illustration of particular topics, and the task of repelling the invectives of his opponents.

"In the early stages of this inquiry," (says this able lawyer and reasoner)" appeals were made to the reign of Henry VIII. and the cruelties exercised by that monarch. Those appeals were considered then as sufficient to satisfy the purposes of the case; they were deemed deemed sufficiently powerful in having to answer the object of this defence. But what have become of the appeals to the case of Lady Anne Boleyn, and the barbarities of Henry VIII.? They have ceased to have any impression for the purposes of her Majesty's defence; a higher flight is necessary in the last stage of this inquiry. To my surprise-to my amazement and utter astonishment, my learned friend, Mr. Denman, whom I have long known-whose character and private life I have long loved, has for this purpose dared to say that no page in the history of the ancient or modern world furnishes a parallel to the abuses and cruelties her Royal Highness has experienced, unless it is in the annals of Rome in its worst period-in_the_history of its worst and most infamous sovereigns! My Lords, the Princess of Wales is said, in her sufferings, to stand in the same situation as the Empress Oc-. tavia! How are we to answer this, but to see in what situation Octavia did stand, in order to see the enormous nature of the charge preferred against the Government of this country. Octavia's father was murdered by Nero-Octavia's brother was murdered by Nero, in the presence of Octavia, She, one of the most pure and spotless beings the world ever produced-she was charged with having a criminal intercourse with a slave! My Lords, there was not the smallest semblance of truth in the charge; she never advanced this slave; she had never promoted him to orders; she had never slept in the same room with that slave, but without evidence she was sent into banishment. She was seen in Gaul when this took place. The most infamous of men-the most atrocious of monsters was employed by Nero, to murder his own mother Agrippa, and I believe that this Nero, to get rid of his wife Octavia, told her " that you have had an adulterous intercourse with your slave, and you shall undergo nominal punishment, but you shall be pardoned." Re luctantly the confession was made; the confession was taken for proof, she was seized-her veins opened-the blood did not flow sufficiently quick-she was drowned in hot water, and her head was sent to Nero, to glut his cruelty. My Lords, that is the conduct of Nero and his myrmidon. They were acting together in this foul and infamous transaction. What are we to say then when counsel like my learned friend, entertaining the best possible feelings on all other occasions, feels himself justified, in a court of justice, in saying that the case of Octavia bears a resemblance to the case before your Lordships; nay, not only bears a resemblance, but that it is the only case that can be presented in ancient and modern times, that can be put in any competition with such a transaction! I confess, when I heard

you must confess

this, my blood was paralized with horror. I hardly understood where I was, or from whom it was this extraordinary language proceeded. But, my Lords, what is still more extraordinary, my learned friend has not the credit of novelty in this comparison. No, it is not his own; for I find in a newspaper, which I hold in my hand, an advertisement published some time before the speech of my learned friend, couched in the terms;-" Nero vindicated!" published by whom? By a name well known, an individual of whom I know nothing, but from those publications which are ushered into the world," Printed for William Hone, Ludgate Hill." Now, my learned friend condescends to make himself the instrument to such a person as I have described, to prefer such charges in this high and august assembly against the monarch of his country! My Lords, what will my learned friend say, if I imitate the same course in answering his argument? What will your Lordships say what will my learned friend say, if I quote the language of Tacitus, of whom he is so fond-" Isontibus innoxia consilia; flagitiis manifestis, subsidium ab audacia petendum."-I should not have dared to make such a quotation, only that I find it in the same page with the passages which my learned friends have quoted." (Speech of the Solicitor General, p. 155, 156.)

