DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.53269#0243
During Overbury’s confinement, a fuit having been inflituted for the
purpofe of declaring the marriage of Lord and Lady Eflex a nullity, and
the hufband acknowledging that he was impotent verfus banc',* though ca-
pable of Satisfying any other womanj and the lady, on the infpedion of
three gentlewomen and two midwives, being pronounced a virgin;^ on thefe
grounds they were divorced a vinculo matrimonii. In the November fol-
lowing Rochefler was made earl of Somerfet; and on the 26 th of the next
month, he and Lady Frances Howard were married, in the prefence of the
king and queen, with almoft regal folemnity.—In about a year and a half af-
terwards, the murder of Overbury was difcovered by the means of Sir
Ralph Win wood; and moil of the minor agents in this black tranfadlion
fuffered the punifhment due to their crimes; Mrs. Turner, WeRon,
Franklyn, and Sir Gervafe Helwyfle being executed. The earl and coun-
tefs of Somerfet were tried for this murder in May, 1616. She acknow-
ledged her crime, and he was found guilty by his peers: but to the eternal
difgrace of King James, their lives, without even a fhadow of ground
for mitigation of their fentence, were fpared, and they were confined in
the Tower till Jan. 1621-2, when they were allowed to remove to one of
Lord Wallingford’s feats in Oxfordfhire, to refide there, and not to pafs
beyond a circuit of three miles round it,—A few months before that king’s
death, they obtained a full pardon 5 and Somerfet, who is faid to have
amafled an eilate of 19,000!. a year, and 200,000!. in moveable property, J
(which was chiefly jewels)§ was allowed to retain only 4000I. a year of
all his wealth. A few months before her trial, his countefs was brought
to bed of a daughter, named Anne, who was married in 1638 to William
Lord Ruflel, afterwards earl, and finally duke, of Bedford; and is faid
never to have heard of her parents’ guilt, till, at a late period of her life,
* It was wittily obferved on this occafion, that <c Lord Eflex’s cafe exactly refembled that of a man,
whofe ftomach could digefl every thing but Bagfhot mutton.”
f On this occafion Wilfon and other hiflorians afllire us, that the countefs claimed the privilege of
wearing a veil during the infpe&ion ; and with the aid of this difguife, a young lady, a relation of her
own, [whofe name was Finett] was fubflituted in her place.
J Firft fourteen years of K. James, p. 70.
§ Birch’s Collection of Bacon’s Letters, &c. 8vo. 1763; p. 71.
S 2
purpofe of declaring the marriage of Lord and Lady Eflex a nullity, and
the hufband acknowledging that he was impotent verfus banc',* though ca-
pable of Satisfying any other womanj and the lady, on the infpedion of
three gentlewomen and two midwives, being pronounced a virgin;^ on thefe
grounds they were divorced a vinculo matrimonii. In the November fol-
lowing Rochefler was made earl of Somerfet; and on the 26 th of the next
month, he and Lady Frances Howard were married, in the prefence of the
king and queen, with almoft regal folemnity.—In about a year and a half af-
terwards, the murder of Overbury was difcovered by the means of Sir
Ralph Win wood; and moil of the minor agents in this black tranfadlion
fuffered the punifhment due to their crimes; Mrs. Turner, WeRon,
Franklyn, and Sir Gervafe Helwyfle being executed. The earl and coun-
tefs of Somerfet were tried for this murder in May, 1616. She acknow-
ledged her crime, and he was found guilty by his peers: but to the eternal
difgrace of King James, their lives, without even a fhadow of ground
for mitigation of their fentence, were fpared, and they were confined in
the Tower till Jan. 1621-2, when they were allowed to remove to one of
Lord Wallingford’s feats in Oxfordfhire, to refide there, and not to pafs
beyond a circuit of three miles round it,—A few months before that king’s
death, they obtained a full pardon 5 and Somerfet, who is faid to have
amafled an eilate of 19,000!. a year, and 200,000!. in moveable property, J
(which was chiefly jewels)§ was allowed to retain only 4000I. a year of
all his wealth. A few months before her trial, his countefs was brought
to bed of a daughter, named Anne, who was married in 1638 to William
Lord Ruflel, afterwards earl, and finally duke, of Bedford; and is faid
never to have heard of her parents’ guilt, till, at a late period of her life,
* It was wittily obferved on this occafion, that <c Lord Eflex’s cafe exactly refembled that of a man,
whofe ftomach could digefl every thing but Bagfhot mutton.”
f On this occafion Wilfon and other hiflorians afllire us, that the countefs claimed the privilege of
wearing a veil during the infpe&ion ; and with the aid of this difguife, a young lady, a relation of her
own, [whofe name was Finett] was fubflituted in her place.
J Firft fourteen years of K. James, p. 70.
§ Birch’s Collection of Bacon’s Letters, &c. 8vo. 1763; p. 71.
S 2