ART. XIV. A Complete Collection of State Trials and Proceedings for High Treason, and other Crimes and Misdemeanours. The 4th Edidition. To which is prefixed a new Preface, by Francis Hargrave, Efq. Folio. II Vols. 11 Guineas in Sheets. Cadell,

&c. 1781.

S this edition is at length completed, it acquires, in its

A collective ftate, a degree of importance, which, in its pro

grefs through a periodical publication in numbers, it did not feem to command.

The refpectable name of Hargrave, prefixed in the title page, and advertised in the public papers, has led many into an opinion of the fuperiority which the whole of this edition would derive from the labours of fo able and enlightened an Editor: nor can it be queftioned, that if this gentleman had poffeffed fufficient leifure to have annexed explanatory notes to the different Trials as the work advanced, it would have added highly to the utility of this compilation. That this was expected by many purchasers is very certain; that it was ever promised is pofitively difavowed by Mr. Hargrave, in his Preface to the Iith volume; wherein, after referring to the Preface to the first volume, he proceeds to ftate the nature of his engagement in this work:

In my Preface to the first volume of this edition of STATE TRIALS, I thought, that I had fufficiently explained myself to guard against any refponfibility beyond what really belongs to me, But from the manner of placing my name in the title to the collection, which I now think might have been lefs ambiguous, a very erroneous notion has prevailed, as to the extent of my very limited share in the undertaking. I therefore deem it proper to be more explicit on this head; and with that view, I here take the opportunity of declaring, that the only parts of the work for which I am in any respect accountable, exclufive of the prefent Preface, are the Preface with my name in the first volume; and the selection of the trials and cafes for this volume, with fuch annotations as I have given in the course of it, particularly those before the several trials. As to the trials in the ten preceding volumes, they were printed literally from the laft of the former edition; nor did I fee fo much as one theet of those volumes before it was printed and published, except only the sheet containing my Preface and the title to the first volume. I am equally free from refponfibility for the Alphabetical and Chronological Tables of all the Trials in this collection, and for the General Index of matter; all of which are placed at the end of this volume. These Tables and Index were prepared by another gentleman. The Chronological Tables of the Trials is quite a new acceffion to the work; there being no fuch table to the former editions; though the utility of it is apparent, as it in a great measure obviates the disadvantage from the dif orderly arrangement of many of the trials in point of time. This diforder was a neceffary confequence of continuing the first fix volumes of the work by fupplemental volumes. The merit of leffening

6

this

this inconvenience belongs wholly to the framer of the Tables and Index to this edition; that is, both the propofal of fuch an improve ment, and the execution of it, originated from him. All that I can pretend to fay further concerning the Tables and Index is, that the latter has been executed at a much greater expence than would have been incurred, if I had not made it a particular request to the proprietors of the edition, to be liberal in their allowance for fo ufeful and laborious a part of the undertaking; and further, that I have every reason to believe, that the gentleman who compiled the general Index of matter, has been extremely diligent in endeavouring to render it acceptable.'

In the foregoing declaration there is a mixture of real candour towards the other gentlemen concerned in the conduct of this work, and of affumed candour with regard to the Public,, and to fuch as, having become purchafers under the idea of poffeffing themselves of the valuable labours of Mr. Hargrave, find,, that though his name appears in large capitals in the title-page, and public prints, he is in reality the perfon who had least to do in the conduct of the work. It is obfervable, that the first Number of the ift volume was printed in the year 1775, and Mr. Hargrave gravely tells us, in the year 1781, that from the manner of placing his name in the title-page, which he now thinks might have been lefs AMBIGUOUS, a very erroneous notion has prevailed as to the extent of his very limited fhare in the undertaking.'-Mr. H. it feems, has too much respect for himself and the Public to let them continue under an error; but he had, too much regard for his friends the Bookfellers, to folve this ambiguity till the fale of the work had been fully benefited by the mistake. Having fold his name to them as a prefacer, he thought, perhaps, they had a right to difpofe of it as they pleafed. This is the fcrupulous morality of a lawyer! He knows that truth is not to be fpoken at all times;' but that there may be a time when truth may be so spoken as to claim the praife of veracity, and enjoy all the benefits of deception.

