« VorigeDoorgaan »
when she was living) she had a translucent passage in the night, through the city of London, by multitudes of torches; the tapers placed by the tomb and the altar, in the cathedral, smoking with them like an offertory, with all the ceremonies, and voices, their quires and copes could express, attended by many prelates and nobles, who paid this last tribute to her memory.”
In 1623 Lord Bacon published the treatise “ De Augmentis." In this treatise the praise of Elizabeth, in the Advancement of Learning, is wholly omitted, and certainly not for its want of beauty; he also omits the passage,
Then the reign of a queen matched with a foreigner : then of a queen that lived solitary and unmarried, and yet her government so masculine that it had greater impression and operation upon the states abroad than it any ways received from thence;" merely saying, “ Rursus regnum fæminæ solitariæ et cælibis.” Whatever were the motives by which he was induced to suppress, for a time, the just praise of Elizabeth, he ordered the publication in a will, which he afterwards cancelled, but, in all probability, after some understanding with Dr. Rawley, that the publication should appear, as it did, soon after his death. This appears from Rawley's account, and from Archbishop Tennison's Baconiana.
Archbishop Tennison published, in the Baconiana, this extract from his will, saying, “ It is a transcript out of his lordship's will concerning his writings. There in particular manner, he commendeth to the press The Felicities of Queen Elizabeth.” The words in the will are," In particular I wish the elegie which I writ'in felicem memoriam Elizabethæ’ may be published."
The will to which the Archbishop and Dr. Rawley refer was a former will, and was altered. This appears by comparing the transcript by Archbishop Tennison with the published copy of his last: and that there may not be any mistake, I compared the printed copy of Lord Bacon's will, with the copy in Doctor's Commons, and found it correct, except with a few immaterial literal variations.
The published, that is, the correct copy of Lord Bacon's will, does not contain this direction respecting the eulogy on Elizabeth.
In the year 1651 a tract was published from which it appears that the essay
In felicem memoriam Elizabethæ" had not been confined to the drawer of Dr. Rawley; it is entitled, In happy Memorie of Elizabeth, Queen of England, or a Collection of the Felicities of Queen Elisabeth.
Of this tract Archbishop Tennison says, “ The third is a memorial, intituled The Felicities of Queen Elizabeth. This was written by his lordship in Latin only. A person of more good will than ability, translated it into English, and called it in the singular, Her Felicity. But we have also a version, much more accurate and judicious, performed by Doctor Rawley, who was pleased to take that labour upon him, because he understood the value his lordship put upon this work; for it was such, that I find this charge given concerning it, in his last will and testament. . In particular I wish the elogie which I writ, in Felicem Memoriam Elisabetha, may be published.'”. This version was published in 1657, many years after the death of James, in the first edition of the Resuscitatio, where in his address to the reader, he says, “I thought it fitting to intimate, that the discourse within contained, entituled A Collection of the Felicities of Queen Elizabeth, was written by his lordship in Latin only; whereof, though his lordship had his particular ends then, yet in regard that I held it a duty, that her own nation, over which she so happily reigned for many years, should be acquainted and possessed with the virtues of that excellent queen, as well as foreign nations, I was induced, many years ago, to put the same into the English tongue; not ad verbum, for that had been but fat and injudicious; but (as far as my slender ability could reach) according to the expressions, which I conceived his lordship would have rendered it in, if he had written the same in English; yet ever acknowledging that Zeuxis or A pelles' pencil, could not be attained but by Zeuxis or Apelles himself. This wor in the La his lordship so much affecte that he had ordained, by his last will and testament, to have had it published many years since; but that singular person entrusted therewith soon after deceased ; and therefore it must now expect a time to come forth, amongst his lordship’s other Latin works." The translation is in the Resuscitatio. The Latin copy is in vol. xi. of this edition, p. 375.
