with its difficulties, where the records, of fo remote a date, are involved in fo much doubt and obfcurity, it is fafe, at least, to conclude, that under the Saxon Kings, Alfred the Great, the founder of the British state, Arthur the British Worthy, Edward the Confeffor, there were wife and wholesome legal inftitutions; and chiefly that great bulwark of our law, the trial by jury, a regular government eftablished, a confiderable portion of liberty, diffused through all ranks and descriptions of men.'

Again,

The licentiousness of mobs, that sometimes, with us, breaks out in tumults and feditions, has this advantage attending it, with all its temporary inconveniencies, that it fhews a fpirit of liberty kept alive in the mafs of the people, that would take the alarm, on any attacks being made on the conftitution; and how infinitely preferable is it to the tranquillity of defpotic governments, deprived of all life and animation, refembling the repofe of death, more ruinous than even a ftate of war, not to mention riot and fedition; and which is but a ftate of war between the defpot and his flaves, with fear, the principle of the government.'

We could bring more inftances of this nature, to prove the truth of our affertion, but fuch illuftrations would not be more painful to the Author than difagreeable to ourselves, and burdenfome to our Readers. We point out these blemishes merely with a view that they may be avoided in fucceeding works.

In his first volume, our Author has prefented us with many excellent obfervations on government in general, and on that which we enjoy in particular; he has interfperfed in his account much ufeful information, and has difcovered an ardent defire [that reflects honour on his feelings] of remedying the evils with which this country is, in his opinion, threatened. We transcribe the following paffage on account of the moderation and good fense shewn by the writer, respecting those persons, and that period, which are feldom mentioned without indecent acrimony, or ill-founded exultation:

Fatally for that line of Kings, in whom centered the two Crowns, they were not fufficiently aware of that combination of circumstances, which transferred fo much power into the hands of the people, and, not accommodating their views to the change of the times, they attempted the continuation of the prerogative in the fame tone, without any relaxation of its fprings, as alfo without any extraordinary tenfion of them, in which it was tranfmitted to them by their predeceffors. Nor was it with the addrefs and fuperior management, popular conduct of Elizabeth, that the attempt was made; which, even with fuch powerful fupports, in the change of time and circumftances, might have proved of no avail. But it was on diametrically oppofite principles of action that James VI. relied for its fuccefs, on the open avowal from the throne of the most unconftitutional dangerous doctrines, the hereditary, indefeafible right of Kings, the facredness of their title, fulness of their power, as God's vicegerents on earth.

• Here

Here the mask was taken off, all difguife laid afide, the alarm was fpread through the kingdom, the fpirit of liberty, that had fo long lain dormant, was now at length roufed, the clouds began to gather that broke out into that dreadful ftorm, that laid the kingdom waste under his fon Charles I. He continuing to purfue the fame line of meafures, fully imprefled with the fame principles, and the times ftill lefs bearing the fame fyftem of politics, affairs foon came to a crifis, and that the moft awful our hiftory records.

This was the era of the parties, the Cavaliers and Round Heads, a regular oppofition was now formed against the court. In all fuch critical fituations, as that unfortunate prince was reduced to, the fatal error in general committed is, that the ftronger party feldom knows when it ought to be fatisfied with the conceffions made to it, to defift in its demands; nor the weaker when or how to make conceffions. The Petition of Rights, the act 16th of the fame reign, which declared all forced loans, and taxes called benevolences, illegal, abolished arbitrary imprisonments, and the exercife of martial law, fuppreffed the Star Chamber, and High Commiffion Court, were fuch advantages gained to liberty, as might have fatisfied the Commons, and gained them the appellation of the Deliverers of their country. But mutual diftrufts and jealoufies ferved only to inflame the contending parties, to widen the breach between them. The executive power first encroached on the legislative, in its attempt to govern without Parliaments: the legislative, not fatisfied with having vindicated its rights, in its turn encroached as far on the executive, in the ufurped right of fitting in virtue of its own authority, retrenching from the Crown its prerogative of diffolving it.

The Commons, flushed with their fuccefs, now finding themfelves poffeffed of ftrength fufficient to carry on the work of reform, independent of the Nobles, their former co-adjutors, when embarked in the fame caufe, and who then took the lead in it, pushed their advantages beyond the point, on which turned the balance of the conftitution, overleaped the due limits prefcribed to them by the wifdom of ages, at one time levelled their attacks against the first, at another against the fecond branch of legiflation, now independent of it, and equal to the business of reform alone.

