The King, nevertheless, did this act unwillingly; and he had even previously dissuaded Buckingham from seeking a commitment, as he said the matter ought to be conducted by “justice and not favour.” Upon receiving this advice, the Duke wrote to Sir Randal Crewe, Lord Chief Justice, requesting him to communicate on this point with Innocent Lanier, a man much trusted by Lord Purbeck. That unhappy nobleman was then residing with the Duke, who seemed anxious to retain him, fearing that otherwise “Sir Robert and Lady Purbeck might, by their crafty insinuations, draw from him speeches to their advantage.”[235] Footnote 235: State Papers, vol. clxxxiii., No. 41. This prosecution was carried on with considerable bitterness of spirit. Upon the first steps taken in the affair, the Duke of Buckingham was sent for to London; and the summons despatched contained this assurance:--"I find them" (the solicitor and attorney-general) “resolved to deal roundly in this business, as your Grace desires.” The advice given by these two crown lawyers was to bring the case before the High Commission Court, which could sit without delay in the vacation, and when the crime had been proved there, the divorce could be obtained by ordinary law. They thought it unadvisable to send these prisoners to prison, “a step unusual for persons of their rank,” but “advised that they be confined in the houses of aldermen, where they would be more strictly restrained than in prison.” They were then examining witnesses.