In the Harleian Miscellany in the British Museum, No. 6797, there is a folio containing, amongst various papers, a tract of praise of Queen Elizabeth ; it was published in 1734 by Stephens. It is in Mallet's folio edition of 1760, and is in vol. vii. page 147 of this edition.
NOTE Z Z.
Solicitations by Suitors in England.
1. Before time of Bacon.
3. After time of Bacon.
Temp. eliz. Letters from Trinity College, Cambridge, to Lord Burleigh, respecting a Cause
before him in which the College was interested, 1596. Our humbliest duties remembered. Your lordship's most honorable protection to our poor colledge giveth us occasion at this present to crave some favour in a cause depending before your honorable lo. in the Exchequer chamber, into which court hath our tenant of the Rectorie of Swinsheade, within the countie of Lincoln been drawne for certain tythes to the Lo. Delaware's lands within that parish, pretended to belong to the free chapel of Barthrope, from no other evidence than a bare and torne inquisition lately discovered by one Jeff, and since sold for five pounds to John Knight, now plaintiff for the said tythes in question ; who being the Lo. Delaware's bayly in these parts hath procured, late years, some broken payments of the said tythes, by threats, and promises to save the saide tenants there harmeles, and not otherwise. May it therefor please your most honorable lordship, for preservation of the colledge rights to examine the ualidity of the said inquisition, being no sufficient euidence, as we are advertised, against so auntient possession, and never taken by the oathes of any due inquest. Whereunto, nevertheless, if we must submit ourselves for the Queene, yet our humble request is, for avoyding of further inconvenience, wherein we stand more entangled by some indirect entring of a late decree in this cause, that the said decree so misentered at least may be explained and rectified by order of that honorable court, and that henceforth the plaintiff intermeddle not anie with other tythes save corne and haye, which in the said inquisition are only reserved. So being always bolde to troble your lo. in all our needs, we humblie comend your most honorable lordship to Almightie God. From T'rinity College, in Cambridge. Januarii 27° 1596.
Your Lo. most humblie to be always comaunded,
Lo. the Lo. Burghley, Lo. High Treasurer of
The following is a letter written in the year 1597 from the University of Oxford to Lord Burleigh to induce him to interfere with the Lord Keeper respecting a pending cause in which the universities were interested.
If, most honored Sir, the risk to which we are exposed were ours alone, yet from a persuasion of your perfect goodwill to us, and the belief of mutual friendship we should think ourselves right in invoking your support as readily as that of our own Chancellor. But since the well-being of the other university is assailed by the same danger which involves our interests, we hasten to borrow a share in that succour which your own Cambridge claims from you, that those who are united in one danger may conjoin their resources for the common
A deputation of our members has attended, by order of the court of Chancery, where, as they were bound to do, they pleaded the privilege of the university to the jurisdiction, and asked that by the favour of the court, they might be relieved from the necessity of leading evidence in any public trial, and permitted to settle the disputed points, after the antient manner, at home. Their plea was so little regarded that while the validity of the privilege was undeniable, they made their reports to us that the matter must be tried in the usual course. The answer having been repeatedly returned our most honorable chancellor at our earnest desire dealt with the illustrious lord keeper to appoint a day in which he should be at liberty to take cognizance of our cause, and to decide upon it, thinking that whether the decision should accord with our wishes or disappoint them, it was still no small object to ascertain as soon as possible what we had to expect. Each ought to have that committed to him which he is best fitted to administer, and our distinguished chancellor has promised, so far as he is concerned, that though prevented from interfering, by having in some measure a common interest in the cause, he will exert himself to bring the dispute to an equitable determination. But your lordship has a free access to solicit for your friends where the cause is not your own; and we therefore the more earnestly conjure you to endeavour to conciliate in our favor that poble person, the Lord Keeper ; and, with your wonted and unequalled skill and infuence, to obtain for us on the day whereon the honorable court shall grant us a hearing, a prompt and fair decision. Which trouble, if you consent to take upon you, you will render no less a favor to Cambridge than to us, and shall bind us as closely to you as are your friends its members. wish you, most honorable Sir, all health, and that you may long live for your country and for us. Given the 12 February, 1597. For the Most Honorable Baron Burleigh, High
Treasurer of England, Privy Counsellor to
