variance, each had declared the coast of its enemy in a state of blockade. British shipping was thus placed between two fires; and the consequence was, that many of them had been captured by each of the hostile parties. The books at Lloyd's exhibited numerous proofs of the depredations committed on British Commerce; and it was known that the Lord Collingwood had been captured and condemned at Porto Rico. These, conjoined with the incessant depredations committed in the West Indian Seas, loudly called for prompt interference. Negociations were accordingly entered into with Spain; and orders were sent to the officers commanding those seas, to afford our shipping all the protection in their power; but the pirates nevertheless

continued their outrages during the whole year; which led to many complaints of the supineness of the Admiralty, and the inadequacy of the measures which had been adopted for extirpating these miscreants. It was even alleged that the commanders of our ships of war on the West Indian station, tempted by the profits arising from the freight of bullion, were much more occupied in transporting bullion from the adjoining parts of South America, than in protecting our shipping from piratical depredations, or in exerting themselves to discover the retreats of these miscreants, and to visit them with the punishment prescribed by the law of nations for the common enemies, of mankind.

SIR Robert Wilson's dismissal from the Army, in consequence of the part he acted, or was alleged to have acted, on the occasion of the late Queen's Funeral, having excited a considerable sensation in the country, and that officer having considered himself aggrieved by the summary manner in which he had been cashiered, being thereby deprived of the opportunity of knowing exactly the charges preferred against him, and of meeting bis accusers face to face in an open trial, determined to bring the subject before Parliament; not so much, we should suppose, from any hope of redress in that quarter, as for the purpose of putting himself on his defence before the country, and of enabling the public to judge between him and those who had advised his removal from the army by a peremptory exercise of prerogative alone. Accordingly, on the 13th of February, Sir Robert, after entering into a full explanation of his conduct on the 14th of August preceding, and reading a number of documents in corroboration of his state

ments, moved, that copies of the correspondence which had taken place between the Commander-in-Chief, Lord Sidmouth, and himself, on the subject of his removal from the Army, should be laid before the House. This proposition was resisted by Ministers, on the ground that, without the possession of such a prerogative on the part of the Crown, it would be impossible to preserve the discipline of the army, whether with reference to its internal subordination, or to the intercourse of the military with the civil population; that the circumstance of officers having purchased their commissions in no degree affected the exercise of this constitutional prerogative of the Crown; that in the present instance there was no presumption of abuse in the exercise of it; but that Sir Robert Wilson's own statement had furnished a presumption which led to a directly contrary conclusion. In support of this doctrine, they referred to the opinions of several lawyers on the subject, and contended, that, laying the merits or demerits of Sir Robert Wilson entirely out of the

or

question, it was clear that the prerogative in question belonged to the Crown, and that the exercise of it, under the responsibility of those who advised it, could not be resisted without destroying the balance of the constitution. Whether this Crown law be sound the reverse, it is not our business to pronounce; the hardship to the individual in question, who was thus deprived of the property vested in his commissions, and of the benefit of long and arduous service in various quarters of the world, is a less debateable matter; while judging from the facts brought to light in the discussion in Parliament, the offence, if it must be called such, of endeavouring to persuade the military to discontinue firing on the people, was visited with a very disproportionate severity of punishment. Admitting, in its fullest extent, the existence of the prerogative for which Ministers contended, it does not surely follow that such a prerogative ought to be exercised, (which must always be as a punishment,) without some tangible and well-defined offence; and there are unquestionably legitimate grounds for suspicion, when the supposed offence is of such a complexion, that even a Court-Martial, which is never refused even to a subordinate officer, cannot be safely permitted to deal with it. The House, however, seemed to be of a different opinion; for Sir Robert Wilson's motion was negatived by a majority of 199 to 97.

Intimately connected with this matter, was a motion brought forward on the 6th of March by Mr H. G. Bennet on the subject of the Queen's Funeral, the purport of which was to induce the House to declare, that the respect and solemnity which, by ancient custom, had been observed at the funerals of the Queens of England, had been unnecessarily and indecorously violated at the funeral of her late Majesty Queen Caroline. This motion, which could have

no other effect than to prolong the exasperation which had been excited by every circumstance connected with the late Queen, and which Dr Lushington declared, had his inclinations been consulted, would never have been brought under the consideration of the House, led to a long and desultory debate, in the course of which Mr Peel took occasion to overthrow every position on which the mover had rested his proposal, which was ultimately negatived without a division; a sufficient evidence of the general sense of the House as to the impropriety of agitating a subject which ought, for the sake of all parties, to glide quietly into oblivion.

A number of petitions, from different parts of the country, having been presented to the House of Commons, praying them to interpose in behalf of Mr Henry Hunt, who was undergoing in Ilchester jail the punishment inflicted on him for his proceedings at Manchester, Sir Francis Burdett moved, on the 24th of April, that an address should be presented to his Majesty, praying that he would be graciously pleased to remit the remainder of Mr Hunt's imprisonment. The grounds laid for the proposed mitigation of Hunt's punishment were, the sufferings he had endured, both from the insalubrious nature of the prison, and the wanton and cruel conduct of Bridle the keeper, (who was afterwards tried and convicted of grossly maltreating his prisoners,) together with his exertions in bringing these abuses to light. The motion of the honourable baronet was strenuously resisted by Mr Peel, who declared that there were no circumstances of such overwhelming necessity in this man's case as to justify the House in interfering with the important prerogative of mercy, which was wholly alienated from its powers, and unconnected with the ends for which they were instituted; and that even if the address now proposed were agreed to, he would feel it

his duty to advise the Crown not to accede to it. The proposition was accordingly negatived.

