the executioner, or perhaps by the piety of friends, soon after death, in order to furnish memorials of the unhappy king.

'On holding up the head, to examine the place of separation from the body, the muscles of the neck had evidently retracted themselves considerably; and the fourth cervical vertebra was found to be cut through its substance transversely, leaving the surfaces of the divided portions perfectly smooth and even, an appearance which could have been produced only by a heavy blow, inflicted with a very sharp instrument, and which furnished the last proof wanting to identify King Charles the First.

'After this examination of the head, which served every purpose in view, and without examining the body below the neck, it was immediately restored to its situation, the coffin was soldered up again, and the vault closed.

"Neither of the other coffins had any inscription upon them. The large one, supposed, on good grounds, to contain the remains of King Henry VIII., measured six feet ten inches in length, and had been enclosed in an elm one of two inches in thickness; but this was decayed, and lay in small fragments near it. The leaden coffin appeared to have been beaten in by violence about the middle; and a considerable opening in that part of it exposed a mere skeleton of the king. Some beard remained upon the chin, but there was nothing to discriminate the personage contained in it.

'The smaller coffin, understood to be that of Queen Jane Seymour, was not touched; mere curiosity not being considered, by the Prince Regent, as a sufficient motive for disturbing these remains.

'On examining the vault with some attention, it was found that the wall, at the west end, had, at some period or other, been partly pulled down and repaired again, not by regular masonry, but by fragments of stones and bricks, put rudely and hastily together without cement.

From Lord Clarendon's account, as well as from Mr. Herbert's narrative of the interment of King Charles, it is to be inferred, that the ceremony was a very hasty one, performed in the presence of the Governor, who had refused to allow the service according to the Book of Common Prayer to be used on the occasion; and had, probably, scarcely admitted the time necessary for a decent deposit of the body. It is not unlikely, therefore, that the coffin of King Henry VIII. had been injured by a precipitate introduction of the coffin of King Charles; and that the Governor was not under the influence of feelings, in those times, which gave him any concern about Royal remains, or the vault which contained them.

It may be right to add, that a very small mahogany coffin, covered, with crimson velvet, containing the body of an infant, had been laid upon the pall which covered King Charles. This is known to have been a stillborn child of the Princess George of Denmark, afterwards Queen Anne.'pp. 161-170.

This account is authenticated by the certificate of the Prince Regent, of whose autograph Sir Henry gives a fac-simile. He has also added a lithograph of the head of the unfortunate Charles' as it appeared in the coffin, which differs in no respect whatever from the portraits of that monarch, which are usually seen in our best collections.

299

ART. XI. Friendly Advice, most respectfully submitted to the Lords, on the Reform Bill. 8vo. pp. 31. London: Ridgway. 1831. NEVER was a general election conducted, in the three kingdoms, with greater tranquillity, with so great a share of good feeling, with more intelligence and determination, than that of which we have just witnessed the conclusion. Before the fiat was pronounced for the dissolution of the late Parliament, loud were the appeals, numerous the menaces, made use of in the presence of the government, with the view of preventing that decisive measure, the effect of which, we were told, would be, to kindle the flame of civil war throughout the country. It is ludicrous to think of the very little foundation there was for any such apprehension. They were the mere visions of heated brains, seated in the heads of men who looked at the country through eyes jaundiced by their own interests and passions. Civil war, indeed! Why there has not appeared a solitary instance, throughout the whole of the contested elections, of an individual who would put his life in peril, even if by so doing he could save the whole fabric of the rotten-borough system. For a few anti-reformers, men of personal worth, who were esteemed in their neighbourhood on account of their excellent conduct in all the relations of public and private life, a partial degree of enthusiasm has been shown. We allude particularly to such men as Mr. Cartwright, in Northamptonshire, and the elder Bankes, in Dorsetmen, whom, although they were upon the wrong side, it is almost painful to see in the ranks of the vanquished enemy. But beyond these, and perhaps one or two other, instances, there was nothing like zeal exhibited on the side of the anti-reformers, by any class of the people. If, therefore, the sword had been rashly drawn by the hot-headed debaters, who talked, five weeks ago, so boldly about civil war and revolution, they would very soon have found that they had committed a very serious mistake. They would either have fallen at once before a company of the Guards, or their precious persons would now have been deposited in the Tower, waiting for the only termination which the law could give to the worldly career of traitors.

