Their miserable victims dared scarcely murmur; having ever the terrible court of Star-Chamber before them, which their persecutors could command, and which punished libellers—­as they would be accounted, if they gave utterance to their wrongs, and charged their oppressors with mis-doing,—­with fine, branding, and the pillory.  Many were handled in this sort, and held up in terrorem to the others.  Hence it came to pass, that the Star-Chamber, from the fearful nature of its machinery; its extraordinary powers; the notorious corruption and venality of its officers; the peculiarity of its practice, which always favoured the plaintiff; and the severity with which it punished any libelling or slanderous words uttered against the king’s representative (as the patentees were considered), or any conspiracy or false accusation brought against them; it came to pass, we say, that this terrible court became as much dreaded in Protestant England as the Inquisition in Catholic Spain.  The punishments inflicted by the Star-Chamber were, as we learn from a legal authority, and a counsel in the court, “fine, imprisonment, loss of ears, or nailing to the pillory, slitting the nose, branding the forehead, whipping of late days, wearing of papers in public places, or any punishment but death.”  And John Chamberlain, Esq., writing to Sir Dudley Carlton, about the same period, observes, that “The world is now much terrified with the Star-Chamber, there being not so little an offence against any proclamation, but is liable and subject to the censure of that court.  And for proclamations and patents, they are become so ordinary that there is no end; every day bringing forth some new project or other.  As, within these two days, here is one come forth for tobacco, wholly engrossed by Sir Thomas Roe and his partners, which, if they can keep and maintain against the general clamour, will be a great commodity; unless, peradventure, indignation, rather than all other reasons, may bring that filthy weed out of use.” [What, would be the effect of such a patent now-a-days?  Would it, at all, restrict the use of the “filthy weed?”] “In truth,” proceeds Chamberlain, “the world doth even groan under the burthen of these perpetual patents, which are become so frequent, that whereas at the king’s coming in there were complaints of some eight or nine monopolies then in being, they are now said to be multiplied to as many scores.”

From the foregoing citation, from a private letter of the time, the state of public feeling may be gathered, and the alarm occasioned in all classes by these oppressions perfectly understood.

Amongst those who had obtained the largest share of spoil were two persons destined to occupy a prominent position in our history.  They were Sir Giles Mompesson and Sir Francis Mitchell,—­both names held in general dread and detestation, though no man ventured to speak ill of them openly, since they were as implacable in their animosities, as usurious and griping in their demands; and many an ear had been lost, many a nose slit, many a back scourged at the cart’s tail, because the unfortunate owners had stigmatized them according to their deserts.  Thus they enjoyed a complete immunity of wrong; and, with the terrible court of Star-Chamber to defend them and to punish their enemies, they set all opposition at defiance.