Privy Council. It might be supposed, for instance, that the criminal records of the forest courts would teem with instances of the stirring deeds familiar to disciples of the gallant-outlaw and Norman-tyrant theory; yet it would be found that in most cases these are of a very commonplace and trivial character, and this may be the reason that they have been so little meddled with by the old chronicler or the modern popular historian. The cases for trial are mostly of this description:

Presentation and conviction were made of six men with bows and arrows for chasing one deer. Amongst whom Elias, parson of the church of Thornhawe, was present, and gave his consent to the evil-doers.

The foresters found in the house of W. of Clapton one deer, and three antlers and two greyhounds.

It befell that John Hog and John Ive were in the park, and heard one man prowling in the park after nightfall.

It befell that Hugh of Goldyngham came to the forest and took one horseman with bow and arrows, who straightway fled.

The following instances have been expressly chosen to illustrate the exaggerated form of evidence, in which the intensity of detail, which might have been viewed soberly enough by contemporary counsel or jurors, will seem to the modern reader often more ludicrous than pathetic, and never wholly convincing. The most characteristic points are given in the parties' own words, and the connecting details are supplied as nearly as possible in the spirit of the original.

It will be observed that these anecdotes have been chiefly taken. from the Tudor and early Stuart periods; the reason being, that personal litigation is always conducted under more favourable auspices when political and parliamentary interests are remote or subservient,—a fact which is borne out by the extreme instance of judicial activity throughout the Wars of the Roses.

It was during this last period that we find, in a petition to the Crown, the most ingenious defence, perhaps, of presumptive murder that was ever imagined before the "Old Bailey " era. The story, as

it appears to the world, was this. One Richard Wood was detected in a murder, and pursued by the hue and cry; took sanctuary; was starved out; confessed; and fled the country before his day of trial. To Richard Wood himself, in the calm seclusion of the Continent, the matter appeared slightly different. For being, as he was wont, engaged in labourynge besely abought his housbandry, as a trewe man of his pour condicion ought to do," he was suddenly surprised and attacked "of forthought, malice, and evil wille" by "certayn ryotous personnes" (the hue and cry), "who lay in a wayte to have

made an assaulte and to have murdred hym." So that, though reluctantly, yet “standing in direct feare of his lyve, and doubtinge (veritus ne) the malice of his enemies," he "fledd for his refuge" to the monastery of Bath. Here he abode for some time, until the prior and convent took it into their heads to be alarmed lest the riotous persons aforesaid should presume to assault and rob their house "under colour" of arresting a murderer; and with singular meanness recommended their guest to communicate confidentially with the coroner, to the effect that he was guilty of an (imaginary) murder some years back, in order that this official might relieve him from the importunate attendance of the hue and cry. Unfortunately, however, the coroner took him a little too much at his word, and committed him for a murder of which "God and the country-side" knew him to be innocent, so that he was reduced to stand his trial or fly the realm. For reasons of his own-weighty ones, no doubt the accused chose the latter course, and now commends his case to the credulity, or more probably the interest, of the Crown.

It would be difficult to imagine a more skilfully conceived defence than that in which an interesting autobiography, a serious reflection on the local executive, a substantial counter-charge, an implied alibi, the good-will of the Church, and the king's pardon, are all dexterously interwoven.

Scarcely less creditable to their inventive powers was the defence, in the same reign, of two worthy citizens of Calais, who had fallen under the displeasure of the Crown entirely through their excessive zeal for its dignity. For being "in the parts of Flanders," and falling in with a "suspecte person" laden with certain merchandize, they concluded that he must be a thief, or smuggler at the least; and so pursued him with intent to bring him to justice. Thereupon the miscreant "flewe and left the seid goodes," which our two amateurs took possession of—intending, of course, to convey them to the mediæval police-station. But being overtaken on the way by the real minions of the law, their tale was-from feelings, no doubt, of professional jealousy-utterly scouted. Then, as unfortunately part of the stolen or contraband property was found on them—notably, "two felte hattes which they had upon theyr hedes "—they were sent to prison, "and have great duresse there; and there lykly for to perysshe "—for what the dull officials persisted in calling highway robbery.

Let us take next a later instance of alleged official violence—an outrage laid to the charge of two very humble servants of the law, a Tudor Verges and his subordinate.

A certain worthy chaplain, exercising his ministry within the classic precincts of the liberty of St. Martin-le-Grand, happened one day to make a call upon a humble neighbour, Jeffery Dyall by name. Whilst engaged on this harmless and perhaps charitable errand, “a certeyn ympostoure then and there brake upon him, by force whereof he was enforseid to have dyverse vomitts and other percolous agonyes and paynes, to the great perell and daunger of his lyf." Being naturally alarmed at this untoward event, the good man "made speedy haste to his chamber, and by the waye mette with on Agnes Andrewe, wydowe, which dyd frequent and use to kepe sicke folkes." Her he "desyred, for Christ's sake, to helpe to bryng him to his chamber, and to make him a fier," besides "other necessaries to and for a syk man requysitt." He would give practical evidence of his gratitude, for "he wolde pay honestly therefor." But his trial had but begun; for scarce had Dame Agnes got him to bed and made him a fire, when William Selbye, under-constable of the liberty of St. Martinle-Grand, “being a man of lyght conversacon, muche lyvinge by extorcon, accompanyeng himself withe Hugh Harryson and other dyverse vacabons and suspecte persons to the nomber of iij or v— forcibly and wrongfully brake in," and apparently "without any good or juste grounde, or cause resonable," arrested the pair, and removed them to the tower of the liberty of St. Martin-le-Grand : "where as yett they do remain by strong dures of ymprisonment." This is all very mysterious so far, but now we have the motive for the outrage, which was to plunder the priest's chamber at leisure whilst he was safe in gaol. Accordingly, the dirty work having been got through by the under-constable, his official superior duly puts in an appearance, and the two proceed to divide the spoil, consisting of certain articles of wearing apparel. In the next place, the natural difficulty suggests itself what to do with the plundered priest? This doubt is soon solved, for "dayley they threaten hym to beate, wounde, and destroye, which they entend shortly to accomplishe." Moreover, his liberty would avail him little, for the neighbours, "for fere of disspleasure of the seid constable and under-constable, have utterlie refused to testifye" their knowledge of the outrage.