We will add, also, the concluding part of the same speech, for the sake of its just and vigorous comment upon the improper and impolitic appeal of the Queen's Counsel to the personal motives of fear, and the threatened consequences of a conviction of the party accused:

"My learned friends have endeavoured to awaken every sympathy, every passion of your Lordships' nature; they have even appealed to the basest of all passions, the passion of fear. In the high and august assembly of a nation renowned for its firmness and intrepidity my learned friends have appealed to the passion of fear. Your Lordships have been told by one of my learned friends, that if you passed this Bill into a law, you would commit an act of suicide. By another of my learned friends you were told, that if you passed this Bill it would be at your-peril! The words hung sufficiently long upon my learned friend's lips to be clearly understood, but they were afterwards affectedly withdrawn. I was astonished to hear such arguments urged arguments which could not serve, but might have an injurious effect on the case of the illustrious individual in whose behalf they were urged. I know, my Lords, that your Lordships dare not do any thing unjust; but I know at the same time that you will do what the ends of justice require, without regard to any personal consequences which may follow. But, my Lords, it is not in this place only that such arts have been resorted to; a similar course has been followed out of doors-every attempt has been made to intimidate your Lordships and overawe your proceedings. Even the name of her Majesty herself has been profaned for base and factious purposes. In her Majesty's name, but undoubtedly without her consent, attacks have been made upon all that is sacred and venerable. The Empire-the Con

stitution-the Sovereign-the Hierarchy-every order of the Stateall has been darkly and malignantly attacked under the shield of her 'Majesty's name. But, my Lords, I do not suppose that this has been done with her Majesty's consent, if it had, well might we exclaim'dum capitolio

Regina dementes ruinas

Funus et imperio parabat.'

In such a case we might well expect the commencement of a new era; but I again say, that I impute no such motives to her Majesty. I say, my Lords, that if, in looking to the whole of the evidence, you shall have the strongest moral conviction on your Lordships' minds of her Majesty's guilt, but yet feel that there has not been such evidence brought forward as would lay the legal foundation of guilt; in that case, my Lords, you will throw out this bill; you will say to her Majesty, in the language of my learned friend Mr. Denman, go thou, and sin no more.' But, my Lords, if, on the other hand, looking with that calmness and impartiality which the great importance of this case requires, you find that the case is borne out by the strongest, fullest, and most satisfactory evidence, if no doubt hangs upon the minds of your Lordships, then, my Lords, knowing the Tribunal I have been addressing, I am sure you will pronounce your decision on this great and momentous question with a firmness consonant to your high and exalted station." (Speech of the Solicitor General, p. 167-168.)

We have also placed the speech of the Earl of Liverpool on the second reading of the Bill of Pains and Penalties at the head of our article, not for the purpose of any particular examination of its contents, but simply to call the attention of our readers to it, as an instructive sample of the gravity and simplicity by which truth should come recommended from the mouth of a nobleman of this great and free community. Really, when one reads the virulent charges brought against the state, of which this elevated, respectable, and amiable person is one of the principal administrators and organs, and without whose large participation no confederate guilt of unprincipled misgovernment can possibly be incurred when one reflects upon the coarse and ferocious obloquies with which his public character, as well as that of his associates in the invidious station of ministers, is loaded, bearing in our minds how confuted by all experience is the distinction between public and private principle-when one sees the vulgar demagogue, with neither principle nor peace in his bosom, leaving his occupation, his duty, and his unhappy home to hurl the thunders of his execration at the head of this honourable man, whose elegant and moral life is the ornament of the public sphere in which he moves, and the joy of his domestic retirement; one discerns by a short glance of the mind the vast difference in disposition, in temper, in habits, in the

It

elements and capacities of social happiness, between those that : maintain and those that menace our ancient and tried institutions, between those that cherish the spirit of improvement combined with the principle of conservation, and those that speculate upon the chances of violent change, or general confusion. The speech of the Earl of Liverpool is one that will be long remembered, for a distinction which is not to be attained by the rhetorician's art,—the impress of candour and feeling on every sentence. is a speech also on which the slavish fear calculated upon by some of the speakers on this question, has evidently had no operation. There is a tempered courage, and intrepid moderation spread over the whole, which, in these days, are absolutely necessary to carry the value of virtue beyond the individual that possesses it into the social atmosphere by which he is surrounded. We will exhibit to our readers the latter pages of this plain and manly oration:

