« AnteriorContinuar »
this inconvenience belongs wholly to the framer of the Tables and Index to this edition ; that is, both the proposal of such an improve. ment, and the execution of it, originated from him. All thai I can pretend to say further concerning the Tables and Index is, that the Jatter has been executed at a much greater expence than would have been incurred, if I had not made it a particular request to the propriešoss of the edition, to be liberal in their allowance for so useful and laborious a part of the undertaking; and further, that I have every reason so believe, that the gentleman who compiled the general Index of matter, has been extremely diligent in endeavouring to ren. der 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 such as, having become purchasers under the idea of porsessing 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 person who had least to do in the conduct of the work. It is observable, that the firft Number of the ist 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 less AMBIGUOUS, a very erroneous notion has prevailed as to the extent of his very limited share in the undertaking.'-Mr. H. it seems, 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 Booksellers, to solve this ambiguity till the sale of the work had been fully benefited by the mistake. Having sold his name to them as a prefacer, he thought, perhaps, they had a right to dispose of it as they pleased. - This is the scrupulous morality of a lawyer! He knows that truth is not to be spoken at all times;' but that there may, be a time when truth may be so spoken as to claim the praise of veracity, and enjoy all the benefits of deception.
As it appears the first 10 volumes are merely reprinted without any notes and illustrations, we shall content ourselves with treating them with no greater respect than Mr. Hargrave does : and as he honestly confesses never to have seen to much as one sheet of them before they were printed or published,' we bave not thought it incumbent upon us to travel over so much old ground on the present occafion. We ought, however, to observe, that Mr. Hargrave's Preface to the ist volume contains a short but judicious account of the former editions, and that be has preferved the different prefaces that were originally prefixed to them by the former editors.
The sith volume, which alone has come forth under the inspection 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 consist of the case of Fabregus and Mostyn, the Trial of the Duchess of Kingston for bigany, and of Mr. Horne for a libel : an Appendix is likewise given, which contains some interesting Proceedings on questions of a political as well as of a legal nature, that have occured in the present reign, particularly those relating to Mr. Wilkes : and Mr. Hargrave has not forgoiten to insert his own valuable argument on Somerset's cale, commonly called the NEGRO Cause. He entitles it The Cole of Somerset the Negro; but he has preserved only his own speech, or rather pamphlet (the 2d edition of which was published in the year 1775), without giving the arguments either of the Counsel or of the Court. This is a species of egotism we should not have expected in the Editor of a great work; and is hardly rendered excuseable by the reference be makes to a no:e of the cale in Loft's Reports.
In discharging that part of his engagement to the Public, and to the Booksellers, which relates to the Trials that were omitted in the former edition, Mr. H. appears to have used considerable diligence; but, according to his own account, not with success equal to his labours. " The result of my pursuit (fays he) for new matter proved very inadequate to my expectation, the induftry of former collectors having scarce left any deficiences which I could supply, without too far passing the line I had prefcribed to myself, of merely selecting additional Trials; yet the few which I have gleaned may fuftice to convince the Reader, , that I have not been sparing of research.
• In the course of my enquiries for nerv Trials; I resorted to the British Museum, in hopes that the immenfe manuscripts in that repofitary of learoing and science would supply me with some new materials of importance ; and I was particularly encouraged in this expectation, by the promiling titles of various articles in the catalogue of the Harleian manuscripts. But I was wholly disappointed; for, on examination, the few Trials I met with proved either too meagre and io fignificant to be made use of, or nothing more than mere transcripts of some of our old printed chronicles
After paying a handsome compliment to those gentlemen in the British Museum, who have the superintendance of the manuscripts and printed books, for their attention and obliging deportment in facilitating the access to the valuable collections intrufted to them, he proceeds to take notice of one very Itriking 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 Inpeachments, buc Proceedings on Bills of Attainder, and of Bills in Aicting pains and penalties. In the 10 vo. lomes, which constitute the work as it was before the present edition, there are not, as I calcolace, thirty articles which fall under such a description ; yet from a very imperfect lia, 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 5. Rev. March, 1783.
such Trials might be extracted.-It was my wish to have supplied this omission; more especially as, by so 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 engage. ments to the Proprietors of this edition of State Trials, but would also have swelled the present collection greatly beyond the terms of the proposals to the Subscribers.'
This capital and striking defect in the former editions' being therefore left to remain a striking and capital defect in the present edition, Mr. Hargrave subjoins the following account of the method he has pursued in this volume:
• Before each Trial (says he) in this volume, I have given notice to the reader whence it is extracted, with such other explanations as were necessary to enable the forming a judgment on the authority of a Trial. It would have been of no small advantage to the readers, if the collectors of the former volumes had been equally explanatory.'