As it appears the first 10 volumes are merely reprinted without any notes and illuftrations, we fhall content ourselves with treating them with no greater refpect than Mr. Hargrave does : and as he honeftly confeffes never to have feen so much as one fheet of them before they were printed or publifhed,' we have not thought it incumbent upon us to travel over so much old ground on the prefent occafion. We ought, however, to obferve, that Mr. Hargrave's Preface to the 1ft volume contains a fhort but judicious account of the former editions; and that he has preserved the different prefaces that were originally prefixed to them by the former editors.

The 11th volume, which alone has come forth under the infpection of Mr. Hargrave, confifts partly of Trials omitted in the period of the former editions, and of Trials of importance

that have happened fince. The latter confift of the cafe of Fabregus and Moftyn, the Trial of the Duchefs of Kingston for bigany, and of Mr. Horne for a libel: an Appendix is likewife given, which contains fome interefting Proceedings on questions of a political as well as of a legal nature, that have occured in the prefent reign, particularly thofe relating to Mr. Wilkes: and Mr. Hargrave has not forgotten to infert his own valuable argument on Somerset's cafe, commonly called the NEGRO CAUSE. He entitles it The Cafe of Somerfet the Negro; but he has preserved only his own fpeech, or rather pamphlet (the 2d edition of which was published in the year 1775), without giving the arguments either of the Counfel or of the Court. This is a fpecies of egotism we thould not have expected in the Editor of a great work; and is hardly rendered excufeable by the reference he makes to a note of the cafe in Loft's Reports.

In difcharging that part of his engagement to the Public, and to the Bookfellers, which relates to the Trials that were omitted in the former edition, Mr. H. appears to have ufed confiderable diligence; but, according to his own account, not with fuccefs equal to his labours. The refult of my pursuit (fays he) for new matter proved very inadequate to my expectation, the induftry of former collectors having fcarce left any deficiences which I could fupply, without too far paffing the line I had prefcribed to myself, of merely felecting additional Trials; yet the few which I have gleaned may fuffice to convince the Reader, that I have not been sparing of research.

In the courfe of my enquiries for new Trials, I reforted to the British Mufeum, in hopes that the immenfe manufcripts in that repofitary of learning and fcience would fupply me with fome new materials of importance; and I was particularly encouraged in this expectation, by the promising titles of various articles in the catalogue of the Harleian manufcripts. But I was wholly disappointed; for, on examination, the few Trials I met with proved either too meagre and infignificant to be made ufe of, or nothing more than mere tranfcripts of fome of our old printed chronicles'

After paying a handfome compliment to thofe gentlemen in the British Mufeum, who have the fuperintendance of the ma nufcripts and printed books, for their attention and obliging deportment in facilitating the accefs to the valuable collections intrufted to them, he proceeds to take notice of one very ftriking and capital defect in the former editions of this collection, I mean in the article of Parliamentary Trials, under which head may be included not only Trials of Impeachments, but Proceedings on Bills of Attainder, and of Bills inflicting pains and penalties. In the 1o volumes, which conftitute the work as it was before the prefent edition, there are not, as I calculate, thirty articles which fall under fuch a defcription ; yet from a very imperfect lift, which I found on a flight examination of the rolls of parchment, and various other books of parliamentary information, I found that many more than a hundred :. Rev. March, 1783.1

S

fuch

fuch Trials might be extracted.-It was my wish to have fupplied this omiffion; more efpecially as, by fo doing, infinite light would be thrown on a subject most interesting to all lawyers and politicians; namely, the criminal judicature of Parliament. But fuch a vaft undertaking would not only have far exceeded the limits of my engagements to the Proprietors of this edition of STATE TRIALS, but would alfo have fwelled the prefent collection greatly beyond the terms of the proposals to the Subfcribers.'

This capital and ftriking defect in the former editions' being therefore left to remain a striking and capital defect in the prefent edition, Mr. Hargrave fubjoins the following account of the method he has pursued in this volume:

Before each Trial (fays he) in this volume, I have given notice to the reader whence it is extracted, with fuch other explanations as were neceffary to enable the forming a judgment on the authority of a Trial. It would have been of no fmall advantage to the readers, if the collectors of the former volumes had been equally explanatory.' • My introductory note to fome of the Trials in this volume is extended into an illuftration of the subject of the Trial; and, occafionally, I bave interfperfed fimilar notes elfewhere. The fulleft annotations of this kind are thofe prefixed to the Cafe of Impofitions, the Cafe of the Pofinati, the Bankers Cafe, and the refpective Cafes of Mr. Whitlock, and Mr. Oliver St. John. Thefe and the other notes I commit to the candid conftruction of the reader, with an affurance that I have endeavoured to form and exprefs my opinion with the utmoft impartiality and moderation; and that I shall even think myself obliged by a good humoured correction of any errors into which I may have fallen.'

