avoided trying witches himself as much as possible, and turned them over to his brother Judge, Mr. Justice Raymond, whom he allowed to hang them. He was once forced to try a wizard; but the fraud of a young girl, whom the prisoner was supposed to have enchanted and made to spit pins, was so clearly exposed by the witnesses, that the Chief Justice had the boldness to direct an acquittal.*

The Popish plot he treated as he did witchcraft. He disbelieved it from the beginning, but was afraid openly to express a doubt of its reality. He thought it might be exposed by the press, and he got a man to publish an anonymous pamphlet against it, to which he contributed; but sitting along with Chief Justice Scroggs, who presided at the trial of those charged with being implicated in it, he never attempted to restrain this " butcher's son and butcher" from slaughtering the victims.†

So on the trial of Lord Stafford, though he privately affected severely to condemn the proceeding, he would not venture to save Lord Nottingham, the High Steward, from the disgrace of assisting in that murder; and he dryly gave his own opinion, that two witnesses were not necessary to each overt act of treason.‡

We have still more flagrant proof of his baseness on the trial of Reading, prosecuted by order of the House of Commons for trying to suppress evidence of the plot. North himself now presided, and having procured a conviction,-in sentencing the defendant to fine, imprisonment, and pillory, he said, "I will tell you your offence is so great, and hath such a relation to that which the whole nation is concerned in, because it was an attempt to baffle the evidence of that conspiracy, which, if it had not been, by the mercy of God, detected, God knows what might have befallen us all by this time."§

We now come to present North on the political stage where he continued to act a very conspicuous and disreputable [A. D. 1679.] part down to the time of his death. In the year 1679, when the king adopted his new plan of government by a Council of thirty, of which Shaftesbury was made President, and into which Lord Russell and several of the popular leaders were introduced, it was thought fit to balance them by some determined ultra-royalists; and the Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, who had acquired himself the reputation of being the most eminent of that class, was selected, although he had not hitherto * Life, i. 255.

† "At the old Bailey," says his apologist, "where the Oatesian storms were most impetuous, the Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench steered the vessel, and the other Judges had little or no share in the conduct, whereby his Lordship (North) in the main, was rather an observer than an actor in these proceedings, to which hung the issues of life and death, And nothing can qualify the silence but the inconceivable fury and rage of the community, gentle and simple at that time, and that consequences of an open opposition to the chief, whose part it was to act as he did, demanding no assistance from any of them "-Life, i. 302 See St. Tr. vol. vi. vii; viii.

‡ 7 St. Tr. 1527.

§ Ibid. 310.

been a Privy Councillor. At first he seldom openly gave any opinion in Council,—but he secretly engaged in the intrigues which ended in the abrupt prorogation and dissolution of the parliament, in the dismissal of Shaftesbury, and the resignation of Lord Russell and the Whigs. The scheme of government was then altered, and a Cabinet, consisting of a small number of Privy To his Councillors, was formed, North being one of them. opinion on legal and constitutional questions, the government was now disposed to show more respect than to that of Lord Chancellor Nottingham.

There being much talk against the Court in the London coffeehouses, it was wished to suppress them by proclamation; and our Chief Justice being consulted on the subject, gave this response, —that "though retailing of coffee may, under certain circumstances, be an innocent trade, yet as it is used at present in the nature of a common assembly to discourse of matters of state, news, and great persons, it becomes unlawful; and as the coffee-houses are nurseries of idleness and pragmaticalness, and hinder the consumption of our native provisions, they may be treated as common nuisances." Accordingly a proclamation was issued for shutting up all coffee-houses, and forbidding the sale of coffee in the metropolis; but this caused such a general murmur, not only among politicians and idlers, but among the industrious classes connected with foreign and colonial trade, that it was speedily recalled.*

66

The meeting of the new parliament summoned in the end of 1679 having been repeatedly postponed, there arose the opposite factions of Petitioners" and " Abhorrers,”—the former petitioning the King that parliament might be speedily assembled for the redress of grievances, and the latter, in their addresses to the King, expressing their abhorrence of such seditious sentiments.

