LORD THURLow's DEFENCE OF HIMSELF IN THE

HOUSE OF PEERS.

"At times, Lord Thurlow was superlatively great. It was the good fortune of the Reminiscent, to hear his celebrated reply to the Duke of Grafton, during the inquiry into Lord Sandwich's administration of Greenwich hospital. His Grace's action and delivery, when he addressed the house, were singularly dignified and graceful; but his matter was not equal to his manner. He reproached Lord Thurlow with his plebeian extraction, and his recent admission into the peerage; particular circumstances caused Lord Thurlow's reply to make a deep impression on the Reminiscent. His Lordship had spoken too often, and began to be heard with a civil but visible impatience; under these circumstances he was attacked in the manner we have mentioned. He rose from the woolsack, and advanced slowly to the place from which the chancellor generally addresses the house; then, fixing on the duke the look of Jove, when he grasps the thunder :"I am amazed," he said, in a level tone of voice, "at the attack which the noble duke has made on me. Yes, my Lords," considerably raising his voice, “I am amazed at his grace's speech. The noble duke cannot look before him, behind him, or on either side of him, without seeing some

noble peer who owes his seat in this house to his successful exertions in the profession to which I belong. Does he not feel that it is as honourable to owe it to these, as to being the accident of an accident?-To all these noble Lords the language of the noble Duke is as applicable and insulting as it is to myself; but I do not fear to meet it single and alone. No one venerates the peerage more than I do; but, my lords, I must say that the peerage solicited me,-not I the peerage. Nay more,-I can say, and will say, that as a peer of Parliament, as speaker of this right honourable house, as keeper of the great seal,-as guardian of his majesty's conscience, as lord high chancellor of England,-nay, even in that character alone in which the noble duke would think it an affront to be considered, but which character none can deny me as a man, I am at this moment as respectable-I beg leave to add, I am at this time as much respected, as the proudest peer I now look down upon." The effect of this speech, both within the walls of Parliament and out of them, was prodigious. It gave Lord Thurlow an ascendancy in the house which no chancellor had ever possessed; it invested him in public opinion, with a character of independence and honour, and this, though he was ever on the unpopular side of politics, made him always popular with the people."—(Butler's Reminiscences, p. 199.)

SIR EDWARD COKE AND THE CASE OF COMMENDAMS.

The firm conduct of Sir Edward Coke, in the dispute between King James and the Judges, respecting Commendams, is highly creditable to the Chief Justice. The King imagining that his interests might probably be affected in the course of a suit which was then in progress in the King's Bench, directed the attorney-general to write a letter to Sir Edward, commanding the judges not to proceed in the cause without advising previously with his majesty. By the advice of Coke, a letter was addressed to the King, signed by all the twelve judges, stating it to be against law and their judicial oaths to forbear doing justice between the parties, and that they had therefore proceeded to a decision according to their duty. The King, after answering the arguments of his judges by letter, summoned them to appear before him at the Council Table; where, after much dispute and many reprimands, the following question was put to them. "Whether in a case where the King believed his prerogative or interest concerned, and required the judges to attend him for their advice, they ought not to stay proceedings till His Majesty had consulted them?" The other judges yielded, acknowledging it to be their duty to do so; but Coke answered, "that when that case should be he would do that which should

be fit for a judge to do." This noble reply is most creditable to the memory of Sir Edward Coke. (See his Life in the Biog. Britt., and see Coll. Jurid. i. 17.)

THE BILLINGSGATE OF THE LAW.

The Law Reports contain an almost infinite variety of exprobatory epithets, some of which, in the older books, are of an amusing character. In Siderfin, (p. 327,) there is a curious decision respecting slanderous words applied to an attorney "He hath no more law than Mr. C.'s bull. Being spoken of an attorney, the court inclined that they were actionable, and that the plaintiff should have the judgment; though it was objected, that the plaintiff had not declared that Mr. C. had a bull." In the Report of the same case, (in 2 Keble, 202,) Keeling, C. J., is said to have over-ruled this objection, "for if C. had no bull, the scandal is the greater." So it has been adjudged, that to say of a lawyer that he has no more law than a goose, is actionable, (Sid. 127;) to which a quære is added, whether it be actionable to say, He hath no more law than

the man in the moon."

There are many curious decisions respecting words imputing witchcraft, which clearly show how very prevalent that superstition was in the seventeenth century. The malign influence of the

sorcerer seems to have gained the greatest credence among the rustic part of the population, as most of the cases impute witchcraft to the charming of cattle. Thus, in Sid. 424: "You enchanted my bull, and made him run mad about the common." And again, in 1 Rol. Ab. 45 : "Thou art a witch; I will make thee say, God save my mare; I was forced to have my mare charmed for thee." It is said in this case, that in the country where the words are spoken, it is usual for men when they pass by cattle to say, "God save them," otherwise they are taken for witches. In Cro. Eliz. 312, the words were, "He is a witch, and bewitched my husband to death, for he made his picture in wax, and roasted it every day by the fire, until he roasted my husband to death." It was objected, that the reason given shewed the charge to be "a vain conceit;" but the court held the words to be " very heinous," and adjudged them actionable. If a man says to a woman, that she sacrificed one of her children to the devil, to the intent to bewitch his mother, an action on the case lay, for invocation of spirits was punishable by the Statute of Witches. This Statute of Witches was long a disgrace to our law; but, by the 9 Geo. II. c. 5, §. 3; no prosecution shall lie against any person for witchcraft, sorcery, enchantment, or conjuration, or for charging another with such offence.