should not hold his place a month if he did not con form himself in better manner to the Patent of Inns,' and by roundly asserting ' that he suft'ered unjustly by his lordship's meana,' This was natm-ally deemed an aggravation of his offence, and on May 16, I62l, hewas sentenced to be imprisoned, and to pay 10,000 marks to the Mng, and 5000 to Buckingham, who immediately remitted his part of the flne, and the prince and the Lords agreed to move his majesty to miti gate the other, (ParL Hist, i, 1232-5, 1243-8, 1255-9.) He did not long continue a captive in the Tower. It ia related that Buckmgham came to him there in disguise, and from tbe result of the interview (the very improbable details of which Sir Anthony Weldon (Court of James, 157) professes to give), he made his peace, and procured his imme diate release. He resumed his practice at the bar iu the following Michaelmas Term, when his name appears in Croke's Reports, and for the remainingfour years of the reign, 'That the reconciliation was complete is apparent from the factthat, within six weeks YONGE after King Charles came to the crown, Buckingham procured for him a seat on the bench of the Common Pleas, not to supply any vacancy, but in addition to the court as a flfth judge. He received his patent on May 10, 1626 ; and, according to Bishop Hacket (ii. 19), there were rumours of his being made lord keeper by the removal of Lord Coventry, which was only prevented by the assassination of the duke, within eighteen months of which Sir Henry's own career was closed by his death on January 24, 1630, at his house in Aldersgate Street. His remains were removed for interment in the church of Easton-Mauduit, where a monument is placed with recumbent effi gies of himself and his lady. He was much respected and admired by his contemporaries for his eloquence, his courage,, his integrity, and his leaming. His reputation as a lawyer was very great, and was not diminished by the subsequent publication, by Sir W. Wylde, of his ' Re ports of Special Cases,' CecU Earl of Salisbury, at an early period of his career, gave this testimony of him to his face : ' Indeed, I must say your father's education of you, that have made you so lively resem ble himself, for you have good elocution and sound reason, whereby the apprehen sion ofthem that hear you is made more active, and so hath your father, which is a great merit in the professors of the law,' (Archeeologia, xv. 51.) He married Margaret, daughter ofRobert Beale, Esq., clerk of the council to Queen EUza'beth, who had the unpleasant duty of reading the warrant for the execution of Mary Queen of Scots at the scaffold on which she suffered. He left several chil dren, the eldest of whom, Christopher, was created a baronet in 1641, and was suc ceeded in the title by his son. Sir Henry, who married Susan, in her own right Baroness Greyde Ruthyn. This titie (after the extinction in 1799 of two others sub sequently granted) survived, and has been since home by many generations, _and is now in abeyance, (Athen. O.von. ii. 476 ; CoUins's Peerage, vi. 624.) YONGE, Thomas, several of whose an cestors were merchants of Bristol, in such high estimation as to be elected repre sentatives of that city from the reign of Edward III., was the son of Thomas Yonge, who was mayor of Bristol m 12 Henry IV. The maiden name of his mother, Joan, is not known. He was the elder of two brothers, the younger of -wliom, John, was member for London m 33 Henry VL, lord mayor in 4 Edward IV., and knighted in 11 Edward IV. He was a member ofthe Middle Temple, and represented his native city m seven parUaments from the thirteenth year of the reign of Henry VI. In that of the tMrty- YONGE 781 third year he moved that, as Henry was without children, the Duke of York should be declared heir presumptive to the crown. The time, however, had not arrived for the duke's partisans to speak out ; and the in discreet member, for this premature exhibi tion of his zeal, was straightway committed to the Tower. (Lingard, v. 141.) His party having shortly afterwards gained the ascendency, he petitioned the parliament for damages on account of Ms imprisonment, which he laid at one thousand marks ; and the Mng was compelled to assent to the prayer, referring it to the lords of his coun cil to provide what should be thought con venient and reasonable. (Rot. Pari v. 387.) His attendance in parliament did not prevent his practising at the bar, and the Year Book records bis name from 27 Henry VI. The accession of Edward IV, insured him legal honours, and accordingly he was summoned to take the degree of the coif on November 7, 1463, and was appointed one of the king's Serjeants on the very next day. On the first opportunity he was raised to the bench, being constituted a judge of the Common Pleas about November 1467. The first fine levied before him was in the following February. (Dugdale's Orig. 46.) Notwithstanding his known attachment to the Yorkists, he was not removed from his seat when Henry VI, was restored to the throne in October 1470, the advisers of that unfortunate monarch probably deeminir it politic to make as Uttle change as possible in the administration of the law. But when Edward IV. retumed, at the end of aix months, Yonge was auperseded, or at least was not re-appointed. That thia was more the result of his own choice than of any displeasure felt against him by the king may be presumed from the fact that in the act of resumption, passed two years afterwards, the grant of an annual tun of wine which had been made to him for his Ufe in 9 Edward IV. was excepted from its operation. (Rot. Pari vi. 82.) He however resumed the judicial ermine in 15 Edward IV., being constituted a judge, not of his old court, but of the King's Bench, on April 29, 1475. He died in the following year, 1476, and was buried in Christ Church, London. (Stow's London [Thorns], 120.) By his wife, Joan, he left several sons, one of whom is believed to have been the under-mentioned John Yonge. One of the descendants of the judge's eldest son, Thomas, was in 1661 honoured with a baronetcy, which became extinct in 1810, YONGE, John, whom Fuller in his ' Worthies ' has mistaken for a John Young who was made Bishop of Callipoli in Thrace in 1517, a year after this John Yonge's death, is believed to have been one of the sons of the .above Thomas Yonge, and to have been born at Rye, receiving 782 YORK his education first at Wykeham's college at Winchester, and then at New College, Oxford, He graduated as doctor in both laws, and practised as an advocate in the ecclesiastical courts, taking, as was then usual, holy orders also. In March 1602 he was presented to the church of St, Stephen, Walbrook; in March 1604 to that of St. Mary le Bow ; and in July 1513 to that of Cherfield in the archdeaconry of Huntingdon, the latter of which waa given to him by Cardinal Wolsey, whom he suc ceeded on May 17, 1514, as defin of York, when he resigned Ms other preferments._ The first mention of him in connection -vrith politics is on May 16, 1503, as a wit ness to the enrolment of the bull relating to the chapel of Windsor. In August he was at the head of the commiaaioners to negotiate a mercantile treaty vrith Philip Duke of Burgundy ; and in May 1506 he was employed to treat for the marriage of the king with Margaret Duchess of Savoy (Rgmer, xiii. 61,105, 128), an object which waa subsequently reUnquished. Yonge's exertions were not overlooked, the office of master of the Rolls being given to him on January 22, 1508, 23 Henry VII. On the accession of Henry VIII, Dr, Yonge's appointment was renewed ; and his diplomatic services were afterwards occasionally demanded, (Lingard, vi. 9.) He retained the mastership of the RoUs till hia death, which