BACON S DEFENCE. CCCXV 



and indulging in imaginations of the friendship of Bucking 

 ham and of the King, thinking, as they were, only of their 

 own safety, had trusted to his own powerful mind, and 

 met the accusation instantly and with vigour, he might at 

 once, strong as the tide was against all authority, (a) have 

 stemmed the torrent, and satisfied the intelligent, that the 

 fault was not in the Chancellor, but the Chancery. 



Might he not have reminded the house that, although he 

 knew the temporary power of custom against opinion, he in 

 resistance of the established practice, had exerted himself 

 to prevent any interference, even by Buckingham or the 



leur maitre, qu il n &oit pas besoin de lui rendre de bons offices aupres de 

 sa majeste, ce qu il disoit, non pas pour le refuser, car il aimoit beaucoup, 

 mais pour lui faire plus d honneur : le chancelier lui repondit de tres-bonne 

 grace, qu en il croyoit etre parfaitement bien &quot; dans 1 esprit de son maitre, 

 mais aussi qu il avoit toujours remarque que pour si grand que soit im 

 feu, et pour si fortement qu il brule de lui-meme, il ne laissera pourtant 

 pas de bruler mieux et d etre plus beau et plus clair si on le souffle comme 

 il faut.&quot; 



&quot; My Lord Chancellor hath many bills put up against him, who is said 

 to have made a very peremptory speech in the committee, wherein was this 

 passage : that he wondered how the Lower House would or durst go about 

 to question his personal honour,&quot; Sec. From the British Museum. 



() In the year 1824, when there was a senseless yell against Lord 

 Eldon, a commission was appointed to inquire into the defects of the court 

 of Chancery. That it abounded with defects was indisputable. Before 

 this committee I was examined ; and aware of the tendency of the many 

 to personify and make their complaints against magistrates, I did all in my 

 power to resist it. The following is an extract from part of my examination. 

 I hope that in thus speaking of the Lord Chancellor s court, I may not 

 be supposed to be speaking of the Lord Chancellor; or to attribute to 

 him these defects, any more than I thought the defects of the commissioners 

 court should be ascribed to the commissioners. I cannot but think it most 

 unjust to confound the court with the judge. There is a spirit of improve 

 ment now moving upon this country, which onght not, as it appears to me, 

 to. be impeded by personality. Permanent defects in a court may perhaps 

 generally be traced to the constitution of the court : that is, not to the 

 judge, but to society. 