United, they first read the ftandard of liberty; united, they fell in the full career towards the object of its completion. But the Commons fell but to rife again, without their former leaders, and even on their ruins. But when the Nobles of France were crushed, the people could not rife to any confequence without them, that never had with them, they remained funk, as they ever had been.

Our Houfe of Commons did not defit from their enterprizes, till confounding prerogative and privilege, beginning with riot, tumult, and fedition, they proceeded to the moft cruel civil war, anarchy, and confufion, a total overthrow of the conftitution in Church and State, and on the ruins of both, the establishment of a Commonwealth. But the end aimed at, in all thefe bloody means, was not accomplished; as in the English Commonwealth, there was no more real liberty than in the Roman; and the lofs of it in both proceeded from the fame caufe, the confufion of the legislative and executive powers, which effected the abfolute dominion or a few popular leaders to pass from them to one. There is no more certain

axiom in politics, than that the dominion of all refolves itself into that of a few; that of a few, finally into that of one.

The long Parliament, which fat, in virtue of that unconftitutional privilege derived to it, its own authority, independent of the King's power of diffolution, facrificed in the wreck of the times, was the efficient caufe of all the calamities of this reign. So rapidly, but yet through fo much blood, fuch fcenes of horror and devaftation, did this people pafs from the extreme of prerogative to the extreme of privilege, both equally repugnant to that liberty they in vain fought after, which confifted only in the due medium between them, in their intemperate zeal tranfgreffed.

The puritanical fpirit that murmured only at the end of Elizabeth, and throughout James's reign, now raged aloud, ferved much to carry the fpirit of liberty to that excefs, firft ftirred up, then heaped fuel on thofe flames of civil difcord, that laid wafte the three king-doms in one general conflagration.

The catastrophe that closed this revolution, its tragical end, the recital of which may make Kings tremble on their thrones, mult here have a veil drawn over it.'

We fee, enumerated with precifion and accuracy, thofe peculiarities which have rendered the English government an object of admiration; and by having it compared with that enjoyed by other nations, and by perceiving the fuperiority it maintains, we become more grateful for the blefling we poffets.

In his political difquifitions, this Author difcovers much thought, difcernment, and knowledge. He fhews himself to be well acquainted with his fubject, and has thrown out many hints which may be perfued with advantage.

Of the moral reflections we can fay little. The old ground is again trodden over, without affording any novelty to reconcile us to the repetition. Of the poetry, which is introduced in the 2d volume, we can fay ftill lefs. Without powers of defcription, without energy of fentiment, and without variety of diction, there can be no poetry; and that (by what name fhall we call it) which is contained in thefe volumes, is very deficient in these material requifites. We would advife this writer to give up the flowery regions of imagination, and verfe, to thofe who are more favoured by nature for their cultivation, and to pursue that path in which he has fhewn himself better qualified to fhine,-in historical narrative, and political remark.

ART. VII. Sir Edward Coke's Commentary upon Littleton. The thirteenth Edition, revised and corrected; with the Addition of Notes and References, by Francis Hargrave, Efq; and Charles Butler, Efq. Continued.

IN

N our Review for the last month, p. 147, we prefented to the Reader a compendious account of Littleton's Tenures, with a few ftrictures on the intemperance of Hottoman, and

other

other foreign feudifts. Of the value of Sir Edward Coke's Commentary, thofe who have not made the law their study will be able to form a clear, though not complete idea, from the extracts which we made from Mr. Butler's very fenfible preface. It may now be proper, before we proceed in the plan we have chalked out to ourselves, to ftate fome particulars relative to two ancient writers, who have tranfmitted their. works as a legacy to after-ages, and have done immortal fervice to the laws and conftitution of their country.