It is now placed beyond the possibility of a doubt, that the people in England and Ireland, and, as far they could express themselves, in Scotland, have unanimously adopted the reform bill of the government. We must therefore, in the first place, protest by anticipation against the slightest shadow of change in the principle of that measure. It is now a law, so far as the national voice has power to make it such, and we must hope that whatever may be the rights and faculties exercised or assumed by Parliament upon all subjects that come within its jurisdiction, it will not unnecessarily meddle even with the details of a project, which has met with such cordial approbation from the whole country. If any errors have been com

mitted with respect to the population in particular districts, let those errors undoubtedly be amended. If consistently with the main scope and object of the measure, the elective franchise can be conferred upon a still greater number of persons than had been at first contemplated, let that too be done. If it should happen that, from local circumstances, the number of voters would be rather diminished than enlarged, by the operation of the principle laid down in the Bill, let special clauses exempt them from it, and let provision be made, at all events, for securing a popular constituency in all such places. Nay, we would even see without regret, a larger addition made to the number of members for Ireland and Scotland, and some arrangement effected, whereby the boroughs in either country, which do not contain a population of two thousand souls, should be enlarged by contributory towns within fifteen miles distance around them. These changes, instead of infringing the principle of the measure, would on the contrary rather strengthen and improve it.

After what has occurred, there can be no apprehension for the fate of the Bill in the House of Commons. It has been calculated upon the safest data, and speaking within bounds, that there will be, at the least, a majority of one hundred and twenty-five in its favour, in that branch of the legislature. This majority will be quite sufficient to secure its success there, and is, perhaps, as much as we can hope for, seeing that the rotten-borough system has in itself a corps of interested auxiliaries, amounting to upwards of two hundred. But what will become of the Bill in the House of Lords? This is the question which every body is now putting to himself, and to his friends; a question upon the solution of which depend the destinies of this nation, its tranquillity at home, its power and influence in all parts of the world, and the whole wonderful fabric of its wealth and commerce. The very able pamphlet before us, which evidently proceeds from a person in authority, to whose name we will not venture more particularly to allude, would lead us to believe, that difficulties of no ordinary importance will, at least for a season, prevent this question from being answered in a satisfactory manner. The writer, indeed, anticipates much more of opposition to the popular wishes in that quarter, than we had been at all prepared for.

'When Sir Joseph Jekyll died, he left his fortune to pay the national debt. "Sir," said Lord Mansfield, to one of his relations, "Sir Joseph was a good man and a good lawyer, but his bequest is a very foolish one -he might as well have attempted to stop the middle arch of Blackfriars Bridge with his full-bottomed wig!" So say we, to these opponents of reform-and we particularly beg the attention of Lord Mansfield's descendant to the apophthegm of his ancestor. The House of Lords can no more stop the success of Reform, than Sir Joseph Jekyll's bequest could pay the national debt, or his wig impede the current of the river Thames. Many of the persons we are now addressing are, doubtless, like Sir Joseph,

good men; and some of them, like him, may be good lawyers-but their conduct, like his bequest, is exceedingly foolish. Nay, it is worse than foolish, it is dangerous in the extreme. It is, doubtless, impossible for the House of Lords to stem the tide of reform-but, in attempting to do it, the rash act may endanger their own safety, and, with theirs, that of all of us, who are, to a certain degree, in the same boat with them. The opposition of the Lords must be powerless for any good purpose, but it may be yet pregnant with evil. Their continued resistance to the measure, so ardently desired by the people, may cause convulsions in this now happy land-nay, even civil war. And, if this, unhappily, should be the case, it will be but poor consolation to those who are fellow-sufferers in the anarchy and confusion that would be thus produced, that the immediate authors of it would be, as is certain to be the case, its first victims.