The

Petitioners," however, were much more numerous and active, and a Council was called to consider how their proceedings might be stopped or punished. Our Chief Justice recommended a proclamation, which the King approved of, and ordered the AttorneyGeneral, Sir Creswell Levinz, to draw. Mr. Attorney, alarmed by considering how he might be questioned for such an act on the meeting of parliament, said, "I do not well understand what my Lord Chief Justice means, and I humbly pray of your Majesty that his Lordship may himself draw the proclamation."-King. My Lord, I think then you must draw this proclamation."— Chief Justice. "Sire, it is the office of your Majesty's Attorney General to prepare all royal proclamations, and it is not proper for any one else to do it. I beg that your Majesty's affairs may go on in their due course; but if in this matter Mr. Attorney doubts anything, and will give himself the trouble to call upon me, I will give him the best assistance I can."

Sir Creswell having written on a sheet of paper the formal

* Examen, 140. Life, i. 298.

commencement and conclusion of a royal proclamation, carried it to the Chief Justice, who filled [DEC. 12.] up the blank with a recital that, "for spurious ends and purposes relating to the public, persons were going about to collect and procure the subscriptions of multitudes of his Majesty's subjects to petitions to his Majesty, which proceedings were contrary to the known laws of this realm, and ought not to go unpunished,”—and a mandate to all his Majesty's loving subjects of what rank or degree soever, "that they presume not to agitate or promote any such subscriptions, nor in any wise join in any petition in that manner to be preferred to his Majesty, upon pain of the utmost rigor of the law, and that all magistrates and other officers should take effectual care that all such offenders against the laws be prosecuted and punished according to their demerits."

Parliament at last met, and strong measures were taken against the "Abhorrers," who had obstructed the right of [Oct. 21, 1680.] petitioning. An inquiry was nstituted respecting the Proclamation. Sir Creswell Levinz was placed at the bar, and asked by whose advice or assistance he had prepared it. He several times refused to answer; but being hard pressed, and afraid of commitment to the Tower, he named the Lord Chief Justice North,-against whom there had been a strong suspicion, but no proof. A hot debate arose, which ended in the Resolution, That the evidence this day given to this House against Sir Francis North, Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, is sufficient ground for this House to proceed upon an impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanours."*

He was a good deal alarmed by the vote of impeachment, but it raised him still higher in favour at Court. Next day, presiding in the House of Lords as Speaker, in the absence of the Lord Chancellor, and seeming very much dejected, King Charles (according to his manner) came and clapped himself down close by him on the woolsack, and, My Lord,' said he, be of good comfort; I will never forsake my friends, as my father did." Majesty without waiting for a reply, then walked off to another part of the House.

His

A committee was appointed to draw up the articles of impeachment against the Chief Justice; but before they made any report, this parliament too was dis

solved.

[JAN. 18. 1681.]

Soon after the summoning of Charles's last parliament, North was obliged to set off upon the spring circuit; and notwithstanding his best efforts to finish the business rapidly, he could not arrive at Oxford till the two Houses had assembled, and had entered into the controversy respecting the trial of Fitzharris. He lodged in Trinity College, as his lady was one of the co-heirs of the founder, and there he kept a table for the well-affected mem

* Com. Journ. Nov. 25, 1679. 4 Parl. Hist. 1229.

bers of either House,-being "allowed to battle in the butteries."

As Lord Nottingham was able to be present and to preside in the House of Lords, North had no opportunity for [MARCH 28.] any public appearance; but we need not doubt that he was very active in private intrigues, and that he warmly supported the opportune doctrine, however much he might inwardly condemn it, that a Commoner may not be tried for his life by the House of Lords. He was of the small junto to whom was intrusted the secret of immediate dissolution. The moment the deed was done, he set off for London, pretending to be afraid of what he called "the positive armament against the King, which manifestly showed itself at Oxford."