Temp. Jac. Before Bacon was Chancellor. The influencing a judge out of court seems at that period scarcely to have been considered improper. A short time before Sir Francis was appointed Lord Keeper, Sir Edward Coke had incurred the royal displeasure. The King, anxious to convict one Peacham, but doubting the issue of a trial, ordered his attorney general to sound the judges upon it, and gather their opinions privately before he instituted
" I will not thus declare what may be my judgment auricy
ions of new and pernicious tendency, and not accordi
alm,” was the answer of Sir Edward Coke. A cause as
respecting a vacant church held in commendam
ouncil against the bishop, in arguing the case ha
reckoned prejudicial and derogatory to the Kir
er, which was affirmed to be distimet from en
nary authority. Informed on this J
all proceedings till his exam 20
he council, and shaper cent
manded for suffering the popular lawyers to question his prerogative, which was represented as sacred and transcendent, not to be handled or mentioned in vulgar argument. At last, raising his voice to frighten them into submission, he put this question to them severally: “If, at any time, in a case depending before the judges, he conceived it to concern him either in profit or power, and thereupon required to consult with them, and that they should stay proceedings in the mean time, whether they ought not to stay them accordingly?” They all, the chief justice only excepted, acknowledged it their duty to do so. His answer was, " When such a case happens I will do that which will be fit for a judge to do.” For this noble conduct, for this independent spirit, in resisting an attempt to violate the law, Sir Edward Coke was, as it is termed, disgraced, a censure which reflected more honour upon him than all his preferments. The following letters will exbibit the nature of the proceedings in these times.
To the King, touching Peacham's business, &c. It may please your excellent Majesty,– I received this morning, by Mr. Murray, a message from your majesty, of some warrant and confidence that I should advertise your majesty of your business, wherein I had part: wherein I am first hurnbly to thank your majesty for your good acceptation of my endea. vours and service, which I am not able to furnish with any other quality, save faith and diligence.
For Peacham's case, I have since my last letter, been with my lord Coke twice; once before Mr. Secretary's going down to your majesty, and once since, which was yesterday: at the former of which times I delivered him Peacham's papers; and at this latter the precedents, which I had with care gathered and selected; for these degrees and order the business required. At the former I told him that he knew my errand, which stood upon two points; the one to inform him of the particular case of Peacham's treasons, for I never give it other word to him; the other, to receive his opinion to myself, and in secret, according to my commission from your majesty. At the former time be fell upon the same allegation which he had begun at the council table; that judges were not to give opinion by fractions, but entirely according to the vote whereupon they should settle upon conference; and that this auricular taking of opinions, single and apart, was new and dangerous; and other words more vehement than I repeat. I replied in civil and plain terms, that I wished his lordship, in my love to him, to think better of it; for that this, that his lordship was pleased to put into great words, seemed to me and my fellows, when we spake of it amongst ourselves, a reasonable and familiar matter, for a king to consult with his judges, either assembled or selected, or one by one. And then to give him a little outlet to save his first opinion, wherewith he is most commonly in love, I added, that judges sometimes might make a suit to be spared for their opinion, till they had spoken with their brethren ; but if the king, upon his own princely judgment, for reason of estate, should think it fit to have it otherwise, and should so demand it, there was no declining; nay, that it touched upon a violation of their oath, which was to counsel the king, without distinction, whether it were jointly or severally. Thereupon, I put him the case of the privy council, as if your majesty should be pleased to command any of them to deliver their opinion apart and in private; whether it were a good answer to deny it, otherwise than if it were propounded at the table. To this he said, that the cases were not alike, because this concerned life. To which I replied, that questions of estate might concern thousands of lives, and many things more precious than the life of a particular; as war, and peace, and the like. To conclude, his lordship tanquam eritum quærens, desired me for the time to leave with him the papers, without pressing him to consent to deliver a private opinion till he had perused them. I said I would. But he desired me to leave the precedents with him, that he might advise upon them. I told him, the rest of my fellows would dispatch their part, and I should be behind with mine ; which I persuaded myself your majesty would impute rather to his ! backwardness than my negligence. He said, as soon as I should understand that the rest were ready, he would not be long after with his opinion.
