The Star Chamber : its Practice and Procedure. 101 



they had to transact. Sir Francis Palgrave, however, would 

 appear to think that the criminal jurisdiction of the Privy 

 Council was alone vested in the Court of Star Chamber, the 

 jurisdiction in civil causes being retained by the body of the 

 council. For, after stating that the statute of Henry VII., 

 which declared the authority of the court, and the 21 Henry 

 VIII. c. 20, which added the President of the Council to the 

 other members, ' ' virtually created the Court of Star Chamber 

 as it existed under the Tudors," says : " The Privy Council, 

 sitting as such at Whitehall and Greenwich, gradually aban- 

 doned its criminal jurisdiction to those of its members who 

 assembled at Westminster, conjointly with the justices of 

 either bench, and under the direction of the Lord High Chan- 

 cellor/'' Though it is quite likely that the Privy Council 

 reserved to itself the right to hear any complaint which might 

 be brought before it, notwithstanding it had delegated so much 

 of its judicial power to its committee — a right which privy 

 counsellors sometimes questionably claimed to exercise by 

 taking their seats at the board in the Star Chamber, though 

 they were not regular members of that court — it is certain the 

 council, as such, did not, at least under the Tudors and the 

 Stuarts, habitually sit as a court of appeal or as a court of first 

 instance. Whatever the theory might have been, the practice 

 was, since the declaratory act of Henry VII., for the Star 

 Chamber to discharge both the criminal and civil business of 

 the council. It will be as well here to ascertain what power was 

 actually wielded by the Star Chamber, what the procedure in 

 the court was from summons to execution, and then to indicate 

 the causes which led to its ruin. 



The Court of Star Chamber had jurisdiction both in civil 

 and criminal causes, and could enforce its sentences by any 

 punishment short of death, and dispossession of freeholds. 

 Even these two extreme punishments it was able to inflict by 

 indirect means, as will be shown later on. 



As a court of civil law, it entertained suits by the king's 

 almoner for the delivery of deodands, and the goods of 

 suicides, felons, etc. It also took cognizance of "great matters- 

 of interest betwixt the king and his subjects, which are accom- 

 panied with conveniency of state as well as meum and tuum" 

 One large branch of its practice lay in the hearing of causes 

 against corporations, abbeys, great lords, and others whom it 

 was difficult to reach through the common channels of the 

 law. It was a reason very frequently given for applying to 

 the council that the defendant was a person of so great influ- 

 ence that a fair trial could not be had at common law. Alien 

 merchants, women who had been cheated of their jointure, 

 suitors in testamentary matters, in prize claims, in actions for 