happened on April 25, 1616, two years after he had become dean of York. On his monument in the Rolls Chapel, the work of Pietro Torregiano, a very eminent Florentine, he is represented in a scarlet robe with a four-comered cap. Besides the favour of Wolsey, he has the credit of having been the friend of Dean Colet and the patron of Erasmus. (Athen. Oxon. ii. 727 ; Dugdale's Orig. 335.) YOEK, William of (Bishop oe Salis buey), was brought up as an ecclesiastic and a la-wyer, and in 1226, 10 Henry IIL, was granted 10/. for his expenses on an iter into Lincolnshire. (Rot. Claus. ii. 119.) His name occurs as justice itinerant iu Cumberland and tbe liberties of the bishop ric of Durham, in 11 and 12 Henry III. (End. 213), about which time he was pro bably appointed one of the regular justiciers at Westminster. Fines were levied before him from 1231 to 1230. (Dugdale's Orig. 43.) On July 6, 1234, on the nomination of three judges of the Common Pleas, they were directed to be admitted by Robert de Lexinton and William of York, who were most likely the two senior judges, and per haps pre.sided in tbe two branches of tbe court. This receives some confirmation from the fact that the former wa,"* placed at the head of the justices a.-^-sigued for the northern counties, and the latter at the bead of those for the southern counties, who YORKE were sent throughout England in 1240, under the pretence of redreaaing grievances and easing the people, but with the real object of collecting money for the royal treasury by means of fines and confiscations. About this time he was made provost of Beverley, was subsequently rector of Eton and of Gatton, and in December 1246 was elected Bishop of Saliabury. His elevation to the episcopal bench does not appear to have removed him from his judicial duties, as in 36 Henry III, he atanda at the head of a commission to hear the pleas of the city of London, which were wont to be decided before the justices itinerant, Matthew Paris mentions him as moat learned iu the laws, and a great favourite with the king. He died on January 31, 1266, and was buried in his o-wn cathedral. (Godivin, 844 ; Le Neve, 257 ; Excerpt e Rot Fin. i, 292, 431 ; Abb. Placit 106-120.) YOEKE, Philip (Eael oe Haedvpicke), The character of this great man and distin guished judge has had scanty justice done to it by his biographers. Living when party spirit ran extravagantly high, it is not surprising that the estimate formed of it by the opposing factions should be as -wide apart aa their political opinions ; but even his gi-e.atest vituperators, while oriti- sing, and perhaps condemning, his proceed ings as a statesman, are forced to acknow ledge his transcendent abilities as a magis trate. It is, however, curious to see two of his opponents differ -widely in thefr re marks. Lord Chesterfield says that Lord Hardwicke ' was never in the least sus pected of any kind of corruption ;' that 'he was an agreeable eloquent speaker in par liament; and that ' he was a cheerful in structive companion, humane in his nature, decent in his manners, and unstained by any \'\ce (except avarice).' Horace Wal pole, to whom he was a subject of personal aversion, on the contrary insinuates the re verse of all this, spesiking of ' the extent of his baseness,' and asserting that ' m the House of Lords he was laughed at, in the cabinet despised,' thus carrying his invete racy to so absurd a degree that no reliance can be placed on anything that be relates. Tbe best memoir is -the one in ~Sh. Welsby's collection ; but both that and Lord Camp bell's give too much weight to the 'sketch' published by Mr. Cooksey in 1791, and to the gossiping and malicious stories con tained in the letter introduced in the sketch from an anonymous correspondent, who vents the most virulent abuse, and even commits the gross extravagance of charging Lord Hardwicke with causing his nephew to be sent on a fatal expedition, in order that by his de.ath he might succeed to his property— in short, accusing him of a conspiracy to niui'der. Lord CampbeU, YORKE though of the same party and approving his political principles, and of the same profession and cognisant of the veneration with which his memory is regarded by its members, seems to grudge the encomiums he is obUged to bestow, attenuating them by so many qualifications that the reader cannot but regret that his lordship did not recollect his own remark, that ' historians and biographers make sad mistakes when they begin to assign motives — which how ever they often do as peremptorily as if they lived in famiUar con-fldence with those whose actions they narrate.' A. sub sequent Life has been published by Mr. George Harris in three volumes, which is written in so lengthy and unmteresting a style, and interlarded with so much extra neous matter and so many insignificant de tails, that it has not met -with the favour to which it would have otherwise been en titled, for the valuable materials and au thentic documents which the author has had an opportunity of furnishing, Simon Yorke, the grandfather of Lord Hardvricke (descended, according to the inscription on his grave in St, James's Church, Dover, from the ancient family of Yorke long settled in North Wiltshire), left his native county at the time of the Great Rebellion, and established himself as a merchant at Dover. By the council books of that corporation it appears that at the Restoration he was restored to the office of common councilman. At his death in 1682 he left several sons, one of whom, Philip, pursued the profession of the law with great success in the same town, where he fllled the office of town clerk, and occu pied one ofthe handsomest houses, the an tique beauty and great extent of which are remembered by some of its present inha bitants. This "Philip married EUzabeth, daughter and heir of Richard Gibbon of Dover, and widow of her cousin Edward Gibbon of Westcliffe, near that town, whose namesake and descendant became illustri ous in Uterature as the historian of the ' DecUne and Fall of the Roman Empire.' Of the numerous family he had by her only three survived him — one son, the subject of the present sketch, and two daughters. That hia death did not occur till June 1721 is a pregniint refutation of the report that he was distressed in his circumstances and died in despair, inasmuch aa his son had long before that date gained an emi nent position at the bar, had for the seven previous years been a member of parlia ment, and for more than a year had held the prominent and profltable post of solici tor-general. Thia report originated, aa far aa I can trace (for no aUusion is made to the alleo-ed indigence of the father by any of the son's contemporaries), in the anony mous letter before mentioned, which Mr. YORKE 783 Cook.sey thought flt to pubUsh, although containing a variety of frivolous details not tending, aa the writer candidly professes, 'to flatter his lordship's memory.' The tale, without any better authority, has been subsequently repeated ; and Lord Campbell perpetually harps upon the penury under which the chanceUor commenced his career. Its improbability is apparent from the fact that several estates belong^ing to the father have remained in the family till the present generation ; and it is contrary to all likeli hood that a prosperous son who inscribed a tablet in St. James's Church, Dover (still existing), to the memory of his parents at the death of his mother in 1727, con cluding with the expressive line Quos amor in vitfi conjunxit, non ipsa mors divisit, would suffer poverty to overtake them during their lives. Philip Yorke the son waa born at Dover on December I, 1690, and received hia education at a school of considerable reputation at Bethnal Green, kept by Mr, Samuel