Such is his own version of the handling of a "jack priest," detected in fornication by the notoriously anti-clerical London mob of the last days of Henry VIII.

The next case of official violence is less romantic, though perhaps equally unpleasant in its consequences to the presumed victim. Here a sheriff arrested a man against whom he seems to have borne a grudge, having first invited him to his house "for to speke with hym.”

When he arrived there, he was asked "where he was at masse upon Sunday the xiij day of February;" to which he answered innocently enough, that "he was at Lesant at masse, as he doth remember." Hereupon the sheriff "yncontynently called him arrant thefe," and proceeded to accuse him of having stolen a "brasse pott" from the church and hidden it "under his bedde." The accused denying this, search was made, which resulted—as another famous search did-in finding "no other thing but that was his propre goods," after vainly attempting to make his woman-servant confess "by force agayne her wyll and mynde." None the less, however, this wicked officer called for ropes and tied the accused "hand and foote, and sett hym on an old horse-and nothing under hym to sytt on." Then, when he arrived at the gaol, after being sorely jolted on the road, the sheriff took away his purse, “with the intent that he should have no meate, nor non he could have for the space of xxti houres;" and "commanded hym to warde" with "a greate paire of gyves upon his legges." Here he has since lain, and meantime, "with intent further to werey hym," his enemies, including neighbouring magistrates, with his landlord, have broken down his mill-dams and committed other damage to his property. One result, however, there was-they found the stolen utensil. The retribution that a Cornish or Devon Catholic gentleman would be likely to exact from an unwary spoiler of churches sufficiently explains this incident of the time of Edward VI.

The following case arose from the difficulty experienced by an executor in accounting for a certain sum of money received by a creditor of his brother, who met his death in the following remarkable manner :-"By misfortune, as he wolde have passed over a water, he fell of the brigge into the seid water and was drowned. Wherupon, by inquisicon upon the syght of the body of the seid Thomas, it was founden that he was drowned by mysfortune, and against the will of the seid Thomas." Next it is implied that the deceased was last seen in company with his creditor, a 'bailey' of Derby, who dunned him, or, as it is expressed, "excersively appeled hym and toke from hym all such sumes of money as he then hadde in his purse." The executor had "oftentimes requered him to restore the seyd money so exercively taken against right and good conscience-which at all tymes he hathe denyed and yet denyeth." This view of the case leaves upon the reader's mind, in spite of the coroner's verdict, the unpleasant suspicion that such a creditor was quite capable of throwing a troublesome debtor into the river, after emptying his pockets, "against right and good conscience."

The bitterness of religious and political feeling which found its suitable expression in the Anti-Supremacy riots of the reign of Henry VIII., and the Anti-Mass reaction of the worst days of his successor, furnished nearly contemporary chroniclers with abundant materials for violent tirades. This same period, too, witnessed the commencement of those scenes of determined repression and desperate reprisals which were to make Ireland famous as the worst governed and most turbulent country in Europe.

The following is the official character of an Irish rebel chieftain of the period, taken from the pardon of Barnard O'Connor, Lord of Offayley. The whole contents of the Statute Book seem, as usual, to have been emptied into this document. He has been guilty of "treasons, rebellions, insurrections, misprisions, confederacies, seditious words, enmities, misprisions of treason, murders, robberies, felonies, homicides, rapes, burglaries, conspiracies, champartis, maintenancies, riots, routs, unlawful conventicles, arsons, depredations, transgressions, concealments, contempts, and all other misdeeds, offences, negligencies, extortions, ignorancies, and trespasses whatsoever." The pardon is made conditional on the surrender of the grantee's estates.

The prevailing tone of exaggerated invective which characterised public and private suits also found its way into the articles exhibited against political offenders, especially such as were suspected of "backwardness in religion." As an example, we may take the case of the feud between Charles Arundel and the Earl of Oxford, which cost them both their liberty, and the former eventually his country. These two had once been friends, till religious and party prejudices separated them. Oxford was a good example of Ascham's and Lyly's aversion, and of the truth of the proverb, "An Italionate Englishman is an incarnate devil." Arundel, on the other hand, was a sincerely religious and bigoted Catholic, and very credulous; while, as a proof of his imaginative temperament, it may be mentioned that he once excused his neglect of one sister and attention to another by giving out that he only desired to pay his addresses to the former through the medium of the latter. This gentleman had been accused, through Oxford, of Catholic tendencies, such as being present at a supper in Fleet Street, where seditious speeches were made; attending mass celebrated by a Jesuit; and amusing himself with a book of illuminated prophecies in the Catholic interest. But the gravest charge was that "he should bringe in a Jesuite to see

'The Barony of Offayley originally belonged to the Fitz-Geralds, and was committed by Edward I. to the custody of Thomas de Cluno.-Cotton MSS. Tit. B. xi.