cases alleged against him, it is not wonderful that they came to the conclusion, as the rest of the world did, that he was as bad as the accusation painted him—­a dishonest and corrupt judge.  Yet it is strange that they should not have observed that not a single charge of a definitely unjust decision was brought, at any rate was proved, against him.  He had taken money, they argued, and therefore he must be corrupt; but if he had taken money to pervert judgment, some instance of the iniquity would certainly have been brought forward and proved.  There is no such instance to be found; though, of course, there were plenty of dissatisfied suitors; of course the men who had paid their money and lost their cause were furious.  But in vain do we look for any case of proved injustice.  The utmost that can be said is that in some cases he showed favour in pushing forward and expediting suits.  So that the real charge against Bacon assumes, to us who have not to deal practically with dangerous abuses, but to judge conduct and character, a different complexion.  Instead of being the wickedness of perverting justice and selling his judgments for bribes, it takes the shape of allowing and sharing in a dishonourable and mischievous system of payment for service, which could not fail to bring with it temptation and discredit, and in which fair reward could not be distinguished from unlawful gain.  Such a system it was high time to stop; and in this rough and harsh way, which also satisfied some personal enmities, it was stopped.  We may put aside for good the charge on which he was condemned, and which in words he admitted—­of being corrupt as a judge.  His real fault—­and it was a great one—­was that he did not in time open his eyes to the wrongness and evil, patent to every one, and to himself as soon as pointed out, of the traditional fashion in his court of eking out by irregular gifts the salary of such an office as his.

Thus Bacon was condemned both to suffering and to dishonour; and, as has been observed, condemned without a trial.  But it must also be observed that it was entirely owing to his own act that he had not a trial, and with a trial the opportunity of cross-examining witnesses and of explaining openly the matters urged against him.  The proceedings in the Lords were preliminary to the trial; when the time came, Bacon, of his own choice, stopped them from going farther, by his confession and submission.  Considering the view which he claimed to take of his own case, his behaviour was wanting in courage and spirit.  From the moment that the attack on him shifted from a charge of authorising illegal monopolies to a charge of personal corruption, he never fairly met his accusers.  The distress and anxiety, no doubt, broke down his health; and twice, when he was called upon to be in his place in the House of Lords, he was obliged to excuse himself on the ground that he was too ill to leave his bed.  But between the time of the first charge and his condemnation seven weeks elapsed; and