Morland, a man of great classical attainments. He continued there till Christmas 1706, having by his diligence, his talents, and general behaviour earned the affection of his master, who for some years afterwards kept up a Latin coiTe spondence with him. Two of Mr. Morland's letters are preserved. The first is dated iu February 1706-7, written soon after Yorke left the school, in which the proud tutor not only predicts his pupil's future cele brity, but declares that he reputes that the happiest day of his life on which he was entrusted with his education. The other is dated October 1708, and addressed to his pupil at Mr, Salkeld's in Brooke Street, Holbom, to whom his father had sent him for his elementary legal studies. Mr. Salkeld waa not, aa some biographers have stated, the learned serjeant of that name (a natural mistake, as he was then in full practice, and lived for several years after, and as his well-known Reports were first published under the care of Lord Hardwicke) ; but he was the Serjeant's brother, and an eminent attomey, who must have held a high rank among his brethren, since in his office Viscount Jocelyn, lord chancellor of Ireland, Sir Thomas Parker, lord chief baron, and Sir John Strange, master of the Rolls, besides Lord Hard- wir'ke, the most eminent of all, were at different times seated as pupils. That Mr. Salkeld was Mr. Yorke's London agent, or that he received tbe son as his 'gratis clerk,' there is no other authority than the gos.sip of Mr. Cooksey's anonymous correspondent. The improba bility, if not the falsehood, of hoth stories is evident from the fact that Mr. Yorke, 784 YORKE two months before Ms son left school, commissioned a relative in London to find an eminent attorney with whom to place his son, which would have been quite unnecessary had he had any previous con nection with Mr. Salkeld ; and in the same letter, so far from alluding to his supposed poverty, or intimating a wish to avoid the expense, he desires his friend ' to learn the tei-mes on which he may be disposed of Neither does it appear at all, though generally asserted, that the son was in tended for his father's branch of the pro fession; but, on the contrary, the expression used by his father in the above letter is that he is ' desiroua to place him ¦with an eminent attomey in the Common Pleaa /or three years, that by the practis of the lawe he may be better quaUfied for the study of it.' This term was not a sufficient service then, any more than it is now, to enable a clerk to be admitted an attorney, and the father's expression seems_ clearly to show his inclination to bring his son up to the bar. Jeremy Bentham also, in a letter to Mr. Cooksey (54, 72), states expreaaly that tbe father, ' intending^ him for the har, very judiciously placed him with Mr. Salkeld' (Harris, i. 27, 29) ; and that he did so in tend is confirmed by the fact that before the young student had been two years with Mr. SaUield he was, on November 29, 1708, actually admitted a member of the Middle Temple. The anecdote told of Mrs. Salkeld send ing him on family errands, and to fetch in littie necessaries from the markets, and of the ingenious mode he took for putting a stop to the practice by charging Mr. Sal keld with coach-hire for the carriage, has little bearing on the question. Besides the recollection that youth was not so tenacious and dignified as in the present age, it proves nothing more than that tbe lady took too great advantage of the extreme good-nature for which the young pupil was no doubt then as famous as he was in after Ufe, Soon after hia admiaaion he left Mr. Salkeld's, and took chambers in Pump Court in the Temple, where he not only pursued with assiduity his legal studies, attending the courts and noting cases, but employed his leisure hours in polite litera ture and philosophical enquiries. There he composed, there is little reason to doubt, though it has been disputed, the letter which appeared in the ' Spectator ' of April 28, 1712, under tbe signature Philip Home bred, ridiculing the common practice of sending unfledged youth on foreign travel ; the only literary, not legal, perforra.ince on which he ever ventured. About this time he was introduced to Lord Maccleafleld, lord chief juatice of the King's Bench, either (for tbe narrationa vary) by IMr. Salkeld, or Mr. George Parker, the chief YORKE justice's son, or by Mr. Thomas Parker, the chief justice'snephew. The latter was aclerk iu Mr. Salkeld's office, but probably not at the same time, as he was five years Yorke's junior; so that if he was the introducer, it would appear that Yorke frequented Mr. Salkeld's office after his admission to the Middle Temple, and also was a brother- student vrith Parker in that society. What ever was the object of the mtroduction, it led to an intimacy most beneficial to the young man when he -went to the bar. It turned out, however, very injurious to the peer, as, it is asserted, the favour he showed to Yorke in the Court of Chancery excited the jealousy of some of hia seniors so much that it gave additional mveteracy to the earl's prosecution. Yorke was called to the bar on May 6, 1715, and almost immediately obtained considerable employment. That for this success he was partly indebted to his legal connection, and partly to the mfiuence of his patron, there can be no doubt; but neither would have avaUed him had he not shown himself competent to improve the opportunities thus put in his way. His superiority of talent was soon recognised, and that it procured Mm a large accession of business is proved by the anecdote re lated in the memofr of Sfr Littleton Powys. Other and better testimonies of the esti mation in which he was regarded are to be found in the two following facts. Before he had been four years at the bar he was sent down by the government to supply a vacancy in the borough of Lewes, and was retumed its member on May 2, 1719, And, secondly, his marriage later m the same month -with Margaret, the daughter of Mr, Charles Cocks of Worcester, by the sister of Lord Somers, and the young widow of Mr. William Lygon of Maddresfield. This lady he had met at her uncle's, Sfr Joseph Jekyll, whose strong recommendation of him and his future prospects overcame the objections of the father to a suitor who had no present means of making a settiement. He kept up constant intercom^se with hia family and friends at Dover, and was ap pointed recorder or steward of that cor poration, NotMng appears in this inter course that gives the slightest insinuation of the miputed penury of his father. The correspondence to which JMr, Harris has had access contains the strongest proofs ot Yorke'a affection for both his parents, and of his kindness to his sister, .and liberality to her and her unfortunate husband, whose indigence was caused by his dissipation and misconduct. It also afibrds ample evidence that throughout Yorke's career in life he never deserted the friends of his youth, but did what he could to advance tiiem ; thus manifestly showing the malice of Mr, Cook sey's anonymous correspondent in inventing YORKE -tales of a contrary tendency, which it is to he regretted have been too easily repeated by Lord Campbell, without sufficient en- ;;,q,uiry into their truth. Hia father Uved to see the flrst fruits of his son's success, and died in June I72I, fifteen months after bis ffrst promotioa. . That promotion took place in less than two years after his marriage, when he was appointed solicitor-general on March 22 1720, being knighted, and soon after be coming bencher, treasurer, and reader of his inn. On January 31, 1724, he succeeded to the office of attorney-geneisl, and thus within nine years after hia call to the bar, and before he had attained thirty-four years of age, he had outstripped all his colleagues and become the leader in Westminster Hall. If he had been a scion of nobility, or sur rounded with the highest connections, it would be idle to suppose that he could have attained this eminence by means of mere patronage. He filled tbis office for above ten years, four under George I. and six under George ll.jandhisexcellenceboth as an advocate and as a public prosecutor was acknowledged as well by his political opponents as his friends. 