19 Jan. 1615 he took an official part in the examination of Peacham under torture (Spedding, Letters and Life of Bacon, v. 94), as well as in a subsequent examination on 10 March (ib. v. 127). About the same time he joined in signing a certificate in favour of the chancery in the conflict with Coke on the question of praemunire (ib. v. 388), and, in short, is found taking the official view of the legal points which arose during the years in which he was solicitor-general. That he refused to take part against Somerset at his trial rests only on the unsupported testimony of Weldon, whose account of the matter is full of blunders.
On Bacon's acceptance of the great seal, in 1617, James announced that Yelverton should succeed him as attorney-general. For some time, however, the king held back from signing the warrant, and Yelverton was not long in discovering that Buckingham stood in his way, looking on him as a creature of the Howard family, who had adopted Somerset's partisans as their own. Yelverton was just then in one of his unbending moods, and refused to apply to the favourite in a matter which he held to concern the king alone. Buckingham, perhaps finding the king determined, sent for Yelverton, telling him that he would lose credit if the attorney-generalship were conferred without his influence being felt, and was answered that it was not the custom of favourites to meddle with legal appointments—an answer which leads to the suspicion that Somerset had not directly interposed in Yelverton's favour in 1613. Yelverton proceeded to express a hope that Buckingham would have no reason to complain of him, on which the favourite, professing himself satisfied, took the warrant to the king and returned with it duly signed. Afterwards Yelverton, as if to mark his dependence on the king only, carried to James a present of 4,000l. (Whitelocke, Liber Famelicus, p. 55). In the dispute between Coke and Buckingham about the marriage of the daughter of the former, Yelverton acted the part of mediator, and it was to his charge that Frances Coke was committed. Later on he gave confidential information to Bacon on the feeling of Buckingham towards him (Yelverton to Bacon, 3 Sept. 1617, Spedding, Letters and Life of Bacon, vi. 247), and pleaded the lord-keeper's cause at court with success.
In the stretching of the prerogative which preceded the meeting of parliament in 1621 Yelverton, as attorney-general, could not fail to have his share. In April 1617 he had been employed, at Buckingham's instance, in taking legal proceedings against the opponents of the patent for gold and silver thread; but he refused to take the step of committing those persons to prison without first consulting the king. In 1628, however, he concurred with Bacon and Montague in advising that the infringers of the patent should be prosecuted in the Star-chamber (Elsing, Notes of the Proceedings of the House of Lords in 1621, Camden Soc. p. 43). Becoming himself one of the commissioners on 22 April 1618 (Archaeologia, xli. 252), he was subsequently placed on another commission issued on 20 Oct. authorising means to be taken for the punishment of offenders, and in 1619, the silkmen having refused to give a bond to abstain from the manufacture, he committed some of them to the Fleet prison; but, being unwilling to bear the responsibility, announced his intention of releasing them unless Bacon would support him (ib. xli. 259).
It is not unlikely that this reference to Bacon was a sign of Yelverton's dissatisfaction with the policy of which he had hitherto allowed himself to become an instrument. At all events, on 16 June 1620 Bacon and others recommended that, in spite of Yelverton's acknowledgment of error, he should be tried in the Star-chamber on the ground of having officially passed a charter to the city of London containing unauthorised provisions (Spedding, Letters and Life of Bacon, vii. 98), and on 27 June he was suspended from his office (Grant Book, P.E.O., p. 307). On 27 Oct. Yelverton more expressly acknowledged his offence in the Star-chamber (Spedding, Letters and Life of Bacon, vii. 134); but this was again held insufficient, and on 10 Nov. he was sentenced to imprisonment in the Tower during pleasure, a fine of 1,000l., and dismissal from his place if the king approved (ib. vii. 140). The king did approve, appointing Yelverton's successor in the attorney-generalship on 11 Jan. 1621.
If Yelverton gave offence to the court by his hesitation in defending the monopolies, he also gave offence to those who attacked the monopolies by defending them at all. On 18 April 1621 he was fetched from the Tower to answer charges brought against him in the House of Lords, where he stated in the course of his defence that his sufferings were in his opinion due to circumstances connected with the patent for inns (Lords' Journals, iii. 77). At this James took offence, and on the 24th invited the peers to defend him against Yelverton's insinuations. On the 30th Yelverton, being called for his defence, turned fiercely upon Buckingham, charging
