extenfive knowledge of the law, as it is practifed in our courts of juftice, requires them all. Thus, on the one hand, the student will find an advantage in fome degree of refearch into feudal learning; on the other, he will feel it neceffary to bound his researches, and to leave, before he has made auy great progrefs in them, the Book of Fiefs, and its commentators, for Littleton's Tenures and Sir Edward Coke's Commentary.

If it were proper to enter into a further defence of Littleton, it might be done, by obferving, that it must be a matter of great - doubt, whether Hottoman ever faw, or Gatzert more than faw, the work they fo feverely cenfure. Hottoman, if he had read it, might think it inelegant and abfurd; but he could not think it malicious, or indictive of a difpofition to flander. Gatzert says Ļittleton specifies twenty-five kinds of feudal fervices. It is probable, that by fervices be meant tenures: if he did, it is obvious that he confounded thofe chapters of Littleton which treat of the nature of the feudal eftate, with those chapters which treat of the nature of the feusiai tenure: in every other fenfe the word fervices, applied in this manner to Littleton's work, is without a meaning.-Befides, he mentions Latin editions of Littleton, when no edition in that language ever appeared.

In fact, were it not for the general obfer, yations to which they naturally give rife, neither the criticifm of Hottoman nor that of Gatzert would have been noticed.

When Doctor Cowell, in his Law Dictionary, cited the paffage in question from Hottoman, it raifed univerfal indignation, and he expunged it from the later editions of his book. It certainly was unjuft to impute it as a crime to Doctor Cowell, that he inferted this citation in his work; but the manner in which it was received is a ftriking proof of the high eftimation in which Littleton's Treatife was held.

The reputation of Sir EDWARD COKE'S COMMENTARY is not inferior to that of the work which is the fubject of it. It is objected to it, that it is defective in method. But it should be obferved, that a want of method was, in fome refpects, infeparable from the nature of the undertaking. During a long life of intense and unremitted application to the ftudy of the laws of England, Sir Edward Coke had treasured up an im menfity of the most valuable common law learning. This he wished to prefent to the public, and chose that mode of doing it, in which, without being obliged to dwell on thofe doctrines of the law which other authors might explain equally well, he might

produce that profound and recondite learning which he felt himself to poffefs above all others. In adopting this plan, he appears to have judged rationally, and confequently ought not to be cenfured for a circumstance infeparable from it.

It must be allowed, that the style of Sir Edward Coke is ftrongly tinged with the quaintnefs of the times in which he wrote; but it is accurate, expreffive, and clear. That it is fometimes difficult to comprehend his meaning, is owing, generally fpeaking, to the abftrufenefs of his fubject, not to the obfcurity of his language.-It has also been objected to him, that the authorities he cites do not in many places come up to the doctrines they are brought to fupport. There appears to be fome ground for this obfervation. Yet it fhould not be forgot, that the uncommon depth of his learning, and acutenefs of his mind, might enable him to difcover connections and confequences which elcape a common obferver.

It is fometimes faid, that the perufal of his Commentary is now become ufelefs, as many of the doctrines of law which his writings explain are become obfolete; and that every thing useful in him may be found more fyttematically and agreeably arranged in modern writers. It must be acknowledged, that when he treats of thofe parts of the law which have been altered fince his time, his Commentary partakes, in a certain degree, of the obsoleteness of the subjects to which it is applied; but even where this is the cafe, it does not often happen that the doctrines laid down by him do not ferve to illuftrate other parts of the law which are fill in force. Thus, there is no doubt but the cafes which now come before the courts of equity, and the principles upon which they are determined, are extremely different in their nature from those which are the subject of Sir Edward Coke's refearches. Yet the great perfonages who have prefided in thofe courts, have frequently recurred to the doctrines laid down by Sir Edward Coke, to form, explain, and illustrate their decrees, Hence, though portions charged upon real eftates, for the benefit of younger children, were not known in Littleton's time, and not much known in the time of Sir Edward Coke ; yet on the points which arise respecting the vesting and payment of portions, no writings in the law are more frequently or more fuccessfully applied to than Sir Edward Coke's Commentary on Littleton's Chapter of Conditions. It may alfo be observed, that notwithstanding the general tenor of the prefent business of our courts, cafes must frequently occur which depend upon the most abftrufe and intricate parts of the ancient

law.

law. Thus the cafe of Jacob v. Wheate led to the difcuffion of elcheats and ufes as they stood before the ftatute of Henry VIII. and the cafe of Taylor v. Horde turned on the learning of diffeifins.