As soon as the Cabinet met at Whitehall, North advised the issuing of a Declaration to justify the dissolution of [APRIL, 1681.] the three last parliaments which had met respectively at Westminster and at Oxford,—and himself drew an elaborate one, which was adopted. This state paper certainly puts the popular party in the wrong, upon the "exclusion question" and other matters, with considerable dexterity, and it was supposed to have contributed materially to the re-action going on in favour of the government.

So far his conduct was legitimate, and in the fair exercise of his functions as a Privy Councillor; but I am sorry to say that he now sullied his ermine by a flagrant disregard of his duties as a Judge. The grand jury for the city of London having very properly thrown out the bill of indictment against Stephen College, "the Protestant joiner," it was resolved to try him at Oxford; and for this purpose a Special Commission was issued,-at the head of which was placed Lord Chief Justice North. Burnet says mildly, "North's behaviour in that whole matter was such that, probably, if he had lived to see an impeaching parliament, he might have felt the ill effects of it."* After perusing the trial, I must say, that his misconduct upon it was most atrocious. The prisoner, being a violent enemy to Popery, had attended the city members to Oxford as one of their guard, with "No Popery" flags and cockades,―using strong language against the Papists and their supporters, but without any thought of using force. Yet the Chief Justice was determined that he should be found guilty of compassing and imagining the King's death, and levying war against him in his realm. College's papers, which he was to use

in his defence, were forcibly taken from him, on the ground that they had been written by some other persons, who gave him hints what he was to say. They were in reality prepared by his legal advisers, Mr. Aaron Smith and Mr. West. The prisoner was checked and browbeaten as often as he put a question or made an

* O. T. i, 504.

† Examen, 589. Roger North was him elf one of the counsel for the Crown.

observation. His defence was much more able than could have been expected from a person in his station of life ;-but, of course, he was convicted. The Chief Justice, in passing sentence, observed, "Look you, Mr. College; because you say you are innocent, it is necessary for me to say something in vindication of the verdict, which I think the Court were all well satisfied with. I thought it was a case, that, as you made your own defence, small proof would serve the turn to make any one believe you guilty. For, as you defend yourself by pretending to be a Protestant, I did wonder, I must confess, when you called so many witnesses to your religion and reputation, that none of them gave an account that they saw you receive the Sacrament within these many years, or any of them particularly had seen you at church in many years, or what kind of Protestant you were. But crying aloud against the Papists, it was proved here who you called Papists. You had the bolddess to say the King was a Papist, the Bishops were Papists, and the Church of England were Papists. If these be the Papists you cry out against, what kind of Protestant you are I know not, I am sure you can be no good one. How it came into your head, that were but a private man, to go to guard the Parliament, I much wonder. Suppose all men of your condition should have gone to have guarded the Parliament, what an assembly had there been! And though you say you are no man of quality, nor likely to do any thing upon the King's guards or the King's person, yet if all of your quality had gone upon the same design, what ill consequences might have followed? We see what has been done by Massaniello, a mean man in another country,-what by Wat Tyler and Jack Straw in this kingdom." College asked him to fix the day of his death, but he answered that that depended on the King; adding, in a tone of great humanity, "that he should have due notice of it to prepare, by repenting of his crimes."* College's innocence was so manifest, that even Hume, eager to palliate all the atrocities of this reign, says, "that his whole conduct and demeanour prove him to have been governed by an honest but indiscreet zeal for his country and his religion." On the 31st of August, 1681, the sentence, with all its savage barbarities, was carried into execution. "Sir Francis North," observes Roger Coke, was a man cut out, to all intents and purposes, for such a work."†

He was next called upon to assist at the immolation of a nobler victim, who escaped from the horns of the altar. Shaftesbury had been for some time very careful never to open his mouth on politics out of the city of London and county of Middlesex, and during the Oxford parliament had touched on no public topic except in the House of Lords. It was resolved at all hazards to bring him to trial; but this could only be done by an indictment to be found at the Old Bailey. There did North attend when the

* 8 St. Tr. 550-723.

† Detection, ii. 368.