For Mr. St. John, your majesty knoweth, the day draweth on; and my lord Chancellor's recovery, the season, and his age, promising not to be too hasty. I spake with him on Sunday, at what time I found him in bed, but his spirits strong, and not spent or wearied, and spake wholly of your business, leading me from one matter to another; and wished and seemed to hope that he might attend the day for 0. S. and it were, as he said, to be his last work to conclude bis services, and express his affection towards your majesty. I presumed to say to him, that I knew your majesty would be exceeding desirous of his being present that day, so as that it might be without prejudice to his continuance; but that otherwise your majesty esteemed a servant more than a service, especially such a servant. Surely, in mine opinion, your majesty were better put off the day than want his presence, considering the cause of the putting off is so notorious; and then the capital and the criminal may come together the next term.
I have not been unprofitable in helping to discover and examine, within these few days, a late patent, by surreption obtained from your majesty, of the greatest forest in England, worth 30,0001. under colour of a defective title, for à matter of 4001. The person must be named, because the patent must be questioned. It is a great person, my lord of Shrewsbury; or rather, as I think, a greater than he, which is my lady of Shrewsbury. But I bumbly pray your majesty to know this first from my lord treasurer, who methinks groweth even studious in your business. God preserve your majesty. Your Majesty's most humble and devoted subject and servant,
FR, Bacon. Jan. 31, 1614. The rather, in regard to Mr. Murray's absence, I humbly pray your majesty to have a little regard to this letter.
A Letter to the King, touching Peacham's Cause, January 27, 1614. It may please your excellent Majesty—This day in the afternoon was read your majesty's letters of direction touching Peacham, which, because it concerneth properly the duty of my place, I thought it fit for me to give your majesty both a speedy and private account thereof; that your majesty knowing things clearly how they pass, may have the true fruit of your own wisdom and clear seeing judgment in governing the business. First, for the regularity which your majesty (as a master in business of estate) doth prudently prescribe in examining, and taking examinations, I subscribe to it; only I will say for myself, that I was not at this time the principal examiner. For the course your majesty directeth and commandeth, for the feeling of the judges of the King's Bench their several opinions, by distributing ourselves and enjoining secresy; we did first find an encounter in the opinion of my lord Cooke, who seemed to affirm, that such particular, and, as he called it, auricular taking of opinions, was not according to the custom of this realm, and seemed to divine that his brethren would never do it. But when I replied, that it was our duty to pursue your majesty's directions; and it were not amiss for his lordship to leave his brethren to their own answers, it was so concluded ; and his lordship did desire that I might confer with himself, and Mr. Serjeant Montague was named to speak with Justice Crooke, Mr. Serjeant Crew with Justice Houghton, and Mr. Solicitor with Justice Dodderidge. This done, I took my fellows aside, and advised that they should presently speak with the three judges, before I could speak with my lord Cooke, for doubt of infusion; and that they should not in any case make any doubt to the judges, as if they mistrusted they would not deliver any opinion apart, but speak resolutely to them, and only make their coming to be, to know what time they would appoint to be attended with the papers. This sorted not amiss ; for Mr. Solicitor came to me this evening and related to me, that he had found Judge Dodderidge very ready to give opinion in secret, and fell upon the same reason, which upon your majesty's first letter I had used to my lord Cooke at the council table, which was, that every judge was bound expressly by his oath to give your majesty counsel when he was called, and whether he should do it jointly or severally,