• My introductory note to some of the Trials in this volume is extended into an illustration of the subject of the Trial; and, occasionally, I bave interspersed fimilar notes elsewhere. The fullest annotations of this kind are those prefixed to the Case of Impositions, the Case of the Pefinati, the Bankers Case, and the respective Cases of Mr. W birlock, and Mr. Oliver St. John. These and the other notes I commit to the candid construction of the reader, with an assurance that I have endeavoured to form and express my opinion with the uto most 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 with the limits of our work would admit of our extract. ing some 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 leisure to have pursued the same mode of illustrating the Trials contained in the former volumes. The Case of Impositions above mentioned is the case of Mr. Richard Bates, who was tried on an information in the Exchequer, in the year 1604, for refusing to pay a duty on foreign currants, imposed by a mere A&t of the Crown. This Case gave rise to a vast profufion of bistorical and constitutional learning. Mr. Hargrave has been juftly anxious to preserve the speeches of Mr. Hakewill and Mr. Yelverton, in opposition to the prerogative lawyers of that day. His observations on their speeches, together with a short 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 specimen of Mr Hargrave's talents as a writer, of his impartiality as a judge, and bis zeal and attachment to the principles of the constitution. After enumerating the different sources from which he has collected this case, he adds, these pieces together comprize the principal arguments for the prerogative of impositions claimed by the Crown. But, without something more, it would be a very partial view of the subject. In justice, therefore, as well to that excellent conftitution, to the injury of which the claim of impofitions by prerogative operated, as to those who, so honourably for themselves, and so happily for their country, resisted the invasion, we shall add two moit learned and able arguments on the oppofire fide of the quellion; one delivered by Mr. HAKEWILL in the same Parliament, with Lord Bacon's argument; the other also cotemporary, and said to have been com osed by Sir Henry YiLVERION, afterwards the Judge of that name. Bosh of these valuable remnants of the debates in Parliament on impofitions by the Crown are very rare; having been printed separately, 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 eren escaped the observation of our detervedly celebrated female historian. That the two former writers should not be ftudious to draw the attention of their readers to two arguments, so fit to counteract the reception of their particu. lar prejudices, is easy to be accounted for; especially in the initance of Mr. Carte, whose 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 same way; and therefore we attribute it to the accident of her not having met with either of the arguments. Perhaps our observation on Mr. Hume and Mr. CARTE may sound as barth to fome persons. But we can assure such, that ic is not intended to write disrespectfully of either of these authors. We feel strongly the merit of Mi. Carte as a molt elaborate hillorian ; as one, to whole familiar knowledge, and skilful use of records, with the other most authentic materials of the history of his country, all, who follow him in the same line, are infinitely obliged. For strength, clearness, and elegance of file, for prosoundness in remark, for beautiful arrangement and close comprellson of matter, we consider Mr. Hume's work as a model of historical composition. Such being the characters of these eminent writers, it becomes the more necessary to know, on which fide their prejudices operate. Otherwise the authority of their works might have an improper in Auence in ferring the opinions of their readers on the controverred points of our Govern. ment and conftitution, and so lead to the dissemination of dangerous and pernicious errors. The croch seems to be, that a generai history of ENGLAND, composed with that sigid impartiality to effential to a perfectly jolt idea of our Conftitution is still wanting. Hithecro, the belt of our writers, who have been engaged in that arduous task, have been betrayed into extremes. One is swayed by predilection for the STUART family; whilit another loses his temper from averlion to them. Some write from favour to absolute monarchy; others are votaries to the pallion of republicanism. Too many, nave been seduced by zeal for a particular party in the State ; and so, according to the occasion, have pra&tised the arts of apology, or adopted the severe and vehement language of satire. But the author, who wishes to fix the true point of our ancient Conftitution in the scale of Government, muft banith from his mind all such corruptives of judgment,'
ART. XV. 1. PHYSIQUE du Monde. i. c. A Cosmological Sysem of Na
tural Philofophy (for we know not how to translate this title otherwise). Dedicated to the King. By the Baron de MARIvetz and M. GOUSSIER. Volume 1. with a Dictionary of unusual Terms. Sold le parately. Paris. 1782.
To read some pages, or rather lome paragraphs, here and there in the immense volume of Nature, seems all that is granted to man in this present state, except the idea that can never be banished from a truly philosophical mind, of a well connected WHOLE, under a perfect direction. The parts of this whole, and their mutual relations and dependencies, are not commenfurate to human capacity; but if, beside the particular laws that take place in the different claffes of beings, there is a general law, which embraces, connects, and governs the whole fyfo tem, an acquaintance with this law may conduct our researches with success, and facilitate our progress in the knowledge of Nature.
Our immortal Newton opened a new field of investigation, by unfolding the great lau of attraction, fo admirable by its fimplicity, and to extensive in its application. But the Authors of the work now before us have banished (as far as their authority will go) attraction from the mechanism of the universe, and more especially from the theory of the Moon, and have subftituted, in its place, a universal fluid; compofid of elastic molecules, in di-, rect and immediate contact. With this principle before them, they think that nothing, but the first act which created matter, and communicated mution to it, remains beyond the bounds of human comprehenfion and philosophical investigation. Setting out, fay they, from this primitive action of the Eternal Mind, which reafon must affirm, as well as revelation, the philosopher may investigate with a steady eye all the aclions of recondary czules, and the whole series and succeflion of effects.' Such is the arduous enterprize, which these new-fashioned Cartefians, there new-modellers of the murdane fyftem, have undertaken. Genius and knowledge they do not fack; but whether they have employed them to good purpose, we leave to the judgment of those who perule the work, which is magnificent both in matter and forin.
In a Presiminary Discourse, we fee the valt extent of the plans which these learned and ingenious Authors propose to execute. This Discourse is followed by a Preface, in which they lay down i heir manner of proceeding, and the nieans of success on which they depend. This Preface again is followed by a Letter, in