'Ihe first is evidenced by the frequent re currence of his name in the Reports of the time, and by the anxiety expressed in many private letters from parties desiroua of his aid. The laat is proved by his speeches, , remarkable at the same time for their humanity and temperance and for their i force and effect, and is unmistakably con- , firmed by the applause of both sides of the House of Commons on an accidental allu sion by him to his conduct while in office. A magistrate against whom he was engaged as counsel thought proper to challenge him, and was obliged to ask his pardon in open court in order to prevent a criminal infor mation. (Gent. Mag. i. 29.) His general success is manifested by his being enabled to purchase in 1725 the manor and estate of Hardwicke in Gloucestershire, which i cost him about 24,000/. He continued in parliament from his first election for Lewes in 1719 till he was pro moted to the upper house in 1783, being returned for Seaford in the two intervening pariiaments of 1720 and 1727. Each of -theae seats he owed to the patronage of the Duke of Newcastle, who from the first saw his merit, and to the last never deserted him. With whatever disregard the cha racter of his grace may be treated, he cannot be refused the credit of discrimination in this early recognition of the talents of a young Man who became one of the most efficient supports of his administration. Sir Philip's reported speeches as a com moner exhibit that power of argument and lucid arrangement for which he waa always remarkable, and fully justify the YORKE 785 respect and deference which were p.rid ta his opinion in the house. To this feeling on the part of his senatorial colleagues mav be attributed his being excused from taking any part in the impeachment of the Earl of Maocleafield, on account of the close friend- ahip that existed between them. That he took no more steps in the earl's behalf than by speeches in his place in parliament has been unjustly made the ground of animad version, without a suggestion of what more he could have done, and without consider ing that, being a member of the House of Commons, he could not take a profeaaional part in the defence of one whom that houae had chosen to prosecute. It is rather laugh able that, more than a century after the earl's death, he should be pitied for the de sertion of a friend — of which he himself was never conscious — with whom he kept up a cordial intercourse from the time of his trial to hia death, and to whom in his laat letter he describes himself aa Ma ' most affectionate and most faithful humble ser vant,' (Harris, i. 179, 222,) In 1727 he published anonymously a work, which has been erroneoualy fathered on Sir Joaeph Jekyll, entitled ' A Discourse on the Judicial Authority belonging to the M.ister of the Rolls in the High Court of Chancery,' It was apparently in answer to ' The History of the Chancery,' published the year before by Mr, Samuel Burroughs, whom Lord Chancellor King rewarded -with a mastership in Chancery, Sir Philip's book evinced great learning and research, and on being answered by Burroughs, with the as sistance of Warburton, afterwards Bishop of Gloucester, in a work called ' The Legal Judicature in Chancery Stated,' waa re published in a aecond edition with a preface containing an elaborate reply to all the op posing arguments. (Ibid. 195.) Lord Chief Justice Raymond died on March 19, 1783, and his place in the Court of King's Bench remained vacant for nearly eight months, although Sir Philip Yorke waa regarded aa the only competent suc cessor, and although the Duke of Somerset was assured by the Duke of Newcastle that it was at his own choice to succeed. (Ibid. 130.) It is not unlikely that there was some prudent hesitation on his o-wn part to leave the profitable position of attomey- general, for he says to the Duke of Somer set, ' I am doubtful how suitable the office of chief justice ofthe King's Bench maybe to my circumstances at this time of life, and with a numerous family,' Some time probably elapaed in overcoming that hesi tation, and the rest may be well accounted for in arranging the means of doing so. It was at last effected by increasing the salary of 2000/. to 4000/. a year, which Sir PhiUp insisted should not be for himaelf alone, but for his successors also. He was also to be 3e 786 YORKE raised to the peerage. He was accordingly appointed chief justice on October 31, 173.3, and created Lord Hardwicke on Novem ber 23. Much credit cannot be placed on the statement made by some that he aimed at the Seals, but gave way to bis friend the Solicitor-General Talbot; and still less to the assertion, made by othera, that they were actually offered to him and declined. In 1784 he was elected recorder of Glou cester, and continued to hold tbe office till his death, when he was succeeded in it by his son Charles Yorke, During the three years and a half that he presided over tbe King's Bench he more than satisfied the expectations of those who had formed the most favourable opinion of him. His legal knowledge, his habitual caution, his firmness and discrimination, gave weight to his decisions, and excited unquestioned admiration from even those to whom they were adverse. In the House of Lords also he shone with equal brilliancy. In the speeches he delivered there was so much solidity, argument, and eloquence that his brother peers welcomed him as nn accomplished colleague. With this superiority both as ajudge and a sena tor, his advance to a higher dignity could not but be anticipated. 'The opportunity soon occurred. Lord Talbot died after a short and brilliant career ; and on the very day of the event the Great Seal was presaed upon Lord Hardwicke, He hesi tated to accept the precarious honour, and to give up a permanent position, to the duties of which he was accustomed, and iu which he had the opportunity of providing for his family by the expected falling in of a valuable office. This difficulty being soon overcome by giving him an equivalent in a grant in reversion to his eldest son of a tel lership of the Exchequer, he undertook the office and was constituted lord chancellor on February 21, 1737. For the next four months Lord Hard wicke held both the offices of lord chan cellor and lord chief justice, and occasionally sat in the King's Bench till June 8, when the appointment of Sir William Lee to the latter court took place. He retained the Great Seal for nearly twenty years of his life, and rendered his name illustrious both as a statesman and a judge. The acts and poUcy of tbe govem ment, for which as a member of it he was responsible, and which he moderated by his prudent counsel and supported by his powerful eloquence, belong more to the history of the country than to the bio graphy of the man. But under Sir Robert Walpole's ministry, and those that suc ceeded it, he still maintained liis influence, accommodating the personal disputes and feuds in the cabinet, and looked up to with YORKE respect and deference by all parties in the senate. He seems to have excited'the ani mosity of no one except Horace Walpole, who, for some cause or other, takes every opportunity to vilify him by putting false constructions on his actions and false co louring to his opinions. For his character as a