386 CHARGE AGAINST WHITELOCKE. 



my opinion, which is nothing, etc. But &quot; illotis mani- 

 bus,&quot; he takes it into his hands, and pronounceth of 

 it, as a man would scarcely do of a warrant of a 

 justice of peace, and speaks like a dictator, that 

 &quot; this is law,&quot; and &quot; this is against law,&quot; etc.* 



* Sir H. Wotton, in a letter of his to Sir Edmund Bacon, 

 [Reliq. Wotton, p. 421. edit. 3rd] written about the beginning 

 of June, 1613, mentions, that Sir Robert Mansell and Mr. 

 &quot;Whitelocke were, on the Saturday before, called to a very ho 

 nourable hearing in the queen s presence-chamber at Whitehall, 

 before the lords of the council, with intervention of the lord 

 chief justice Coke, the lord chief baron Tanfield, and the master 

 of the rolls; the lord chief justice of the King s Bench, Flem 

 ing, being kept at home by some infirmity. There the attor 

 ney and solicitor first undertook Mr. Whitelocke, and the 

 recorder [Henry Montagu], as the king s serjeant, Sir Robert 

 Mansell, charging the one as a counsellor, the other as a ques 

 tioner, in matters of the king s prerogative and sovereignty upon 

 occasion of a commission intended for a research into the admi 

 nistration of the admiralty. &quot; Whitelocke in his answer,&quot; adds 

 Sir Henry Wotton, &quot; spake more confusedly than was expected 

 from a lawyer; and the knight more temperately than was ex 

 pected from a soldier .... Whitelocke ended his speech 

 with an absolute confession of his own offence, and with a pro 

 mise of employing himself hereafter in defence of the king s pre 

 rogative .... In this they generally agreed, both counsellors 

 and judges, to represent the humiliation of both the prisoners to 

 the king, in lieu of innocency, and to intercede for his gracious 

 pardon: which was done, and accordingly the next day they 

 were inlarged upon a submission under writing.&quot; 



