Prince Henry and the Lord Chief Justice

Prince Henry and the Lord Chief-Justice are joined by an unusually direct test of whether law can restrain the heir to the throne. The judge recalls committing Prince Henry under the authority of his father, and, after becoming king, Prince Henry not only accepts that act as just but renews the judge’s authority. Their relationship moves from confrontation and apparent estrangement to an explicit bond of trust: the king places the sword of justice in the judge’s hands and promises to let his counsel guide him.

A Past Encounter with the Law

The relationship’s foundation is an earlier exercise of judicial power. Addressing Prince Henry after his accession, the Lord Chief-Justice explains that he had acted through the authority of the prince’s father: the father’s power, he says, was represented in his person as he administered the law. The judge’s account makes the distinction between personal hostility and public office central. He presents his action not as a private contest with the prince but as the discharge of a responsibility entrusted to him.

That history gives the exchange its particular force. The person who had been subject to the judge’s decision is now king, with the power to reward or punish the official who made it. Yet the Lord Chief-Justice does not disguise what happened or ask the new monarch to treat the case as a personal grievance. He says that he acted in honour and under the impartial direction of his conscience. His explanation places the legitimacy of the earlier judgment—and the judge’s standing to continue in office—before the king for confirmation.

Estrangement and Explanation

At the meeting, Prince Henry remarks that the assembled company looks strangely at him, especially the Lord Chief-Justice, and supposes they are sure he does not love them. The observation makes personal distance visible at the moment when his new political position could easily be mistaken for resentment. The judge’s presence matters because their past encounter gives that apparent coldness a specific history: he had once exercised coercive authority over the prince, while the prince now possesses royal authority over him.

The Lord Chief-Justice answers by returning the question to the principle behind his conduct. He maintains that he acted honourably and impartially, rather than for private advantage. The exchange therefore does not erase the discomfort of their history; it interprets it. The judge’s former action becomes evidence that the law was applied even to the king’s heir, while Prince Henry’s response determines whether that principle will survive the change of ruler.

The King’s Judgment and the Judge’s Office

Prince Henry gives an unambiguous answer: he tells the judge that he is right and that he has weighed the matter well. He then directs him to continue bearing the balance and the sword. These emblems make the settlement concrete. The balance signifies judgment, while the sword marks the authority to enforce it; both remain with the official whose impartial conduct had once placed the prince himself under legal restraint.

The king also recalls that the judge had committed him, and turns that earlier act into the reason for a new commission. He places in the judge’s hand the unstained sword he has used to bear, presenting the office not as a favour withdrawn or bestowed at royal whim but as a trust supported by demonstrated service. The sequence is a reversal with continuity: Prince Henry has become sovereign, but he does not use sovereignty to invalidate the judgment made against him when he was the heir.

Trust, Counsel, and Political Meaning

The settlement is personal as well as institutional. Prince Henry says the Lord Chief-Justice shall be as a father to his youth and that his own voice will follow the judge’s prompting. The language of filial guidance echoes the judge’s earlier account of having acted in the name of Prince Henry’s father, but redirects that authority toward the king’s future conduct. The judge is no longer simply the officer who once disciplined him; he is entrusted to advise him.

This relationship consequently defines kingship through restraint. Prince Henry could treat the old judgment as an injury and use his new position to overturn its consequences. Instead, he publicly recognizes the judge’s impartiality, renews his charge, and promises to humble his intentions to legal counsel. The reconciliation does not depend on denying the conflict. Its force comes from preserving the very authority that made the conflict possible: the law could reach the heir, and the king now confirms that it should continue to guide the crown.