judge, 'whether estimated by his deci sions, or by the arguments by which he supported them, or by the principles on which they were founded, or, to take a lower standard, by the unadorned eloquence in which they were delivered, we have only to refer to the ssitisfaction they gave to his contemporaries, to the deference with which they are still always quoted, and to the veneration with which his very name is regarded, even at tMs distance of time, by the ablest practisers of the law. Lord Hardwicke's entrance into tbe chancellorship was anything but auspicious. He at once was made to experience the disagreeables of office, by being forced to enter into the personal disputes of the royal family. He was commanded by the king on the very day of his appointment to carry an unwelcome message to the Prince of Wales, the sting of which however he managed to make less poignant ; and m the future progress of the quaiTel, harsh on one side, and foolish and in.solent on the other, he exerted himself as much as possible to eflect a reconcUiation. In the frequent absences of the king from England, Lord Hard-wicke was always left as one of the lords justices; and -with the Duke of Newcastle and his brother, after Sir Robert Walpole's resignation, had the principal management of the affairs of the kingdom. During one of these intervals commenced the Rebellion of 1745, which was treated at first with apathy and indif ference, and as of trifiing moment, till the success of the Young Pretender at Preston Pans and his march into England roused the country from its lethargy, and led to the retreat of the rebel army and its sub sequent defeat at Culloden. In the trials of the lords engaged in the conspiracy Lord Hardwicke acted as lord high steward, con ducting them with dignity and firmness ; and, though some -writers have considered his address to Lord Lovat as unneceasarily harsh and personal, it should not be for gotten that the occurrence of a second rebellion soon after that of 1716 required a more solemn and ciroumstanti.il exposi tion of its enormity, while the vile cha racter and disgraceful conduct of the titled criminal j ustified any severity of re mark, _ In July 1749 he waa unanimously elected high steward of the university of Cam bridge, an honour for which he' had reason to^ be proud, conferred as it was on one who, without the claim of an academical edu- YORKE cation, had acquired the reputation of high classical attainments, in addition to the eminent inteUectual powers with which he ¦was endowed. After having several times decUned an advance in the peerage, thouo-h pressed upon him by ministers, he was "at last induced to accept it, and on April 2, 1764, was created Earl of Hardwicke and Viscount Royston, dignities which were universally recognised as fitting rewards for his long and valuable services. For two years and seven months after this eleva tion he continued to execute the duties of his high office, and to be one of the most active and efficient advisers in the administration. But when the Duke of Newcastle was forced to succumb to the opposition and give way to the Duke of Devonshire as first lord of the Treasury, Lord Hardwicke took the opportunity to retire with his friend, and, notwithstanding all the efforts of the new ministry to retain him, on No vember 19, 1766, resigned the Great Seal, after holding it, according to his own com putation, 'nineteen years, eight months, and sixteen days,' Only two previous holders of the Seal, whether as keeper or chancellor, had exceeded this length of service — Sir Nicholas Bacon, who was keeper for twenty years ; and Sir Thomas Egerton, Lord EUesmere, who retained the Seal as keeper and chancellor twenty years and ten months ; and only one subsequent lord chancellor, John Lord Eldon, whose occupation of office extended to twenty- four years, ten months, and twenty-four days, with an interval of about a year. On the return of the Duke of Newcastle to power and his junction with Mr, Pitt in the following June, Lord Hardwicke again refused the Great Seal, but aided the mi nisterial counsels in the cabinet ; and it is a curious circumstance that he prepared all .the speeches fiom the throne till the year 1762, as he had previously done while in ¦ oifice. On Lord Bute's accession to the ministry. Lord Hardwicke, though off'ered the privy seal, retired altogether into pri vate Ufe, His health began to decUne in October 1763, and, gradually sinking, he died on March 6, 1764, at his house in Grosvenor Square, in the seventy-fourth year of his age. He was buried in the church of Wimpole in Cambridgeshire, where he had purchased in 1740 the large estate of ihe Earl of Oxford, the mansion on which he had greatly improved, A handsome monument to him and his lady by Scheemakers adorns the church. Lord Chesterfleld, his opponent in politics, acknowledges that he was ' unstained by any vice (except avarice),' but brings no proof to sustain the exception ; neither do we flnd anything in his career that substan tiates it. That he was careful of his gains, and neither profuse nor wasteful in his ex- YORKE 787 penditure, are rather proofs of his prudence as a man who has flrst to estabUsh himself in the world, and next to support the pro minent position to which he was called at an early period. That he kept up the dig nity of the various stations which he flUed, that he showed no penuriousness in the education of his seven children, that he was liberal in his charities, aud, above all, that he declined the ofl'er made to him of a pension on his retirement, leave a very con trary impression. It is not too much to say that the repu tation gained and deserved by Lord Hard wicke as a lawyer and a judge was not exceeded by any previous holder of the Great Seal, and has never been equalled, except perhaps in one instance, by any of his successors. The justice of his decisions no one has ventured to impugn ; all have been satisfled with the equitable principles they established, and have admired the reasoning by which he supported them. 'That only three of those pronounced in the course of nearly twenty years were the sub ject of appeal, and that none of them were reversed either during or after the termi nation of his chancellorship, must, notwith standing the depreciating remarks of Lord Campbell, be regarded at the present time aa a substantial proof of the excellence of his decree.', as it was in his own time ac knowledged by the President Montesquieu to be ' un 6loge au dessus de toute la flat- terie.' (Harris,ii. 398.) One of his contem poraries who practised under him and became the ablest common law judge that ever sat upon the bench, Lord Mansfield, said that ' when his lordship pronounced his decrees. Wisdom herself might be sup posed to speak,' Even Horace Walpole, whose personal antipathy is apparent in all he writes of him, does not deny his claims in this respect ; and the depreciating cha racteristics which he malignantly seeks to attach to Mm need no other refutation than the contradictions which the writer himself unconsciously produce.s. Every contemporary account shows how great was the influence he exercised both in the House of Commons and in the House of Lords, His ascendency in the cabinet is manifest by the deference paid to his opinion by Sir Robert W.alpole and the Duke of Newcastle, and by the respect and affection with which he was regarded by his sovereign. Some critics have objected to him that he was not a law reformer, seeming to consider that it is incumbent on every lord chancellor to distinguish his season of power by some legislative altera tion in the existing laws; wbile at the same time they complain of the onerous multiplicity and the absorbing nature of his various avocations. Lord