

STAR-CHAM HKK. 



STAR-CHAMUKI;. 



of the council wu added by stat. 21 Henry VIII., c. 90), upon bill or 

 information exhibited to the lord chancellor or any other, against any 

 person for maintenance, giving of liveries, and retainers by indenture* 

 or promises, or other embraceries, untrue demeaning* of sheriff* in 

 making panels and other untrue return*, for taking of money by juries, 

 r for great rioU or unlawful assemblies, to call the offenders before 

 them and examine them, and punish them according to their demerits. 

 The object and effect of this enactment are extremely doubtful. It 

 appears to have been the opinion of the court* of law at the time the 

 statute was paaaed that it established a new jurisdiction, entirely 

 distinct from the ordinary jurisdiction of the council ; for five years 

 afterwards, in the eighth year of Henry VII., it was resolved by all 

 the judges, according to the plain words of the law, that the only 

 judge* of the court under the statute were the lord chancellor, the 

 treasurer, and the keeper of the privy-seal, the bishop and temporal 

 lord being merely " called to them " as assistant* or assessors, and not 

 ns constituent members of the court. (' Year Book,' 8 Hen. VII., 13, 

 pi. 7.) This view of the effect of the statute is confirmed by the fact 

 that, more than forty years afterwards, the president of the council 

 was expressly added to the judges of the court by the statute 21 

 Henry V 1 1 1 ., c. 20 ; "a decisive proof," as Mr. Hallam' observes " thai 

 it then existed as a tribunal perfectly distinct from the council itself." 

 ('Constitutional History,' vol. i., p. 70.) And this writer conelu.l, - a 

 careful examination of the subject by the following propositions : 

 " 1. The court erected by the statute of 8 Henry VII. was not the 

 court of Star Chamber, 2. Thia court by statute subsisted in full force 

 till beyond the middle of Henry VIII.'s reign, but not long afterwards 

 went into disuse. 8. The court of Stir-Chamber was the old Concilium 

 Onlinarium, against whose jurisdiction many statutes had been enacted 

 from the time of Edward III. 4. No part of the jurisdiction exercised 

 by the Star-Chamber could be maintained on the authority of the 

 statute of Henry VII." In the first of these propositions, Mr. Hallam 

 is confirmed by Hudson, in his ' Treatise of the Court of Star-Chamber.' 

 (' Collectanea Juridica,' vol. ii. p. 50.) On the other hand, both Lord 

 Coke and Lord Hale consider the statute of Henry VII. as having 

 merely introduced a modification of the ancient jurisdiction. The 

 former calls the above resolution of the common-law judges " a sudden 

 opinion," and fays it is " contrary to law and continual experience." 

 And he contends that the statute did not create a new court, but was 

 merely declaratory of the mode of proceeding in an ancient court, pre- 

 viously known and recognised. (' Fourth Institute,' p. 62.) Lord 

 Hale also speaks of the " erection of the court of Star-Chamber by the 

 stat, 8 Henry VII.," and says it " was a kind of remodelling of the 

 Cant ilium Kcgi." (' Jurisdiction of the Lords' House,' chap, v., p. 35.) 

 However this may have been, there is no doubt that, previously to the 

 time of Coke, this court, whether distinct or only a modification of 

 the ancient jurisdiction, had again merged in the general jurisdiction 

 of the lords of the council so completely as to justify his statement, 

 that the opinion expressed in the judicial resolution was " contrary to 

 continual experience." Sir Thomas Smith, who wrote his ' Treatise on 

 the Commonwealth of England ' in the year 1565, makes no mention of 

 a limited court, though he treats particularly of the court of Star- 

 Chamber, and says that the judges were the lord chancellor, the lord 

 treasurer, all the king's council, and all peers of the realm ; and he 

 ascribes the merit of having renewed the vigour of the court to 

 Cardinal Wolsey. At the beginning of the reign of Elizabeth, there- 

 fore, the court of Star-Chamber was unquestionably in full operation 

 in the form in which it was known in the succeeding reigns ; and at 

 this period, before it had degenerated into a mere engine of state, it 

 was by no means destitute of utility. It was the only court in the 

 land in which great and powerful offenders had no means of setting at 

 defiance the administration of justice or corrupting its course. And 

 during the reign of Elizabeth, when the jurisdiction of the Star- 

 Chamber had reached its maturity, it seems, except in political MUMS, 

 to have been administered with wisdom and discretion. (Palgrave's 

 ' Essay on the King's Council.') 



The proceedings in the court of Star-Chamber were by information, 

 or bill and answer; interrogatories in writing were also exhibited to 

 the defendant and witnesses, which were answered on oath. The 

 attorney -general had the power of exhibiting ex-officio informations ; 

 as had also the king's almoner to recover deodands and goods of a felo- 

 de-se, which were supposed to go in support of the king's alms. In 

 cases of confession by accused persons, the information alid proceedings 

 were oral, and hence arose one of the most oppressive abuses of the 

 court in political prosecutions. The proceeding by written information 

 and interrogatories was tedious and troublesome, often involving much 

 nicety in pleading, and always requiring a degree of precision in setting 

 forth the accusation which was embarrassing in a state prosecution. 

 It wa with a view to these difficulties that Lord Bacon discouraged 

 the king from adopting this mode of proceeding in the matter of the 

 pursuivants, saying that " the Star-Chamber without confession was 

 long seas." (Bacon's ' Works, 1 vol. Hi. p. 372.) In political charges, 

 therefore, the attorney-general derived a great advantage over the 

 accused by proceeding ore tenui. The consequence was, that no iins 

 were spared to procure confessions, and pressure of every kind, 

 including torture, was unscrupulously applied. According to the laws 

 of the court, no person could be orally charged, unless he acknowledged 

 his confession at the bar, " freely and voluntarily, without constraint." 



