immense theoretical and practical knowledge to the business immediately before the court,-in perceiving, almost with intuitive readiness, on the first opening of a case, its real state, and the ultimate conclusion of equity upon it, yet investigating it with the most conscientious, most minute, and most edifying industry,--in all, or in any of these requisites, for a due discharge of his high office,-lord Eldon, if he has been equalled, has assuredly never been surpassed by any of his predecessors. He throws a lustre on the whole profession to which he belongs; they gratefully acknowledge it, and will feel its loss.

He has other merits:He has often opposed the popular voice, yet he has always been popular; but, to use the words of lord Mansfield," it has "been with that popularity which follows, not with "that which is run after:" He has almost always supported administration, but has never been subservient to any minister; and, among those, who, by the public opinion of the worth and dignity of their individual character, attach the people to the government, and thus secure its stability, his lordship is universally allowed to be eminently conspicuous. On all this, there is no dissentient voice: all, which these lines have expressed, or attempted to express, the Reminiscent has heard often, and much better said by the late sir Samuel Romilly, both in public and in private-testimony goes no higher.› zil

7. Much of the intuitive readiness which we have -mentioned in the preceding article was possessed by

* In the case of Rex v. Wilkes, 4 Burr. p. 2562. ....i

the late lord Kenyon; but the intermediate patient discussion was seldom exhibited by his lordship. The consequence was, that though the decision was right, the ground of it was sometimes obscure, and the objections to it, in the minds of the hearers, were not always removed. This lessened the merit of his adjudications; but they are most deservedly held in the greatest respect, and considered of the highest authority *.

In

We have noticed the small proportion, which the courts of justice in England bear, in number, to those of France. some principles of the highest importance in the administration of justice, the difference between them is equally remarkable. In England, the highest degree of evidence is always required to establish legal proof; hearsay evidence is never admitted; and, in criminal causes, the person accused can never be required to answer any questions which tend to convict him. In all these instances, the courts of law, both of the ancient and the new régimes of France, have adopted a different system.

On the first of them, lord Mansfield was supposed to have thought with the French lawyers, that, speaking generally, evidence of every kind should be received, and the court judge of its weight,—presuming always against the party, who produced evidence of a lower degree, while the production of higher evidence was in his power. According to this system, if an action upon a bond was tried, and the witness of its execution resided in or near the place in which the cause was heard, and was under no mental or bodily infirmity which prevented his attending and giving evidence, nothing short of his personal testimony should be permitted to establish the bond: but, if the witness was out of the kingdom, so that his attendance in court could not be compelled; or, if he were summoned, and disobeyed the summons; or, if he lived at such a distance, as to render the expense of his attendance insupportable, -in all these instances, the absence of the first degree of

HERE the Reminiscent closes his mention of his juridical publications.

evidence would be accounted for satisfactorily, and evidence of the next degree should therefore be admitted:-so that, under these circumstances, the evidence of a person acquainted with the hand-writing of the party, who executed the bond, and with the hand-writing of the parties, who witnessed its execution, should be received as adequate testimony of both.

It is evident that the contrary practice of the English law in such a case, exposes creditors to great inconveniences; and frequently deprives them of the means of enforcing a just demand;-still, the Reminiscent suspects, that a different practice would lead to a laxity in the doctrine of testimony, that would produce, in its consequences, greater inconvenience and greater injustice.

Whether in a criminal action the person accused should be bound to answer questions tending to convict him of the crime for which he is tried, appears to the Reminiscent a much nicer question.

XII.

PARLIAMENTARY ELOQUENCE :—LORD CHATHAMLORD NORTH-MR. FOX-MR. PITT-MR. BURKE.

THE administration of lord North was certainly an æra in the history of British eloquence: what, in respect to the orators of Rome, is observed by Velleius Paterculus of Cicero, will probably be said of lord North, that "no member of either house "of the British parliament will be ranked among "the orators of this country, whom lord North did "not see, or who did not see lord North."

XII. 1.

Lord Chatham.

Or those, by whom lord North was preceded, none, probably, except lord Chatham, will be remembered by posterity; but the nature of the eloquence of this extraordinary man, it is extremely difficult to describe.

No person in his external appearance was ever more bountifully gifted by nature for an orator. In his look and his gesture, grace and dignity were combined, but dignity presided; the "terrors of his "beak, the lightnings of his eye," were insufferable. His voice was both full and clear; his lowest whisper was distinctly heard, his middle tones were sweet, rich, and beautifully varied; when he elevated his voice to its highest pitch, the house was completely

filled with the volume of the sound. The effect was awful, except when he wished to cheer or animate; he then had spirit-stirring notes, which were perfectly irresistible. He frequently rose, on a sudden, from a very low to a very high key, but it seemed to be without effort. His diction was remarkably simple, but words were never chosen with greater care; he mentioned to a friend of the Reminiscent, that he had read twice, from beginning to end, Bailey's Dictionary; and that he had perused some of Dr. Barrow's Sermons so often, as to know them by heart.

His sentiments, too, were apparently simple; but sentiments were never adopted or uttered with greater skill; he was often familiar and even playful, but it was the familiarity and playfulness of condescension -the lion that dandled with the kid. The terrible, however, was his peculiar power.-Then the whole house sunk before him.--Still he was dignified; and wonderful as was his eloquence, it was attended with this most important effect, that it impressed every hearer with a conviction that there was something in him even finer than his words; that the man was infinitely greater than the orator; no impression of this kind was made by the eloquence of his son, or his son's antagonist.

for great he cerOne of the fairest

Still, with the great man, tainly was, manner did much. specimens which we possess of his lordship's oratory, is his speech, in 1766, for the repeal of the stamp

'act.

"Annuit, et nutu totum tremefecit Olympum."

VIRGIL.