Hardwicke probably thought that be was better 3 e2 788 YORKE employed and doing more essential good to his country by establishing that system of equitable jurisprudence of which he has the renown of being the framer, than in attempting to remove some slight defects which might incumber the proceedings. His justification has been made apparent by the many abortive attempts at amelioration that have recently seen the light. But though he abstained from interfering in these minor grievances, he devoted Ms attention as a legislator to those of more importance. By him was the bill for abolishing the feudal powers and the sepa rate jurisdiction in Scotland framed. He succeeded in passing am act for the natural isation of the Jews, with a view to remove civil disabilities on account of faith, which, however, popular prejudice induced parlia ment to repeal in thc foUowing year. And he put an end to the miseries to which every EngUsh family was liable by intro ducing the act for the prevention of clan destine marriages — a measure for which all parents (ay, and all youths, masculine and feminine) have reason to bless his name. The beauty of his person, the urbanity of his manners, and the peculiar sweetness of his voice enhanced' the admiration which could not fail to be excited by his excel lence aa a judge. His popularity among those who practised under him could not be exceeded, and few would deny the truth of the expression of one of them, that when lie quitted his high station ' he leit a name that will be mentioned with honour as long !is Westminster Hall lasts,' ( Wynne's Ser- jeant-at-Law, 103.) The unfortunate poet Richard Savage, in his ' character' of Judge Page, thus alludes to him : — ¦ Were all, like Yorke, of delicate address, Strength to discern, and sweetness to express, Learn'd, just, polite, born ev'ry heart to gain, Like Cummins mild, like Fortescue humane, All-eloquent of truth, divinely known, 80 deep, so clear, all Science is his own. The Countess of Hardwicke, after a happy union of forty-two years, died before her hus band, leaving five sons and two daughters. The eldest son, Philip, succeeded hia father and died without male issue, but by bis marriage with Lady Jemima Campbell, granddaughter of Henry Grey, first Duke of Kent, was the father of two daughters, who by special limitations became succes sively Baroneasea Lucaa and Countesses De Grey, titles which are now united with the earldom of Ripon. The chancellor's second son, the next- mentioned Charles, was the father of the third Earl of Hardwicke, and his descen dants atill inherit that title. The third son, Joseph, waa iu 1788 raiaed to tbe barony of Dover, which at his death in 1792 became extinct. The fourth son, John, was clerk of the YORKE crown, F.R.S., and M.P. for Reigate ; and the fifth son, James, enjoyed in succession the bishopries of St. David's, Gloucester, and Ely. Elizabeth, the elder of the chancellor's daughters, married Admiral Lord Anson; and Margaret, theyoungerdaughter, married Sir Gilbert Heathcote, Bart. ; but both died childless. {Cooksey's Sketch; and Lives by Mr. George Harris, and in Welsby's Col lection, and in Lord Campbell's Chancel lors, &c.) YOEKE, Chaeles, was the second son of the above PhiUp Earl of Hardwicke. He was born in January 1722, while his father was solicitor-general. At about ten years of age he was sent to a private school at Hackney, from which m 1739 he was removed to Corpus Christi College, Cam bridge. At both he was an eamest and successful student, and at the latter he gave early proofs of his classical attainments and his refined taste by his contributions to the ' Athenian Letters,' printed for private use in 1741. His father, destining him for his own profession, had entered him at the Middle Temple in December 1736, but upon his taking his degree he was transferred to Lincdn's Inn at the end of 1742, and assi duously availed himself of his father's expe rience by listening to his decisions in court, and hearing their explanations in private, as well as by a diligent study of the ordi nary books of legal instruction. In the be ginning of 1746, while yet a student, he issued an anonymous publication, entitled ' Considerations on the Law of Forfeiture,' in support of his father's bill to attaint the Pretender, then daily expected to land, in which he so ably illustrated the constitu tional argument by classical allusions that the treatise was greatly admired and went through several editions. The author was called to the bar of Lincoln's Inn on Fe bruary 1, 1745-0, The son of a chancellor, with a capacity to improve the advantage, was not Ukely to be long unemployed, and consequently we flnd him pleading successfully in the very next year before the House of Lords, and receiving the praise of his father, who, as his brother says, ' is not flippant in his com mendations.' He became his father's purse- bearer, and was made one of the clerks of the crown in Chancery. In 1747 he was returned for the family borough of Reigate, which he continued to represent in all the subsequent parliaments till that of 1768, when lie was elected for the university of Cambridge. In the Parliamentary Reports there are few specimens of his speeches, but contemporary letters and records prove that he took a prominent part in the debates, Amid all his legal and senatorial avocations he found time for intellectual relaxations, nnd for the enjoyment of friendly inter- YORKE course. _ He kept up a constant correspond ence with the President Montesquieu, and with Bishops Warburton and Hurd, for both of whom he exerted his interest. In 1751 he was appointed counsel to the East India Company, and in the next year he narrowly escaped being burnt to death. His chambers in Lincoln's Inn were di rectly over Mr, Wilbraham's, which caught fire, and Mr, Yorke had barely time to run down stairs almost naked, and take refuge with an opposite neighbour. His whole property was destroyed, including his books and manuscripts, and, what was of more importance, the valuable collection of state papers left by his great-uncle Lord Somers, which had been deposited with him for examination, and of which only a very small part was saved. Lord Hardwicke became extremely anxious about him in this visita-tion, as he knew that ' his spirits were not of the beat and firmest kind, and wished to do something to encourage him by some permanent provision. An attempt was accordingly made to obtain for him the appomtment of solicitor-general, which was not however successful ; but he was nomi nated soon after solicitor-general to the Prince of Wales, -with a patent of pre cedence. On Lord Hardwicke's resignation of the Great Seal in November 1766, the king promoted him to the solicitorship, as a mark of his approbation of his father's services. Mr. Yorke had at this time so large a practice and so high a reputation that the appointment caused no surprise or jealousy among Ms brethren. After a few months a new ministry was formed by the junction of the Duke of Newcastle with Mr. Pitt, in which Lord Hardwicke, though -without office, had great power ; who in January 1762 saw his son invested with the attorney-generalship. On the formation of the Bute ministry in the following May, the new attorney- y general began to feel his position uncom fortable, and wrote seriously to his father of his intention, if he resigned his office, of I retiring altogether from the bar. Although his father was at least in latent opposition to Lord Bute's admmistration, Charles . Yorke remained attorney-general during ita ¦ continuance, and at its termination he ad vised the prosecution of the famous No. 46 of the ' North Briton,' published on AprU 23, 1763 ; but he had nothing to do with the general