But the most advantageous, and, perhaps, the most proper point of view in which the merit and ability of Sir Edward Coke's writings can be placed, is by confidering him as the centre of modern and ancient law.-The modern fyftem of law may be fuppofed to have taken its rife at the end of the reign of king Henry VII. and to have affumed forething of a regular form about the latter end of the reign of King Charles II. The principal features of this alteration are, perhaps, the introduction of recoveries; conveyances to ufes; the teftamentary difpofition by wills; the abolition of military tenures; the statute of frauds and perjuries; the establishment of a regular fyftem of equitable jurifdiction; the difcontinuance of real actions; and the mode of trying titles to landed property by ejectment. There is no doubt, but that, during the above period, a material alteration was effected in the jurifprudence of this Country: but this alteration has been effected, not fo much by fuperfeding, as by giving a new direction to the principles of the old law, and applying them to new fubjects. Hence a knowledge of ancient legal learn ing is abfolutely neceffary to a modern lawyer. Now Sir Edward Coke's Commentary upon Littleton is an immenfe repofitory of every thing that is moft interefting or useful in the legal learning of ancient times. Were it not for his writings, we should still have to fearch for it in the voluminous and chaotic compilation of cafes contained in the Year-books; or in the dry, though valuable Abridgments of Statham, Fitzherbert, Brooke, and Rolle. Every perfon, who has attempted, must be fenfible how very difficult and disgusting it is, to pursue a regular investigation of any point of law through thofe works. The writings of Sir Edward Coke have confiderably abridged, if not entirely taken away, the neceffity of this labour.

But his writings are not only a repofitory of ancient learning; they alfo contain the outlines of the principal doctrines of modern law and equity. On the one hand, he delineates and explains the ancient system of Law, as it flood at the acceflion of the Tudor line; on the other, he points out the leading circumstances of the innovations which then began to take place. He fhews the different reftraints which our ancestors impofed on the alienation of landed property, the me thods by which they were eluded, and the various modifications which property received after the free alienation of it was allowed,

He fhews, how the notorious and public transfer of property by livery of seifin was fuperfeded, by the fecret and refined mode of transferring it, introduced in confequence of the ftatute of ufes. We may trace in his works the beginning of the difufe of reat actions; the tendency in the nation to convert the military into focage tenures; and the outlines of almost every other point of modern jurifprudence. Thus his writings stand between, and connect the ancient and modern parts of the law, and by fhewing their mutual relation and dependency, difcover the many ways by which they refolve into, explain, and illuftrate one another.

Mr. Butler then proceeds to give an account of all the editions of Littleton's Tenures with and without Sir Edward Coke's Commentary, which, though ef fentially neceffary for him as an editor to infert, would not, we apprehend, be fufficiently interefting to the generality of our readers for us to extract.

In addition to the great legal knowledge of the editors, they have received at leait fome affittance. Mr. Hargrave has been favoured with Lord Chief Juftice Hale's manufcript notes, and fome various readings from MSS. by Sir William Jones; and Mr. Butler has in like manner been afflifted by the notes of Lord Chancellor Nottingham and Lord Hale.Of the value of thefe notes fome eftimate may be formed from the following memorandum in Sir Thomas Parker's handwriting.

"The notes to this book, in my hand"writing (except one note in folio 26. b. "and fome modern cafes), were transcribed "from a copy of the lord chancellor Not"tingham's manufcript notes, in the margin "of his lord Coke's Commentary upon "Littleton, which copy was made for the "ufe of his fon Heneage Finch, efq. foli"citor-general, afterwards earl of Ayles"ford, and is now in the poffeffion of the "honourable Mr Legge, to whofe favour "I am indebted for thefe notes.

