# Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Walter, John (1566-1630)

1904 Errata appended.
​WALTER, Sir JOHN (1566–1630), judge, second son of Edmund Walter of Ludlow, Shropshire, by Mary, daughter of Thomas Hackluit of Eyton, Herefordshire, was born at Ludlow in 1566. His father was then a counsel of some standing, having about 1560 been called to the bar at the Inner Temple, where he was elected bencher in July 1568, was autumn reader in 1572, and treasurer from 1581 to 1583. He was afterwards justice of South Wales, and member from 1586 of the council in the Welsh marches. He died at Ludlow in 1592, and was buried in Ludlow church.
John Walter matriculated from Brasenose College, Oxford, on 28 March 1579, and was created M.A. on 1 July 1613. He was admitted in November 1582 at the Inner Temple, where he was called to the bar on 22 Nov. 1590, elected bencher in 1605; as autumn reader in 1607 he increased a reputation for learning which already stood so high that more than a year before he had been selected, with Serjeant (afterwards Baron) Altham, to assist the deliberations of the privy council in conference with the barons of the exchequer on the privileges of the court, and to defend the royal prerogative of alnage in the House of Lords (Pell Records, ed. Devon, pp. 32, 64; Whitelocke, Liber Famel. Camden Soc. p. 30). Having established a large practice in the exchequer and the chancery court, he was appointed, towards the close of Easter term 1613, attorney-general to the Prince of Wales, of whose revenues he was also made trustee. In 1618 he was selected to contest the recordership of London against the crown nominee, Robert (afterwards Sir Robert) Heath [q. v.], and was defeated by only two votes. He was knighted at Greenwich on 18 May 1619, and was returned to parliament on 13 Dec. 1620 for East Looe, Cornwall, which seat he retained at the subsequent general election. Though naturally humane, he was so far carried away by the flood of fanaticism let loose by the impeachment (1 May 1621) of Edward Floyd [q. v.] as to propose whipping and sequestration as the meet reward of the incautious barrister's slip of the tongue. On 10 May 1625 he 'succeeded Sir Lawrence Tanfield [q. v.] as chief baron of the exchequer, having been first made king's serjeant (4 May). As assistant to the House of Lords he had a hand in shaping the somewhat puritanical measure (1 Car. I, c. i.) which ushered in the reign of Charles I by a prohibition of bull-baitings, bear-baitings, interludes, plays, and extra-parochial meetings for sport on Sundays. In fiscal matters Walter took a high ​view of the prerogative. Into the validity of the patent of the farmers of the revenue he declined to inquire; and to the merchants who in 1628 resisted the levy of tonnage and poundage he meted out the rigour of the law, committing their persons to gaol and discharging the replevins by which they sought to recover their goods. On the other hand, his prerogatival proclivities did not prevent his concurrence in the resolution in Pine's case (1628) that mere words in no case amount to treason, or blind him to the gravity of the issues raised by the stormy incidents which closed the parliamentary session of 1628-9. Did privilege of parliament cover conspiracy to defame privy councillors and forcibly resist the adjournment of the House of Commons? Such in substance was the case laid before the three common-law chiefs by Attorney-general Heath at the king's express instance immediately after the dissolution of 10 March 1628-9, and the three chiefs dexterously evaded the issue by involving their answer in a cloud of ambiguous verbiage. Charles declined to be put off with riddles, and submitted the case to the entire common-law bench (25 April), with much the same result so far as the formal resolutions of the judges were concerned, but not without securing a practical point of great importance—the sanction of the majority to proceedings in the Star-chamber against the nine members (30 April). Walter alone dissented, holding the offence punishable only by committal. Of Walter, accordingly, Charles determined to make an example, and suggested through Heath that it would be well for him to resign. Walter demurred ; his patent was in the form 'quamdiu se bene gesserit,' i.e. during good behaviour, and he would not surrender it without a scire facias. The king shrank from issuing the writ, but on 22 Oct. 1630 inhibited the judge from sitting in court. Walter obeyed, but retained his place until his death on 18 Nov. following. His remains were interred in the church at Woolvercott, Oxfordshire, in which parish he had his seat, and covered by a stately monument.
Though of the moderate type, Walter was sufficiently high a churchman to deem it obligatory to obtain (2 March 1625-6) an indulgence from the bishop of London before permitting himself the use of meat on fast days. He was on the whole a sound lawyer and an upright judge; and the eccentric course which he steered in the conflict between prerogative and privilege was no more than might be expected from a man of his training when suddenly called upon to adjudicate on questions which he was not really competent to determine.
Walter married twice: first, Margaret, daughter of William Offley of London; and, secondly, Anne, daughter of William Wytham of Ledstone, Yorkshire, and widow of Thomas Bigges of Lenchwick, Worcestershire. By his second wife he had no issue; his first wife bore him four sons and four daughters. A baronetcy, conferred by Charles I upon his heir, Sir William Walter of Sarsden, Oxfordshire, became extinct by the death without male issue of the fourth baronet, Sir Robert Walter, on 20 Nov. 1731.
J. M. R.
Dictionary of National Biography, Errata (1904), p.274 N.B.— f.e. stands for from end and l.l. for last line
| Page | Col. | Line | |
| 248 | i | 14 f.e. | Walter, Sir John: for Woolvercott read Wolvercote |