in any criminal profecution for the inferior fort of crimes, having been of late much the fubject of converfation, it will probably be a gratification of the public curiofity, to fee a collection of the Cafes and Records that the Law Books furnifh us with concerning it. How far they tend to elucidate the point of privilege in criminal cafes, which has of late been fo warmly agitated, I will not pretend to determine.I think, he continues, it will appear at least, that the Judgment of the Common Pleas on this occafion, has been founded on very plaufible, if not substantial, reasons, and deferves by no means to be cenfured as precipitate, even fuppofing it to have been erroneous; which, were it not for the late Refolutions of both Houses of Parliament, which have determined that Privilege does not lie in the fingle cafe of a feditious libel, many people would ftill beg leave to doubt of."

How far, in fuch case, people might have doubted on this point, or whether they are not ftill in doubt about it, we know not, any more than the Author. But we will venture to say, that for himself, he is past doubting, as may be inferred from his own words. After having displayed all his Cafes and Records-Thefe circumftances,' he concludes, feem to afford a tolerable proof, that the Lords of Parliament are intitled to such a privilege of their persons in misdemeanours as well as in civil cases.*

In our judgment, they do not afford fo much as a fhadow of proof that privilege holds in mifdemeanours. In fact, all the Cafes and Records which are produced, do not in the least concern the matter in queftion: for they all relate to civil cafes, and no inference, refpecting criminal cafes, can be drawn from them without the moft forced and unnatural conftruction. Thus, on a writ of trefpafs brought against a Prior, the Plaintiff prayed a capias to take his body; but it was faid, that he could not have a capias against a Prior, unless he were indicted of felony, or were attainted of felony, &c.'

Here the Author would induce the Reader to believe, though he does not affert it pofitively, that the &c. at the end of this cafe means treason, or fuch crimes as are either felony or greater than felony; for all crimes of a lower degree than felony,' he adds, come under the general denomination of trefpaffes.'

We, on the other hand, are perfuaded, that the &c. in this place, means other inferior offences to felony: for though it is true that crimes under the degree of felony, are sometimes denominated trefpaffes, yet in this cafe, the fenfe evidently refers to trefpaffes of a criminal nature, in contradiftinction to the trefpafs then in queftion, which was properly of a civil nature.

The

The Writer, however, is candid enough to cite one record which proves, that privilege cannot be claimed in cafes of Refcous and if he had looked farther into the law books, or into the Journals of the House of Commons, he would have found many other cafes in which privilege is not allowed.

The authority of Lord Coke, who fays, that privilege holds, "unless in treason, felony, and the peace," is too much in favour of our Author's opinion, to have been omitted by him: but if he had taken the pains to confult the Records which Lord Coke cites in the margin, to fupport this dictum, he would have found, that not one of them apply to the proof of this propofition, but rather tend to maintain the oppofite conclufion.

In fhort, this Collection feems to have been made by one of thofe Huffars in Literature, who catch fubjects as they rife, and fubfift not by the merit of their writings, but by the popularity of their theme.

The Life of the Right Hon. Sir John Holt, Knight, Lord Chief Fuftice of the Court of King's-Bench. Containing feveral Arguments touching the Rights and Liberties of the People, delivered by his Lordship, with great Reason, and remarkable Courage, upon most important Occafions, during the Reigns of their Majesties King William the third and Queen Anne; taken from the Report of Lord Chief Justice Raymond, &c. And an abstract of Lørd Chief Justice Holt's Will, Codicils, &c. Alfo Points of Law refolved by his Lordship, on Evidence, at Nifi Prius. With a Table of References to all his Lordship's Arguments and Refolutions in the feveral Volumes of Reports. Never before published. By a Gentleman of the Inner Temple. 8vo. 2s. 6d. Worral.

TH

HE Life of this great and public fpirited Lawyer, could not be published at a more feasonable opportunity. During fome late warm contefts in our Courts of Juftice, his authority was appealed to on both fides; and it has been obferved, in a certain affembly, that it was his peculiar honour to have difobliged the Crown, the Lords, the Commons, and the People, by his judicial conduct, at different periods. Which is the ftrongeft inftance that can be given, of his being totally unbiaffed and difinterested.

A life spent in the study and practice of the Law, as it admits of but little diverfification, fo it affords but few anecdotes for general entertainment. Nevertheless it must be confeffed, that our Editor has, with indefatigable pains, collected many curi

ous

ous particulars relating to Lord Holt, which are the more acceptable, fince, as he obferves, not a fyllable concerning this confuminate Judge, or any of his family, is to be found, either in the ten volumes, folio, of the General Dictionary; the five of the Biographia Britannica; of the eleven large octavos, of the Biographical Dictionary.

In the introduction, our Editor very justly premises, that ⚫ there never was an abler, more unbiaffed, and upright Judge fince England was a nation, than the Lord Chief Juftice Holt. His Life is interefting to every individual, who fets the leaft value on the fecurity of his liberty or property; his Lordship was always remarkably ftrenuous in nobly afferting, and as vigorously fupporting the rights and liberties of the fubject, to which he paid the greatest regard on all occafions, and never suffered the leaft reflection tending to depreciate either, to pafs uncenfured, or, indeed, without the fevereft reprimand.'

In proof of this, our Editor takes notice of the refentment which Lord Holt expreffed against the opinion of one of his brethren, relating to a writ of appeal, concerning which one of the Judges alledged, that " an appeal was a revengeful, odious profecution, and therefore deferved no encouragement." Upon which occafion, Holt, with great vehemence and zeal, faid, "He wondered an Englishman fhould brand an appeal with the name of an odious profecution! for his part, he looked upon it to be a noble remedy, and a true badge of the English rights and liberties*."

