The Trial

Abstract

Before the trial, the bishops had engaged the most able and astute lawyers of the day, some of whom had previously held office under James. These included Sir Robert Sawyer, the former attorney-general, Heneage Finch, the former solicitor-general and brother of Lord Nottingham, Sir Francis Pemberton (a former judge), Henry Pollexfen (who, as senior barrister on the Western Circuit had been obliged to prosecute the Monmouth rebels in the Bloody Assizes), Sir Cresswell Levinz, a former chief justice, Sir George Treby, Sir John Holt and John Somers. Pollexfen had insisted on the inclusion of Somers ‘as the man who would take most pains and go deepest into all that depended on precedents and records’.¹ The bishops had at least three long meetings with their lawyers. The lawyers represented a wide range of political views including Pollexfen, Somers and Treby who were Tories. Cresswell Levinz was reputed to have been forced into the defence team with threats that his legal practice would dry up unless he accepted the brief to defend the bishops.² These were men who had figured prominently in the politically charged court cases of the past decade. In many cases they had expertise as judges and, in the case of Somers, of working closely with William Williams, the Solicitor-General. Lord Clarendon had advised the bishops on the best legal minds available, and they spent over 500 pounds on lawyers’ fees. Numerous clerks were employed to copy documents; one spent all night copying documents for the trial.