In this session, as in the preceding, the Bishop of Peterborough's peculiar mode of examining curates, when presented to livings in his diocese, and candidates for holy orders, came under the consideration of the House of Peers, in consequence of a petition from the Rev. T. S. Grimshawe, Rector of Burton Latimer, complaining that the petitioner, having appointed the Rev. E. Thurtell, curate of Burton, the Bishop of Peterborough had refused to license him, on the ground of his not having given satisfactory answers to his questions; and, in general, that persons who had received holy orders were compelled to submit to an examination of a very extraordinary nature, before they could be licensed to curacies in the diocese of Peterborough. Lord Dacre, who presented it, entered at some length into the course pursued by the right reverend prelate, contending that his examination questions, which were all leading questions, and demanded a peremptory answer of Yes or No, were only a series of tests framed for the See of Peterborough, in addition to the 39 articles of the Church of England, which were the only tests recognised by law. The Bishop of Peterborough defended his right to examine, according to his own discretion, not only candidates for holy orders, but even curates appointed to livings in his diocese, although they brought the usual testimonials, signed by three beneficed clergymen, and countersigned by the bishop of another diocese. He then stated the reasons why he had refused to license Mr Thurtell, which were, that in stead of giving plain answers to plain questions, his replies were given in an ambiguous and circuitous manner, with an appendix of no less than ten closely written folio pages of explanation; and that upon a fresh copy of the questions being transmitted to him,

he had returned it with a letter, stating that he could give no other answers than those he had already given; but that if more explanation was desired, he was ready to send it. This not being conformable to the course his Lordship, in the exercise of his discretion, had thought proper to prescribe, the license had been refused, which gave occasion to the petition before the House, the several allegations of which his Lordship next proceeded to answer in detail, asserting vehemently that the major part of them were direct untruths. Lord Holland condemned the language employed by the right reverend prelate in speaking of the petitioner, which was harsh in itself, and not becoming the quarter from which it proceeded The hardship, he said, in a case like the present, was extreme. By the resolutions in the case of Horne Tooke, it had been settled, that when once a man became a deacon, he could look for advancement in no profession but the church. A man might be able to subscribe the 39 articles, with the latitude hitherto allowed; and an opportunity of preferment in the diocese of Peterborough occurring, he might reasonably expect that no obstacle would be presented to his obtaining it. But no: the Bishop of Peterborough stepped in, and put him to a new test by his 87 questions, some of them of no easy solution, and such as Archbishop Wake himself could not have answered. Lord Harrowby considered the allegations contained in the petition as of the gravest character, and thought that some further inquiry ought to be instituted. He was satisfied, that with regard to the welfare of the church, to narrow the base was not the best method of securing the superstructure, and that the conduct of the right reverend prelate had been clearly most impolitic. The Lord Chancellor, however, maintained, that the conduct of the bishop was perfectly justifiable, and that he could not see how he could go on to

the subscription without previous examination, The petition was then ordered to lie on the table; after which, Lord Dacre moved that it should be referred to a committee, but the proposition was negatived by 19 to 58.

It is remarkable enough, that during this discussion, not one of the right reverend prelates on the bench signified, either by word or gesture, whether he approved or disapproved of the doctrines and conduct of the Bishop of Peterborough; and that, though severely taunted by Lord Caernarvon for their prudence or timidity, when their right reverend brother was placed on his defence, they persevered in maintaining a most inflexible Pythagorean taciturnity.

It is not often that the Government of this country presents itself in the character of a patron of literature; in this unusual aspect, however, it appeared towards the close of the session. After expatiating on the advantage of having an uniform and regular edition of our Ancient Historians published by authority, and at the public expense, which was the more necessary, because individuals were in the habit of printing imperfect copies, which were very carelessly collated, if collated at all, and after stating that the expense would not probably exceed L. 2000 a-year, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on the 24th of July, moved, "That an humble address be presented to his Majesty, to represent to his Majesty, that the editions of the works of our Ancient Historians are incorrect and defective; that many of their writings still remain in manuscript, and in some cases in a single copy only; and that an uniform and convenient edition of the whole, published under his Majesty's royal sanction, would be an undertaking honourable to his Majesty's reign, and conducive to the advancement of historical and constitutional knowledge That this House, therefore, humbly beseeches his Majesty to

:

give such directions as his Majesty in his wisdom may think fit, for the pu blication of a complete edition of the Ancient Historians of this realm: and that this House begs leave to assure bis Majesty, that whatever expense may be necessary for this purpose will be made good by this House."

Sir J. Mackintosh felt great satisfaction in seconding the motion, and considered the work proposed as one of the very highest utility. Generally speaking, the Government of England was a little in arrear as to its patronage of literature; but it was highly creditable to the state of society in this country, that we saw works got up by individual enterprise, which in other countries would have required the assistance of the Legislature. With respect to the work in question, however, there were a variety of causesthe great capital required, the great devotion of time, the limited extent of probable sale, and certain laws which pressed heavily upon the publication of expensive works which were likely likely to prevent its being performed by individual speculation. For the conductor of the work, there was an individual (Mr Petrie, of the Tower) eminently qualified; and if he were not employed immediately, the desire of employing him might come too late. The work would be a history of the progress of the constitution; and, as such, it would be extremely valuable; and, whatever might be the anxiety not to spend the public money unnecessarily, there could, he thought, be no objection to the principle of the address. The resolution was of course agreed to.

On the 6th of August, being the day fixed for the prorogation of Parliament, his Majesty arrived with the usual state at the House of Peers, and having taken his seat on the throne, the Black Rod was ordered to desire the attendance of the Commons, who soon appeared at the bar, preceded by