If the Tory Lords had any chance of being able, by their opposition to it, to prevent the progress of reform, we should not be surprised, with the view they take of that question, at their exerting themselves strenuously against it. But is this the case? We will put it to the understanding of any one of them, whether there is even a possibility of their resisting, successfully, the current of public opinion, which now sets so strongly one way. Is there any instance in history of their ever having been able to do so, under similar circumstances? It is true, they rejected the Catholic question, till Ireland was all but in open rebellion-but then the King, and the great body of the people of England were with them; now all are united on the other side: and great is their danger who resist the united will of a great nation.

If, therefore, it is clear, that the Lords cannot prevent the success of Reform, will they, for the imaginary pleasure of preserving their political consistency, endanger the peace of the country, the security of the throne, and the stability of their own order? These are the fearful consummations which their anti-reforming zeal, upon the present occasion, may bring upon themselves and upon all--and that without the slightest hope, on the other hand, of their obtaining the object they have in view.

When the burst of popular indignation in France swept away, during the revolution, the nobility of that country, one of the principal causes which led to this catastrophe, was the feudal intrenchment of separate privileges and separate interests, which divided the higher orders from the great body of the nation. Hence, these two parts of the body-politic had nothing in common-each viewed the other with suspicion and dislike; and thus, when the current of events gave the power into the hands of the people, they wreaked their vengeance upon those whom they considered as their enemies. We ought to be thankful that such a state of things does not exist in England. Here, the nobility have, for the most part, as plebeian an origin as the people; and, though they are placed at their head, they enjoy no exclusive privileges which are onerous to the rest of the community. Hence, the feeling between them and their fellow-countrymen is of a friendly kind, and one that is caused and fostered by the communication of mutual benefits. There is but one thing which could sever this union; and that would be, if the House of Lords were obstinately to oppose, upon any one great question, the deliberate wishes of the rest of the nation. This would be sure to engender suspicion against them—to make the people think that their interests, and those of the nobility, must be

different; and, if such an opinion once gained ground, we fear the tenure of the Lords, as a branch of the legislature, would be but an insecure one. We say, we fear, because we are well convinced that the best interests of this country are involved in their retaining that power and that station in the government of the state, which at present belongs to them.—pp. 8—11. To this conviction we also most sincerely subscribe. If it ever happen that the powers of the legislature shall be exclusively confined to the King and the House of Commons, the monarchy may, from that day, count upon its annihilation as a part of the constitution of this country. The consequences would be, that the Commons would absorb all the power of the State; that laws would be passed without sufficient consideration upon the mere impulse of the moment, and that the kingdom would be changed into, not a republic, but a tyranny, which would be of the most oppressive nature. We are fully of opinion that it would be impossible for a highly civilized and active community, to enjoy a larger share of practical freedom than we are likely to attain, under a Parliament reformed to the extent which the Bill proposes; and that any excess beyond that will not be liberty, but violence and licentiousness. If the Bill be quietly adopted by the Lords, all will go on well; they are secure in the possession of their privileges, their property, and their station in the constitutional system; but, if they be mad enough to throw out the Bill, then every thing is at hazard-the aristocracy, the monarchy, the democracy itself, in its legal sense.Confusion, bankruptcy, ruin, await all the interests in the nation. This is not declamation; we are uttering our deliberate and most serious sentiments; the momentous importance of the destinies now at stake, for good or for evil to our country, would forbid exagge ration at such a time, and upon such an occasion. If the Lords be truly anxious to discharge, faithfully and rightly, the duty which they owe to themselves, and to the nation of which they constitute so distinguished a part, they will hasten to profit by the friendly advice, for most friendly it is, which this writer offers for their consideration.

The author very ably combats the idea that reform is a novelty, a plant of yesterday's growth, which it might be safe carelessly to prune, or wholly to pluck up. It has been in the ground some fifty years or more; originally a mere mustard seed, it is now, like the seed in the Scripture, grown up into a large tree, and multitudes have gathered together beneath its luxuriant shade. The folly of those who thought that they could keep it for ever in the earth, without the power to lift itself above them, has been demonstrated by the experience of the last six months; the conduct of those persons, in withstanding all concession, has served, more than any other circumstance, to make concession more necessary, and much more extensive, than they had, even in their worst fears, anticipated.

The author, after commenting in forcible terms upon the conduct