(Hudson's ' Treatise of the Court of Star-Chauiber.') But this check 

 upon confessions improperly obtained seems to have been much neg- 

 lected in practice during the later periods of the history of this court. 

 Upon admissions of immaterial circumstances thus aggravated and 

 distorted into confessions of guilt, the Earl ot Northumberland was 

 prosecuted ore tcnui in the Star-Chamber, for U-in^ privy to the Gun- 

 powder Plot, and was sentenced to pay a fine of 80,00(V. and to bo 

 imprisoned for life ; " but by what rule," says Hudson (' ColL Jurid.,' 

 vol. ii.), ' that sentence was, I know not, for it was ore tema, and yet 

 not upon confession." Ami it frequently happeneil during the fact 

 century of the existence of the Star-Chamber, that enormous fines, 

 uments for life or during the king's pleasure, banishment, muti- 

 lation, and every variation of punishment short of death, were inflicted 

 by a court composed of members of the king's council, upon a mere 

 oral proceeding, without hearing the accused, without a written charge 

 or record of any kind, and without appeal. 



The judges of the court of Star-Chamber were the lord chancellor or 

 lord keeper, who presided, and when the voices were equal gave a 

 casting vote, the lord treasurer, the lord privy seal, and the president 

 of the council, who were members of the court ex officio, probably by 

 usage since the statute of 3 Henry VII. In addition to these, were 

 associated, in early periods of the history of the court, any peers of 

 the realm who chose to attend. According to Sir Thomas Smith, the 

 judges in his time were the " lord chancellor, the lord treasurer, all 

 the king's majesty's council, and the barons of this land." (' Common- 

 wealth of England,' b. iii. c. 5.) Hudson states that the number of 

 attendant judges "in the reigns of Henry VII. and Henry VIII. have 

 been well near to forty ; at some one time thirty ; in the reign of 

 Queen Elizabeth often times, but now (that is, in the time of James I.) 

 much lessened, since the barons and earls, not being privy councillors, 

 have forborne their attendance." He further states, that " in the times 

 of Henry VII. and Henry VIII. the court was most commonly 

 frequented by seven or eight bishops and prelates every sitting-day ; " 

 and odds, " that in those times, the fines trenched not to the destruc- 

 tion of the offender's estate, and utter ruin of him and his prosperity, 

 as now they do, but to his correction and amendment, the clergy's 

 song being of mercy." (' Coll. Jurid.,' vol. ii., p. 36.) The settled 

 course during the latter part of the reign of Elizabeth and the 

 reigns of James I. and Charles I. seems to have been to admit only 

 such peers as judges of the court as were members of the privy 

 council. 



The civil jurisdiction of the Star-Chamber comprehended mercantile 

 controversies between English and foreign merchants, testamentary 

 causes, and differences between the heads and commonalty of corpo- 

 rations, both lay and spiritual. The court also disposed of the claims 

 of the king's almoner to deodands, as above referred to, and also such 

 chums as were made by subjects to deodands and cnlalla felonum by 

 virtue of charters from the crown. The criminal jurisdiction of the 

 court was very extensive. If the king chose to remit the capital 

 punishment, the court had jurisdiction to punish as crimes even 

 treason, murder, and felony. Under the comprehensive name of con- 

 tempts of the king's authority, all offences against the state were 

 included. Forgery, perjury, riots, maintenance, embracery, fraud, 

 libels, conspiracy,- and false accusation, misconduct by judges, j" 

 of the peace, sheriffs, jurors, and other persons connected with the 

 administration of justice, were all punishable in the Star-Chamber. 



It was also usual for the judges of assize previously to their circuits 

 to repair to the Star-Chamber, and there to receive from the court 

 directions respecting the enforcement or restraint of penal laws. 

 Numerous instances of this unwarrantable interference with the ad- 

 ministration of the criminal law occur with reference to the statutes 

 against recusants in the reigns of Elizabeth and James I. 



A court of criminal judicature, composed of the immediate agents 

 of prerogative, possessing a jurisdiction very extensive, and at the 

 same time imperfectly defined, and authorised to inflict any amount 

 of punishment short of death, must, even when best administered, 

 have always been viewed with apprehension and distrust ; and, accord- 

 ingly, in the earlier periods of its history we find constant remon- 

 strances by the Commons against its encroachments. As civilisation, 

 knowledge, and power increased among the people, the jurisdiction 

 of the lords of the council became more odious and intolerable. A 

 measure which was introduced into the House of Commons in the last 

 parliament of Charles I., to limit and regulate the authority of this 

 court, terminated in a proposal for its entire abolition, which was 

 eventually adopted without opposition in both houses. The statute 

 16 Cor. I. c. 10, after reciting Magna Charta and several early statutes 

 in support of the ordinary system of judicature by the common law, 

 goes on to state that " the judges of the Star-Chamber had not kept 

 themselves within the points limited by the statute 3 Henry VII., but 

 hod undertaken to punish where no law warranted, and to make 

 decrees having no such authority, and to inflict heavier punishments 

 than by any law was warranted ; and that the proceedings, censures, 

 and decrees of that court had by experience been found to bo an in- 

 tolerable burthen to the subjects, and the means to introduce an 

 arbitrary power and government." The statute then enacts, " that the 

 *aid court called the Star-Chamber, and all jurisdiction, power, and 

 authority belonging unto or exercised in the same court, or by any of 

 the judges, officers, or ministers thereof, should be clearly and abso- 