warrant on which its firebrand author John Wilkes was arrested. In the ' subsequent ministry of George Grenville he ' defended the king's messengers in the ac tions brought against them for acting under it; but in subsequent debates he aclmow- k ledged the UlegaUty of such warrants. In • Auo^ust 1763 an attempt was made to form a new administration on a whig basis, a,nd ' the kin'' had apparently a satisfactory in- YORKE 789 terview with Mr. Pitt; but a sudden and unaccountable stop was put to the negotia tion. On the 3rd of November following this faUure Mr, Yorke thought proper to resign his office; and in the debate that soon after took place in the House of Com mons he maintained his opinion against that of Chief Justice Pratt, On his quitting office he attended the court on the outside bar in his stuff gown, althoug'h when ap pointed soUcitor-general to the Prince of Wales in 1754 he had received a patent of precedence, deeming probably that that patent was rendered void by his resignation. His brethren of the bar however paid him the compliment of giving him the privilege of precedence and pre-audience over them. He was chosen recorder of Gloucester in 1764 in the room of his father, who had died in March, On the subsequent death of Sir Thomas Clarke the post of master of the Rolls was offered to him and refused ; but he accepted a patent of precedence next after the at torney-general. In the miserable minis terial differences that followed, which resulted in the Marquis of Rockingham be coming prime minister, Mr. Yorke was in duced again to accept the office of attomey- general in July 1765, upon the king's promise that he should have the Great Seal in lesa than a twelvemonth. When, however, in the following year by another intrigue the ministry was again changed, and Mr. Pitt (now created Earl of Cliat- ham) obliged the king to make lyord Camden chancellor, Mr. "Yorke again threw up "his office, but kept his lead at the bar with the same success that had ever at tended him. The Earl of Chatham soon retiring, the Duke of Grafton became the head of the ministry, against whose measures a strong opposition was formed, in which the Earl of Hardwicke was one of the moat zealous; and Mr. Yorke, though taking no very active share, was of course united in the same ranks -with his brother. Lord Camden, though chancellor, at length felt obliged to give utterance to his condemnation of the policy of Ms col leagues, and was accordingly deprived of his office in January 1770, The Duke of Grafton knew not where to look for a suc cessor, the tenure of his power being so frail that none of his own party, if any were competent, would accept the pre carious honour ; and among his political antagonists he could not expect to find one who would not spurn the temptation. The attempt was made on Mr. Yorke, then the most popular lawyer .among them, and he had given the duke an absolute refusal. This he had reiterated to the king, but in an evil hour he was induced to have a second interview with hia majeaty, wheu, by flattery, by pressing entreaties, and even 790 YORKE by threats, he was so overborne as at last unwillingly to consent, without making any stipulations for his personal benefit. This occurred on January 17, 1770, His brother was, as he says, ' astounded,' and the oppositirn were loud in their dis approval ; but all observations were soon silenced by the public being overwhelmed by the announcement three days after of his sudden death. It ia not to be wondered at that under auch circumstances a report should have arisen that he died by his own hand, that it should be circulated with minute details in various publications, and even that it should still be believed by many, though no proof was ever produced that it had any substantial foundation. The evidence on the contrary seenia to be — that no inquest was holden by the coroner; that persons were immediately after the death admitted to view tbe body; that Horace Walpole (no friend to the family), in a private letter written at the time, states that the death was caused by a high fever and the bursting of a blood vessel ; and that on a recent revival of the report the surviving members of the family gave it a distinct and positive contradic tion, (Morn. Chron. May 12, June 6, 1828.) The subject is too delicate for dis cussion, which would lead to no useful re sult. It is enough to say that tbe melan choly event, however it occurred, was to be attributed to his vexation caused by his frit nds' disapprobation, and to his anxiety how to meet the confusion of the times. The patent confening upon him the title of Lord Morden, which had been prepared, but had not passed the Great Seal, was after his death pressed upon but declined by his widow. ZOUCHE Such waa the termination of the aspira* tiona of Charles Yorke. To be the second chancellor of his family was a natural am bition. It was an office to which his un doubted talents, his extensive practice, and the high positions he had held in the pro fession entitled him to aim ; moreover, in which he would have had the universal suffrage of the bar ; and which the favour and even the absolute promise of his sove reign warranted him in expecting. But, of a reserved habit, fickle and irresolute, jealous of honour, yet sensitive of the slightest blame, he fell upon times when it was difficult to define the shades of party, and almost impossible to pursue an entirely independent and unexceptionable course. Twice had he accepted and twice resigned the office of attorney-general, and each acceptance and resignation seemed to be dictated more by personal than political impulses ; and at last, partly by flattery and partly by fear, he was induced to per mit the great object of his hopes to be thrust into his unwilling hands, not only against hia aettled and expressed convic tions, but at a time when he was sure to be assailed with the deepest rage of his recent associates, and to risk the more dreaded coldness of his family and friends.. His flrst -wife was Catherine, daughter and heir of William Freeman, Esquire, of Aspeden Hall, Herts. His second wife was Agneta, one of the daughters and co heirs of Henry Johnson, of Great Berkham- stead. By each he had issue. Philip, his son by his firat wife, became third Earl of Hardwicke by the death of hia uncle with out iasue in 1790, and was himaelf succeeded in the title in 1884 by his nephew, tbe pre sent peer. z ZOUCHE, Alan de, was the son of Roger de Zouche, of Ashby in Leicestershire, and of North Moulton in Devonshire, who was grandaon of the Earl of Brittany. (Baron age, i. 688.) In 34 Henry III. the custody of all the king's landa in Cheshire and North Wales waa granted to him. This Dugdale notices in his 'Baronage,' but makes no mention there of his being a justice of tbe King's Bench, although he has so intro duced him into his ' Chronica Series,' from a patent of the same date, adding the words *et ejus ampla potestas,' implying a,ppa- Tently that he waa chief of that court. The two quotations are no doubt taken from the same grant which included in his office of custos of Chester the power also of acting as king's justice there (Abh. Placit 142), to which the latter words refer. It may be questioned, therefore, whether he was one of the ju.'tices at Westminster, as his name is not otherwise mentioned among them. In 41 Henrylll. he was appointed justiciary of Ireland. (Cal.Rot.Pat.28;4ReportPub. Rec, App. ii, 146,) He acted as a justice itinerant in the counties of Huntingdon, Buckingham, and Northampton in 47 Henry HI,, being one of the years in which he was sheriff of the latter county, an office which he held from 45 to 50 Henry III, (Fullei-.) In the former of these years, 1261, he was constituted justice of