patronage attached to his high office: on the contrary, in dispensing his favours, he took care to be just while he was generous: never did he sacrifice to selfishness or private pre-' dilections the public weal; and in the very few instances in which he yielded to friendship or affection, no one could deny" that there was a fair proportion between the intellectual qualities of the recipient and the gift. It must be allowed, too, that he' displayed indefatigable industry in the discharge of his judicial duties. He could boast that he was the first Lord Chancellor who, from an anxious desire to get rid of arrears in his court, held sittings on Good Friday and Easter Monday, while other men were resting from their labours and enjoying a brief relaxation from business. Deeply sensible of the value of time, he endeavoured to master as quickly as he possibly could, the real merits of each case, as it was presented to his mind, and he never failed to attain his object. He checked the loose or unnecessarily long argument of counsel, and earnestly strove to go through much work within a comparatively brief space of time. But all these high personal qualities and judicial virtues could be no valid apology for setting at defiance general custom and immemorial usage in the neglect of, or even trifling with, his duties as Speaker of the House of Lords, or exposing himself to the charge, foolish though it was, of forcing the king's guard.5 The Lord Chancellor having, with more than usual solemnity, rebuked a Lieutenant Woodcock, who had written to

1

1 Vide H. P. D. 3rd ser. vol. ii. p. 1296; 17th December, 1830.

Vide" A Refutation of the Calumnies against the Lord Chancellor, contained in the last number of the Quarterly Review, in an article upon the pamphlet entitled 'The Reform Ministry and the Reformed Parliament,' by Charles Purton Cooper, Esq., 4th edit. 1834; and consult, also, as a matter of course, the elaborate, and in some respects able, article inserted in the Quarterly Review, vol. 1, p. 247. It is beyond all doubt that the Lord Chancellor had, in the arrangements referred to, taken care of his own personal and relative interests; but, after a dispassionate examination of all the facts, we feel that nothing materially affecting the purity of Lord Brougham's motives can be detected in the changes which he proposed. Whether such changes were prudent, sufficiently matured, or ultimately successful, is a totally different question, which it is not our purpose to discuss.

3 Vide H. P. D. 3rd ser. vol. vii. p. 646, and particularly pp. 652, sqq. (27th September, 1831).

4 Ibid.

5 Vide H. P. D. 3rd ser. vol. iii. pp. 487, sqq. (17th March, 1831).

L

a peer a letter which was held to be a breach of privilege, had scarcely resumed his seat, when the Marquis of Londonderry neutralized, even to ludicrousness, the effect of Lord Brougham's censure, by charging the Lord Chancellor himself with having "forced his way through the king's guard." The circumstances connected with the absurd affair were these :-On a certain drawing-room day, Lord Brougham, that he might shorten his way to the palace, wished to pass through the Horse Guards. He was told by the officer on guard that only the Speaker of the House of Commons had permission to pass. Lord Brougham would, according to custom, have argued the matter: "It is very extraordinary," quoth he, "that the same privilege should be denied to the Speaker of the House of Lords." But upon being assured that there was "no mistake," he remarked, "then I must go back." His coachman, however, a sly fellow from the North, no doubt, interpreted "go back," into "go on ;" and his lordship was never more surprised in his life than when he found that his coachman had taken him through." At the same time, while he vowed that he was the last person, either in or out of the House of Lords, to set an example of putting military discipline at defiance, he complained of the noble marquis having connected the incident with the grave reprimand which he had, a few moments before, administered, in obedience to the injunctions of the House; and mischievous it, no doubt, was on the part of the Marquis of Londonderry.

This puerile, paltry spirit of quarrel, no matter with whom it might in the first instance originate, had, by its frequent recurrence, become offensive to the peers of the realm, and had long ceased to be even amusing to the public. The strife was carried to an excess, in one point of view so ridiculous, and in another so serious, that both the contending parties appear to have been sensible of their true position: and accordingly a truce, if not a peace, was concluded between them. It happened that, while Viscount Goderich was addressing the House, Lord Brougham, or some other noble lord near him, made a remark in so low a tone of voice that it did not prevent the noble viscount from proceeding with his speech. The Marquis of Londonderry, however, conceiving that the whisperer was sug

VOL. LIII. NO. CVI.

H

gesting thoughts or topics to Viscount Goderich, rose and asked the Chancellor, whether it was consistent with order for one noble lord to prompt another noble lord?