Sir Edward Coke has given, in his Proæmium, the following anecdotes of Littleton.-Thomas de Littleton, Lord of Frankly in the Vale of Evesham, had iffue Elizabeth, an only child. She married Thomas Weftcote, Efq; on a ftipulated condition that her iffue inheritable should bear the name of Littleton. The fruits of this marriage were four fons, of whom Thomas (the author of the Tenures) was the eldeft. Camden, in his Britannia, calls him Thomas Littleton, alias Weftcote, the famous lawyer, to whofe treatise of tenures the ftudents of the common law are no lefs beholden, than the civilians were to Justinian's Inftitutes. He was bred a ftudent in the Inner Temple, and was afterwards made by Henry VI. a ferjeant at law, and Steward of the Marshalfea court. By Edward IV. he was made one of the Judges of the Common Pleas, and in the 15th year of that King, a Knight of the Bath. He compiled his book while he was Judge, and, as is fuppofed, not long before his death. His laft will bears date the 22d of Auguft, in the 21ft of Edward IV. and after naming executors, he conftituted fupervifor thereof John Alcock, then Bishop of Worcefter, who founded Jefus College in the university of Cambridge. He died the next day, the 23d of Auguft 1481, and was interred in the cathedral church of Worcester, under a tomb of marble, with his ftatue on it. His picture was preferved in the churches of Frankly and Hales-Owen. His book of Tenures, as has been already obferved, was published after his death. See our laft Review.

If Littleton was eminent in his time, the Commentator on his work was no lefs fo in the reigns of Elizabeth, James, and Charles I. He was born at Milcham, in Norfolk, in the year 1550. He removed, after four years refidence at Trinity College, Cambridge, to Clifford's Inn, and fhortly after was entered a ftudent of the Inner Temple. Being called to the bar, he read law lectures at Lyon's Inn. His fuccefs in his profeffion was rapid. In the parliament held 35 Elizabeth, he was chofen Speaker, being at that time Queen's Solicitor, which office was bestowed on him in the year 1592; and very foon after he was advanced to the poft of Attorney General. To his great abilities as an advocate, it is well known that he added, on feveral occa

fions, much fcurrility and perfonal abuse. Of this there are fome inftances that difgrace his memory. On the 30th of June 1606 he was made Chief Juftice of the Common Pleas, and in October 1613 he was advanced to the higher rank of Chief Juftice of the King's Bench. He ftyled himself, according to the custom of his predeceffors, Chief Juftice of England. In that station he fhewed himself no friend to unbounded prerogative, and the confequence was, that, on the 30th June 1616, he was removed from the feat of juftice. In the parliament held 1620-21, he efpoufed the cause of liberty; and, in the House of Commons, called the King's prerogative a GREAT MONSTER. At the death of James I. he was wholly out of favour. In the following reign, to prevent his fitting in parliament, he was (1625) made Sheriff of Buckinghamshire, and he, who had been Chief Juftice, was obliged, in an humbler function, to attend the Judges of Affize. This did not hinder his being elected Knight of the Shire for Bucks, 1628. In that parliament he diftinguished himself more than any man in the House of Commons; fpoke warmly for the redrefs of grievances, and ftrenuoufly contended for the privileges of the Commons, and the liberty of the fubject. It was he that proposed and framed the PETITION OF RIGHTS; and it was he who named the Duke of Buckingham as the cause of all the miseries of the kingdom. On the 28th of March 1628-9 the Parliament was diffolved. Sir Edward Coke retired to his houfe at Stoke-pogeys in Buckinghamshire, where he spent the remainder of his days in a quiet retirement, cancelling, by his behaviour, the various prejudices that had been raised against him, till, on the 3d of September 1634, he breathed his laft, in the 86th year of his age, uttering these words: Thy kingdom come, thy will be done.

We thought that this fhort account both of Littleton and of Sir Edward Coke was proper in this place, in order to remind our Readers, that the Tenures and the Commentary are the work of two men who were highly eminent and diftinguished in their day. We proceed now, according to our promise in our laft, to point out what has been done toward rendering the prefent edition as complete as poffible, by the joint endeavours of Mr. Hargrave and Mr. Butler.

We begin with Mr. Hargrave's fhare in this undertaking. This gentleman is well known, not only in his profeffion of a barrifter at law, but in the republic of letters. His argument, in the cause of Somerfet the Negro, will be a lafting proof of his learning, his logical powers, and his taste in compofition. Thofe feveral qualities were, perhaps, never more happily united. With thefe endowments, and the addition of unremitting induftry, he undertook to be the Editor of Coke on Littleton; and if he had not found an able fucceffor, his defifting from

16