We wish the limits of our work would admit of our extracting fome of these notes, for the entertainment of our Readers: they abound with political and historical information on a variety of important points, and leave behind them an additional regret in our minds, that Mr. Hargrave had not either encouragement or leifure to have purfued the fame mode of illuftrating the Trials contained in the former volumes. The Cafe of Impofitions above mentioned is the cafe of Mr. Richard Bates, who was tried on an information in the Exchequer, in the year 1604, for refufing to pay a duty on foreign currants, impofed by a mere Act of the Crown. This Cafe gave rife to a vaft profufion of hiftorical and conftitutional learning. Mr. Hargrave has been justly anxious to preferve the fpeeches of Mr. Hakewill and Mr. Yelverton, in oppofition to the prerogative lawyers of that day. His obfervations on their fpeeches, together with a fhort comparison of the merits of our ableft hiftorians who have treated of this period, we shall infert in this place; as we think they afford no unfavourable fpecimen of Mr Hargrave's talents as a writer, of his impartiality as a judge, and his zeal and attachment to the principles of the conftitution. After enumerating the different fources from which he has collected

this cafe, he adds, thefe pieces together comprize the principal arguments for the prerogative of impofitions claimed by the Crown. But, without fomething more, it would be a very partial view of the fubject. In juftice, therefore, as well to that excellent conflitution, to the injury of which the claim of impofitions by prerogative operated, as to thofe who, fo honourably for themfelves, and fo happily for their country, refifted the invasion, we shall add two most learned and able arguments on the oppofite fide of the queflion; one delivered by Mr. HAKEWILL in the fame Parliament, with Lord BACON's argument; the other alfo cotemporary, and faid to have been compofed by Sir HENRY YELVERTON, afterwards the Judge of that name. Both of thefe valuable remnants of the debates in Parliament on impofitions by the Crown are very rare; having been printed feparately, and not being to be found in any published collections of the time. What is very remarkable, they are not only unnoticed hy Mr. HUME, Mr. CARTE, and the Authors of the PARLIAMENTARY HISTORY; but have even efcaped the obfervation of our defervedly celebrated female hiftorian. That the two former writers fhould not be ftudious to draw the attention of their readers to two arguments, fo fit to counteract the reception of their particular prejudices, is eafy to be accounted for; especially in the instance of Mr. CARTE, whofe bias in favour of the prerogative is more avowed and apparent than Mr. HUME'S. But Mrs. MACAULAY'S filence cannot be explained in the fame way; and therefore we attribute it to the accident of her not having met with either of the arguments. Perhaps our obfervation on Mr. HUME and Mr. CARTE may found as harsh to fome perfons. But we can affure fuch, that it is not intended to write difrefpectfully of either of thefe authors. We feel strongly the merit of Mr. CARTE as a most elaborate hiftorian ; as one, to whole familiar knowledge, and skilful ufe of records, with the other most authentic materials of the hiftory of his country, all, who follow him in the fame line, are infinitely obliged. For ftrength, clearness, and elegance of ftile, for profoundness in remark, for beautiful arrangement and clofe compreffion of matter, we confider Mr. HUME's work as a model of hiftorical compofition. Such being the characters of these eminent writers, it becomes the more neceffary to know, on which fide their prejudices operate. Otherwise the authority of their works might have an improper influence in fetting the opinions of their readers on the controverted points of our Govern ment and constitution, and fo lead to the diffemination of dangerous and pernicious errors. The truth feems to be, that a general hiftory of ENGLAND, compofed with that rigid impartiality fo effential to a perfectly just idea of our Conftitution is ftill wanting. Hitherto, the best of our writers, who have been engaged in that arduous task, have been betrayed into extremes. One is fwayed by predilection for the STUART family; whilst another lofes his temper from averfion to them. Some write from favour to abfolute monarchy; others are votaries to the paffion of republicanifm. Too many have been feduced by zeal for a particular party in the State; and fo, according to the occafion, have practifed the arts of apology, or adopted the fevere and vehement language of fatire. But the author, who wishes to fix the true point of our ancient Conftitution in the fcale of Government, muft banish from his mind all fuch corruptives of judgment,'

S 2

FO