Page:The Advancement of Learning (Wright, 5th ed).pdf/42

treason; and secondly, whether it was possible to establish a treasonable charge on the mere fact of composition. The idea of consulting the judges separately originated with the King. Whether he thought by this means to get a more genuine opinion from the others when they were not influenced by the presence and authority of Coke, or what was his motive, we have no means of knowing. That Bacon had anything to do with suggesting such a course, there is no evidence to show. What he did was to carry out the King’s instructions, and to lay the case before the Lord Chief Justice for his opinion. Coke’s opposition was not exerted against the consultation of the judges, but against their being consulted separately. None of the judges of the King’s Bench had to try the case, and therefore it is hard to see with what truth Bacon’s conduct can be described as tampering with the judges in order to procure a capital conviction. Peacham was ultimately tried at the assizes at Taunton, on the 7th of August, 1615, and convicted of high treason, but the capital sentence was never carried into effect, because, as the report of his trial says of his offence, ‘many of the judges were of opinion that it was not treason.’ That his case excited any indignation in the country, is a simple invention of Lord Campbell's.

On the 24th and 25th of May, 1616, Bacon took part as Attorney General in the trial of the Earl and Countess of Somerset for the murder of Sir Thomas Overbury. With the prosecution of the inferior agents in this mysterious crime he had nothing to do. During the early part of this year the health of the Lord Chancellor (Ellesmere) had been giving way, and Bacon was a suitor to the King for the office which seemed likely to be vacant. On the 9th of June he became a Privy Councillor, an appointment upon which he was formally congratulated by the University of Cambridge, which he represented in Parliament^[1]. He had held the office of