all the king's forests south of Trent (E.rcerpt. e Rot. Fin. ii. 869, 404, 409), and in 47 Henry III. was seneschal to the king, (CaL Rot. Pat 32 34.) ' ZOUCHE DE HARING-WORTH After the battie of Evesham he waa one qf the persons nominated to carry into exe cution the dictum of Kenilworth, and ou June -.6, 1267, was appointed constable of Uie Tower of London (Ibid. 40), in which latter character, no doubt, it was that Stow caUs him custos of that city, Maitland in serts him iu his List of Mayors both iu 1267 and 1268, and both these authors allude to the site of his house in Lime Street. His death arose from a broil touching some title to land with John Earl Warren, who assaulted him and his son Roger in Westminster Hall, and grievously wounded both. Some accounts say that Alan was slain on the spot, and others that he did not die till two years from that time. It is certain, however, that his death occurred before October 20, 1270, 54 Henry IIL, his son Roger doing- homage for the lands of his father, ' lately deceased.' Earl Warren was compelled to make satisfaction before he was pardoned for Ms offence iu that year, and a fine of ten thousand marks was imposed upon him. (Baronage, i, 78, 688 ; Excerpt e Rot Fin. ii, 525.) He married Helena, one of the daughters and heirs of Roger de Quincy, Earl of Win chester, Roger, his sou, succeeded, but the' barony failed in the male line in L314, and is now in abeyance. (Nicolas's Sgiwpsis.) Besides the above-mentioned Roger, they liad a younger son named Eudo, who, by his marriage with Milisent, widow of Roger de Montalt, and one of the sisters and co heirs of George de Cantilupe, baron of Ber gavenny, became lord of Haringworth and many other manors, and was apparently the father of the next-mentioned William de Zouche. ZOTTCHE DE HABINGWOETH, Wilt.tam BE, In the early part of the reign of Ed- ZOUCHE DE HARING-WORTH 791 ward in. three eminent individuals named WUUam de Zouche flourished, one beino- of Ashby, .and the other two of Harinj?" worth. Of the two latter, one held the barony, and the other was of the clerical profession, archdeacon of Exeter in 1830, dean of York in 1336, Archbishop of York in 1342, and died in 1362. There are two reasons which seem to prove that the jus tice itinerant into Derbyshire in 4 Edward IIL, 1380, was the baron and not the priest. Had it been the latter, he would probably have been described by his clerical title and dignity ; and the only other commis sion of justicea itinerant iasued during that year was headed, as we conceive this to have been, by a nobleman. If tbis be the case, William de Zouche was the grandson of tbe above Alan de Zouche, through hia younger aon, Eudo. The manor of Haringworth in North amptonshire, with other extensive property, came into William's possession at the death of his mother, Milisent, one of the sisters and coheirs of George de Cantilupe, baron of Bergavenny, in 27 Edward I, Under Edward II. he distinguished himaelf as an adherent of the Earl of Lancaster, and ulti mately assisted in the deposition of that unfortunate monarch. He died on March 12, 1352. He married Maude, the daughter of .lohn Lord Lovel of Tichmersh, and the barony continued in the male line till 1625, when it fell into abeyance till 1816. It was then terminated in favour of Sir Cecil Bishopp, who died in 1828, leaving only two daugh ters, '.f he consequent abeyance was termi nated in 1829 in favour of the elder, the wife of the Hon. Robert Curzon, the mother of the present baron. (ParL Writs, ii, 1650; Baronage, i. 600; Nicolas's Synopsis.) ADDENDA. 792 ADDENDA, BACON, James, was a member of Gray's Inn, and was called to the bar on May 16, 1827. He received silk in 1846. He waa made one of tbe Commissioners of Bank ruptcy, and ou the establishment of the new court he was appointed chief judge. On July 2, 1870, he was elevated to the post of vice-chancellor in the place of Sir 'William Milbourne James, still, however, retaining his place of chief judge. t GIFFAED, Sie Geoege Maekham, died July 13, 1870, after only a short illness, having filled the post of lord justice of appeal a little more than eighteen months. He was considered one of the moat able judges on tbe Equity bench. The remarks of Lord Justice James on his taking his seat in court on July 1 5, which are annexed, show the estimation in -which he was held by his brethren : " I cannot proceed to the business of the daj^ without saying a few words on tbe sad event which cast its black shadow over this court. During the short period in which I have been in tbis seat it has been my misfortune not to have sat by the side of my lamented coUeague, but it has been my happiness to have known him well, intimately and as a friend, from the vei-y commencement of his professional life, and for many years we sat side by side in the court of "Vice-Chancellor Wood. He at the very outset obtained an amount of business under which a mind of less strength might well haye failed. But he applied himself to it with an industry which never to the end flagged. His acute intellect, sound judgment, and unsurpassed know ledge of legal principles made him the safest of .advisers to the numerous clients who sought his counsel. What his powers as an advocate were those only know and can tell who, like myself, were frequently engaged against him and found how for midable an opponent he was. But he waa not only a great lawyer and a great advo cate ; he was every inch an English gentle man. When, after many years of successful practice, he was elevated to the bench as vice-chancellor, and afterwards promoted to the office of lord justice, his elevation and promotion were received by his brethren with one unanimous acclaim, aud the whole profession recognised in his appointments the just rewards of pufe professional merits, honours and distinctions most worthily won and honourably bestowed. We all hoped that he had a long period of useful life before him, and that in this court and the judicial committee of the privy council the suitors, the profession, and the public would for many years have had tbe beneflt ofthe great judicial qualities which had already made him as eminent as a judge as he had been distinguished as a counsel. But it has seemed otherwise good to the Almighty Diapoaer of our Uves, The loss to me, who had hoped to have sat by him, is very great ; it is scarcely less great to you who have practised before him, I know and feel that this tribute to his memory, which has come from the bottom of my heart, flnds an answering echo in yours. May we in our respective careers be the better for thinking of what he was in them before us.' HELLISH, Geoege, appointed lord j ustice of appeal in the place of the late Sir G. M. Giffard, was a student of tbe Inner Temple, and was called to the bar on June 9, 1848. After practising successfuUj' for thirteen years in tbe common law courts, and on the Northern Circuit as a junior, he took silk in 1861, when his reputation increased rapidly, and of late years he has rarely been left out of any cause in which any deep point of law was involved. He was ap pointed lord juatice on August 4, 1870, with general satisfaction, though he had principally practised at common law, and shortly afterwards was knighted and made a member of the privy council. POLLOCK, Sie Feebeeick, late chief baron of tbe Exchequer, died on August 28, 1870, in his eighty-eighth year. He had retired from the bench four years, but re tained to the last tbe vigour of his intellect. LONDON: TKINTED BT ePOXTISTTOODB AND CO., NVW-BTBEIT SQCIEE AND i'.vnLlAMENT STltEIiT YALE UNIVERSITY a39002 00309252Bb iH'li'^i: liHii'l*''! ¦ '''•' mm.' -' LKmmiii'"' it Sh m I n > . w^- ¦ »¦¦.!• ! UT rilW''.'' ™K:*''' . ¦ " lis*- *'-^ii'i '• ¦' '