No Chief Justice,' fays our Author, perhaps ever continued in that poft fo long as Lord Chief Juftice Holt did, his Lord hip having maintained it twenty-two years fucceffively, with great reputation for his courage, integrity, and compleat knowlege in his profeffion; he applied himself with great affiduity to the functions of his important office; he was a perfect Maiter of the common law; and as his judgment was most folid, his capacity vaft, and understanding moft clear, fo had he a firmness of mind, and fuch a degree of refolution, as could never be brought to fwerve in the leaft from what he thought to be law and juftice; he had upon great occafions fhewn an intrepid zeal in allerting the authority of the law; for he ventured the indignation of both Houfes of Parliament by turns, when he thought the law was with him: thofe who had the happiness of living in his time, were more immediately fenfible of his juftice, wifdom, and integrity. His advancement to the honourable flation which he fo long and fo well filled, is an unerring proof

N. B. Upon an appeal, the King cannot pardon.

REV. Feb. 1764.

H

that

that real merit will make its own way, without any affiftance, without any little mean arts and affiduities, and that the only certain method to obtain true honour, is to deferve it. To his juftice and unfhaken integrity, and to the univerfal fuffrages of praife of a whole nation for fuch a behaviour, we may poffibly, in a great meafure, be indebted for fuch a series of great men fince his time, in the profeffion of the law, not to be equalled in any former period of history, and not likely to be exceeded in any future.'

We must concur with the Writer in his encomiums on this great and upright Judge; but we cannot entirely admit, that we have had a feries of Lawyers, fince his time, not to be equalled in any former period of hiftory. It is certain that our feats of judgment were never better filled than at prefent; but if we look at the intervening space, we shall find many reverend Judges, whom it would be abfurd and unjust to compare with the Cokes and Hales of former times.

With regard to the Life of Lord Holt, the Editor informs us, that he was the eldeft fon of Sir Thomas Holt, Knt. Serjeant at Law in King Charles the fecond's reign; he was born in 1642, at Thame in Oxfordshire, and was educated in Abingdon fchool, while his father was Recorder of that town. He became a Gentleman-commoner of Oriel college, Oxford, under the tuition of Mr. Francis Barry. In 1658, he entered himself of Gray's Inn, before he took a degree; fometime after which he was called to the bar; where applying himself with great induftry to the ftudy of the common law, he arrived at fo great a knowlege therein, that he foon became a very eminent Barrifter, infomuch that when the Earl of Danby (greatgrandfather to his prefent Grace the Duke of Leeds) was, in 1678, impeached in Parliament by the Commons, the Lords appointed Serjeant Raymond (father of the late Lord Chief Juftice Raymond) Mr. Saunders, afterwards Chief Juftice of the King's Bench, and Mr. Holt, to be of his council; but the Commons, by a vote, which was posted round Westminfter-hall, and the Parliament-houfe, prohibited the fame, upon the fevereft penalties.

On the 13th day of February, 1685, he was made Recorder of London, by letters patent, by commiffion, in the place of Sir Thomas Jenner, made one of the Barons of the Exchequer.

Having difcharged the office of Recorder with much candour and applaufe, for about a year and a half, he was removed thence, becaufe he would not give his hand towards the taking

away

away the Teft*.-But another gives us this account of it— "Though King James the fecond had no other wars, but against the laws and conftitution of the nation, yet he would have the act which makes it felony without benefit of Clergy, for any foldier taking pay in the King's service, in his wars beyond fea, and upon fea, or in Scotland, to defert his Officer, to extend to this army, thus raised by King James the second, in time of peace to enflave the nation, in the year 1687; and because the Recorder of London, Sir John Holt, would not expound this law to the King's defign, he was put out of his place, and fo was Sir Edward Herbert, from being Chief Juftice of the King's-bench, to make room for Sir Robert Wright, to hang a poor foldier upon this ftatute; and afterwards this ftatute did the work without any farther dispute." In April 1686, or thereabouts, he, with many others, was called to the degree of Serjeant at Law.

Being chofen a Member in the Convention Parliament, called by the Prince of Orange, to fettle the nation, upon K. James's withdrawing into France, in 1688, he was appointed to be one of the Managers for the Commons, at the conferences held with thofe of the Lords, about the Abdication, and the vacancy of the Throne +; he had an opportunity to fhew his great abilities, and inclination, upon that folemn occafion; and it is not unlikely, but that it forwarded his advancement: for the Government being fettled, and King William and Queen Mary fixed upon the throne, Sir John Holt was, on the 4th of May, 1689, made Lord Chief Juftice of the Court of King's-Bench.

On the 7th of the fame month, he was, at a meeting of the Governors of the Charter-Houfe, at Whitehall, chofen one, in the place of Lord Chancellor Jeffreys; and on the 25th of Auguft, in the fame year, he was admitted into his Majesty's most honourable Privy-council, and fworn at Hampton Court.'

When the Lord Chancellor Sommers parted with the great feal on the twenty-feventh of April, 1700, and the fame continued undifpofed of for fome time, King William preffed Lord Chief Juftice Holt to accept of it, but he replied-" That

In a note on this paffage, we have the following curious anecdote: -When King James afked him to vote for the repeal of the Tolt, he anfwered, he could not do it in honour or confcience. The King faid, he knew he was a man of honour, but the rest of his life did not look like a man that had great regard for confcience; (for he was, indeed, abandoned to luxury and vice;) he boldly replied, he had his faults, but they were fuch, that other people, who talked more of confcience, were guilty of the like.

For a particular account of thefe conferences, fee Grey's Debates.