"A bill of pains and penalties, my Lords, is a bad name: but let me entreat you, fairly and candidly, to consider what the nature of this bill is. Is this bill, in its effect, regard being had to the relative situation of the parties, any more than an ordinary divorce bill, such as you have so frequently before you? I do not mean that the parties have greater advantages. In any case where the wife of any of your Lordships, or of your Lordships' ancestors, has been divorced, is she not actually degraded-is she not deprived of her rights, prerogatives, and privileges? And is she not degraded upon the same principle, and exactly almost in the same terms, as those which are contained in this bill? I know, my Lords, that on occasions of that kind you have decisions of the Ecclesiastical Court, but not always; for many divorce bills pass without any such decision being before the House. I admit the rule generally; but I deny that it is a principle upon which all divorce bills must proceed. We have been told too, that in other cases, the accused has a full right to recriminate; but then the individual is in a far different situation from the Queen. Here the exclusion of that rule cannot operate as a hardship upon the Queen. A Queen of this country does not come forward like a private individual. She stands before the public and the country, claiming prerogatives and privileges which must be founded upon her own individual innocence and purity, unmixed with the doctrines out of doors; unaided by popular declamation. I say then, my lords, that when it is endeavoured to stigmatize this bill as a bill of pains and penalties, it is no more in its operation, than one of those bills which you are constantly in the habit of passing. They are bills which often operate harshly, because, perhaps, they injure those who have not been the aggressors :-because, perhaps, those individuals have not the power of retaliating; because, perhaps, they are feeble and unprotected, and are not upheld and supported by popular feeling, manoeuvring their innocence in the face of manifest guilt. The Queen has none of these hardships to complain of. She has advocates most able, she has means most ample,

and she derives every assistance, even from her accusers, to establish her innocence, if it can be established. My Lords, it has next been said, that this measure is inexpedient and unnecessary, and the noble Lord opposite has personally addressed me, and told me that, because I brought this bill into the house, it would be highly improper for me to vote on this important occasion. Before I address myself to that, however, I beg leave to offer an observation as to what has been said with respect to the inconvenience that will result, if this bill do pass. I would ask the noble Lords who intend to vote the second reading of this bill to look on the other hand, and see the tremendous inconveniencies that would arise from rejecting it, after this question has been brought to the bar-after it has been investigated, and after the parties have joined issue upon it. If, my Lords, you believe her Majesty guilty, and yet reject the bill, it will be a complete acquittal, moral as well as legal, and it will be a triumph of guilt under circumstances the most fatal. Reflect, my Lords, upon all the different bearings of this case; and recollect that in such an event, the Queen would not retire from this bar like an humble individual acquitted for want of evidence. No, my Lords, she is Queen of this country, and she will take that title and its prerogatives, tainted with crime, should you not vote for the second reading of the bill, though you think her guilty of the charge imputed to her. Do not your Lordships recollect a most respectable individual, in a decent and respectable situation of life, being found guilty of the crime of adultery?—and do you not recollect the disgrace and degradation which attached to him for the manner in which the crime was perpetrated? I will not prejudice your opinions; I will not attempt to warp your judgments; but never let it be said, that while you believe her guilty, you dare not pronounce your conscientious opinion. I believe in my conscience, whatever opinion may prevail as to the consequences, I firmly believe, let the consequences be what they may, that is the safest and wisest course; and I rely on the good sense of the country, that those consequences will neither be fatal nor prejudicial, when they see your opi nions have been declared according to the best of your judgment, and according to the dictates of your conscience. The noble Lord opposite has alluded to the clamour out-of-doors; and he says most truly, that attempts will be made by the seditious and disaffected to take advantage of your decision, if you should pass this bill, aad turn it to serve their own evil designs. My Lords, that is most true. In times like these, undoubtedly there are always too many evil spirits abroad, anxious to seize on any public grievance to serve their own base purposes, and to fan the flame of faction, without caring, for a single moment, about the guilt or innocence of the Queen. And would to God, my Lords, I could say, that the Queen had kept herself clear from all participation in such attempts.-Look, my Lords, to the answers she gives those addresses which are daily presented to her. Can we look at them, and say we think they are the answers of a person who, conscious of her innocence, patiently waits the decision of that tribunal before which her conduct is arraigned? Would not the true line to be adopted be, that which she pursued most properly in the answer

13