"My lords," abruptly replied Lord Brougham, "I beg leave to state, that I cannot sit here to be bothered with questions which emanate from the ridiculous ideas of individuals, who cannot or will not see anything, however clear, nor understand anything, however intelligible; and who, whether a noble lord is engaged in conversation, or whether he addresses the House upon his legs, seem, from some unhappy infirmity of nature, to be lamentably incapacitated from understanding what is going on. I beg, moreover, to state to the noble marquis whom I have in my eye, that, for the future, I will answer no questions of his, and will give him no information whatever. If the noble lord feels aggrieved at anything I may happen to do, let him proceed against me by a vote of censure, and I trust I shall know how to defend myself; but I will answer no more of his questions.”

We all know that "when Greek meets Greek, then comes the tug of war." Accordingly the Marquis of Londonderry "got up," in more senses than one:—

"I only asked," said he, "the noble lord a question as to a point of order, which, I conceive, I had a right to do. As to the personal and offensive expressions which the noble and learned lord has applied to me, I beg to tell the noble and learned lord that I shall be glad to hear them repeated elsewhere."

The Duke of Richmond started to his feet, and moved that these words should be taken down. Lord Brougham, at once, true to his nature, manfully and generously interposed, expressing a hope that so trivial, absurd, and insignificant an affair should be allowed to drop.

"As to the hint," continued he, "which the noble marquis has thrown out to me, filling as I do the highest judicial office in the land, and in a public assembly like the present, where such hints are not usually given, I have only to say, that it has not been my habit to say in one place anything which I would not repeat in another, and that it is not likely that I should fall into that habit now."

Of the truth of this remark no one conversant with the character or career of Lord Brougham can entertain a doubt: the Marquis of Londonderry himself, at the time and on the spot, bore testimony, in handsome terms, to the generosity of Lord Brougham's nature. The latter noble lord, in return, expressed his willingness to agree upon an armistice, or to sign

a treaty of peace, and the Marquis of Londonderry, in good humour, accepted the terms.

Any sketch of the career of Lord Brougham might well be regarded as partial or imperfect which comprised not at least a cursory allusion to the very unpleasant position which, during the period of his being in possession of the woolsack, he occupied in the House of Lords. Scenes of a similar description, acted by any Lord Chancellor and the peers around him, stain not, fortunately, the pages of English history at any period antecedent or subsequent to the accession of Lord Brougham to his high office. Such anomalies of character and conduct, if observed in a less highly-gifted and more obscure individual, might be passed over in silence; but they are essential features in a faithful portrait of Lord Brougham: nay, more, they explain-and they alone, we believe, explain-the fact of his never having been again invited to preside over the House of 'Lords.' And yet even his peculiarities shed good seed, and contributed to the public advantage; for his presence incited the Peers to intellectual action, galvanic though it occasionally was, infused animation into their debates, and raised their assembly above the level of being, as it has too frequently been, nothing more dignified or beneficial than a court for registering, in dreary silence, the decrees of the Lower House. Let it not, however, be imagined that Lord Brougham exhausted his energies in desultory warfare: on the contrary, he was, day by day, assiduous in the discharge of his judicial and legislative duties. We shall find, as we advance in the track which he traversed, the foot-prints which he left behind, all testifying to his steady, regular progression. Nor, while we are amused with or lamenting over ebullitions of passion, or sudden impulses of feeling, ought it to be forgotten that those were tempestuous times, and that Lord Brougham would "ride on the whirlwind," though he could not "direct the storm." The country was on the eve of great constitutional changes. Disruption followed disruption of ancient parties, which, being once resolved into their original elements, could not be harmoniously or closely reunited. Each faction was sufficiently strong to displace or temporarily overturn a rival ministry, but too weak to hold the

position from which the enemy had been driven, In not one of the successive cabinets which flourished and fell between the years 1830 and 1834 was there a confident reliance of the whole upon each and every one of its parts-the only condition which can give energetic action to any ministry, or even any associated body of politicians. The tide of party-spirit, too, ran strong and high; and the bark of Lord Brougham was borne along upon the loftiest surge. But he had not lost the compass by which he had, through life, steered his course, and which was now guiding him towards shores where rich fruits were to be gathered, which, ere long, he was destined to scatter luxuriantly around him, for the health and enjoyment of a people which he loved, and for the prosperity of which he had long and gladly toiled.

(To be concluded in our next.)

ART. IV.-NAVIGATION-COLLISION-CONFLICT OF AMERICAN AND ENGLISH LAW HOW TO STEER.

The Osprey. (American case. Court of Massachusetts, September, 1854.) 7 Month. Law Reporter, 384.

THE

HIS case involves singularly important consequences. The necessities of navigation have required that in all countries of maritime commerce very distinct rules should be laid down how vessels should steer which are in danger of collision. It has been established here that, under all circumstances, each vessel is to port her helm, and go to the right; except only where one vessel is close hauled, and the other is going free, in which case the former holds her course, and the entire duty of avoiding collision falls on the latter having the