"The notes in a different hand-writing

were transcribed from a copy of lord chief "juftice Hale's MSS. notes in the margin "of Coke upon Littleton, prefented by lord "Hale to the father of Philip Gybbon, efq. "which copy was made for the use of the "honourable Charles Yorke, efq. his Ma"jefty's folicitor-general. The book in "which the notes are in the hand-writing "of lord Hale, is now in the poffeffion of "Mr. Gybbon; and the book from which "these notes were tranfcribed by the favour "of Mr. Yorke, is now in his poffeffion.

"T, PARKER, 1758.7 After

After this general account, Mr. Butler concludes with a very modeft, but we believe our readers will think with us, an unneceffary apology for his taking up the talk of an editor on Mr. Hargrave's relinquithing it.

When it became generally known that Mr. Hargrave had relinquished the work, the prefent editor engaged in it; but he did not engage in it while there was the flighteft probability of its being undertaken by any other perfon and even then, he would not have engaged in it, if by doing fo he incurred

any obligation of completing Mr. Hargrave's undertaking in all its parts. He thought, an imperfect execution of the remaining part of the work would be more agreeable to the public than none; that to prefent them with the remaining part of the text of Littleton and his Commentator, with fome references and fome notes, would be an acceptable offering to them. No other perfon appeared with any, and the prefent editor's performance does not prevent the exertions of any future adventurer.

To be continued. )

at Rome.

THIS Collection of Poems is not, as its

66

title feems to intimate, a poetical defcription of places, or a narration of the event of a journey; but, as the author's preface expreffes it, they are the effufions of momentary impreffions, written on the very spots where thofe impreffions were received.”

Many of them have already been printed in Italy, being part (and by no means the least confiderable part, either in quantity or value) of the celebrated "Florence Mifcellany," which was noticed with much approbation by the Italian Reviewers, and which certainly does great credit to the ingenious writers who were concerned in it. The author evidently poffeffes the true poetical enthu-. fiafm, and every page of his work bears the marks of a warm imagination and a cultivated tafte.-Thefe poems are fo exceedingly various in their kinds, that it is not poffible to give our readers any idea of their nature by an extract. We fhall, however, infert the following Poem as a Ipecimen of this writer's manner in the familiar and fportive kind of verfe; and we will venture to fay, that it will not fuffer by a comparifon with Prior's epittle to Fleetwood Shepherd, or that of Soame Jenyns to Lord Lovelace.

EPISTLE from ROME to ROBERT

MERRY, Efq. at FLORENCE. BENEATH Italia's fouthern sky, While you on Fancy's pinion fly

* To where o'er Ruffia's frozen plains

'Mid clouds and ftorms hoar Winter reigns,

In thrilling verfe the tale relate
Of injur'd Beauty's hapless fate,
Whofe breaft amid furrounding fnow
The God of Love had taught to glow,
And fuch a melting ftrain effuse,
That maids and youths unborn shall muse
O'er fad Paulina's lot fevere

With horror's chill, and pity's tear;
Dear Merry, thall my humbler rhime
Inform you how I pafs my time
In this strange city, once so splendid,
Whofe ancient glory now is ended?
Whofe modern precincts only fhow
An union of fublime and low;
Of former pride revered remains,
Baths, arches, theatres, and fanes;
Of prefent wealth a wond'rous treasure
For public ufe and private pleasure,

Fountains that copious tides fupply,
Churches that with old temples vie,
So much magnificence and ftate
In all the manfions of the great,

Such marbles, pictures, ftatues, blended!
The wealth of nations feems expended;
Yet clamours of the hungry poor
Befiege the lordly palace door,
And, iffuing, my difgufted eye
Beholds fuch filth and mifery,
That bome my thoughts are ever turning,
With patriot recollection burning
Of fortune's more diffufive fmiles
Spread o'er the northern sister-ifles;
Rough Induftry, thy rich rewards,
Which Freedom grants, and Valor guards!
As here each hillock is renown'd,
And every alles-claffic ground,
First let the Mufe obfervant tell

The spot in which I chance to dwell.

of the ornaments of modern Rome.

To