evival of the Court of
High Commission, and presided in it at the proceedings against Magdalen
College. He advised the trial of the Seven Bishops, and narrowly missed
being made Chancellor of the University of Oxford. On the flight of
James II. he attempted to escape disguised as a sailor, but was seized
in the Red Cow in Anchor and Hope Alley. He was removed to the Tower,
where he died, and was buried in the next grave to Monmouth. The
well-deserved detestation with which he was regarded makes it difficult
to form any just estimate of his character. Where he had no temptation
to do injustice he seems to have been a very good judge; but he had no
hesitation in doing gross injustice by detestable methods, for wholly
discreditable reasons. He is not seen quite at his worst in Alice
Lisle's trial, because she was probably guilty and Dunne was a liar; nor
is he seen at his best as a cross-examiner, because he had very good
material to go on. He has been unfortunate in attracting the notice of
popular writers such as Burnet, Campbell, and Macaulay, who have all
found him a convenient subject for picturesque abuse; and a tendency to
not too ingenious paradox diminishes the value of the work of a more
recent biographer written from the opposite point of view.

[54] Appointed Attorney-General in 1689, and Chief-Justice of the Common
Pleas in the same year. He was a prominent Whig, and at the time of this
trial had appeared for the defence in several previous State Trials,
among others that of Lord Russell, vol. ii. p. 6. He afterwards appeared
for the defence in the case of the Seven Bishops, and was well known as
an adherent of the Prince of Orange at the Revolution. He died in 1691.

[55] See his dying speech, _State Trials_, xi. 312, in which he makes no
reference to Lady Lisle.

[56] This passage with several others proves that Jeffreys had got up
the case beforehand pretty much as counsel would to-day. Cf. pp. 246,
259, 268, 273.

[57] Cf. p. 245.

[58] He was born in Denbighshire.

[59] Cf. p. 245.

[60] _Ante_, p. 239.

[61] Cf. _ante_, p. 245.

[62] Lady Lisle's attainder was afterwards reversed on the ground that
this ruling is wrong; it does not represent the present law (see
Stephen's _Digest_, art. 62), which, however, rests on a subsequent
dictum of Hale's followed by Foster, due probably to his recollection of
this case. Sir James Stephen suggests that as a matter of mere law
Jeffreys may have been rig