of times paft, yet "the execution of these projects has fuffered fo Fittle interruption from the exigencies of the times, that many others of not lefs hardy conception have been undertaken during the war itfelf. And fo little has money been found wanting for the execution of profitable undertakings, that at this time the firft of our corporations is engaged in an eager conteft with a body of individuals, to decide, which party fhall be permitted to expend no lefs a fum than eight hundred thousand pounds; upon a project, the fuccefs of which muft depend totally on the extenfion of the trade of London."

ART. 38. A Vindication of the Privilege of the People, in refped to the conftitutional Right of free Difcuffion: with a Retrofpect to various Proceedings relative to Viclations of that Right. 8vo. 80 pp. 25. Stockdale. 1796.

The author of this pamphlet confiders the right of free difcuffion as endangered by the profecution carried on against the publication attributed to Mr. Reeves; and, regarding the profecution of Mr. Stockdale in 1789, for publishing a Review of the principal Charges against Warren Haltings," as another attack upon the fame privilege, proceeding from a fimilar quarter, defends the unknown writer with the fame arguments which Mr. Erskine then employed in favour of his client. The rule then laid down by that gentleman, admitted by the Attorney-General, and allowed by the Chief Juftice, was in the fol lowing words:

"That where an information charges a writing to be compofed, or publifhed of and concerning the Commons of Great Britain [or, con fequently, the Parliament in general] with an intent to bring that body into fcandal and difgrace with the public, the author cannot be brought within the scope of fuch a charge, unlefs the Jury, on examination and comparison of the whole matter, written or published, shall be fatisfied, that the particular paffages charged as criminal, when explained by the context, and confidered as part of one entire work, were meant and intended by the author to vilify the Houfe of Commons [or Parliament] as a body, and written of and concerning them in Parliament assembled."

Having very maturely confidered the pamphlet which gave rise to the profecution now depending, we have no hefitation in pronounc ing that, if this rule be adopted, the writer or publisher will infallibly be acquitted; fince it appears to us, that the only method by which an unfavourable interpretation can be fixed upon it, is that of detaching a particular paffage from the body of the context, and pronouncing on it feparately. Nor, even in that method, do we think it incapable of fubftantial defence.

Concerning the perfon of the publisher, and his fuppofed intention, the writer of this tract thus fpeaks:

"If the point of the objection to this pamphlet be, that it was written, and publifhed, with the wicked defign of bringing the conftitution into the contempt of the country, and the parliament into the hatred of the people, the first question ought to be, Who is the publifher? that we may judge of his motive from his character. The publisher is faid to be The Chairman of the Affociation for defending the Conflitution

Conflitution against Republicans and Levellers. He, who has been acting for years in defence of the Conftitution, now comes out to defame the conftitution. And, the tens of thoufands, whom he has been the means of affociating, in the noble caufe of fupporting law, and invigorating magiflracy, are now incited by him to conten n the conftitution, and to deride magiftracy. Miracles have not yet ceafed; as this objection evinces; though

"Aye; but there is a deep laid plot against the conftitution, by the chief of the affociators in favour of the conftitution; he is openly for the conftitution; yet, is he fecretly against it; and he publishes the book with the apparent defign of making the people content with their government and laws; yet with the infidious purpose of making them contemn both. Such is the plot, which the breath of faction hath fanned into existence, and the voice of party hath proclaimed to the world! Our recollection is thus carried back to the imputed plots of fimilar times. There is an inftru&tive ftory, told by Roger North, of Lord Shaftesbury, the contriver of the Popish Plot: A certain lord of his confidence in parliament once asked him, what he intended to do with the plot, which was fo full of nonfenfe, as would fcarce go down with tantum non ideots; what, then, could he propofe by preffing the belief of it upon men of common fenfe, and especially in parHament? It's no matter, faid Shaftefbury, the more nonfenfical the better; if we cannot make them fwallow worfe nonfenfe than that, we fhall never do any good with them.' We need only change names, to make be inle apply as pertinently to the prefent times, and to contemporary perfons, as to the past.”

P. 25.

The metaphor of the tree this author explains, as others have, to denote only the conftitutional pre-eminence of the crown; but he does not, that we can perceive, advert to the very material dilinétion, that the lopping off the branches certainly alludes to no more than the putting a complete end to one parliament, to be fucceeded in due courfe by another. This writer is frequent, and generally happy, in his quota tions and allufions.

ART. 39. A Defence of the Pamphlet afcribed to John Reeves, Efg. and entitled, Thoughts on the English Government." By the Rev. J. Brand, A. M. addreffed to the Members of the Loyal ciations against Republicans and Levellers, 8vo. 95.pp. 2s. 6d. Longman. 1796...

It is with great reafon that the very fenfible author of this publication addreffes it to the loyal affociations, and the principal reafon may best be ftated in his own words.

Look back to the ftate of the kingdom, when your affociations first were formed. What man, qualified to think on the intereft of the ftate, except those interested in the fubverfion of it, who did not in his face carry all the marks of confternation? But when men who wifhed well to their country, of all defcriptions of parties, became

united;

united; in their union, in the bonorum omnium corfenfus, they faw their fuperiority: the faction feemed to fall before you.

It is much to be wifhed on your parts, that the fame popular favour, the fame opinion of the conftitutional principles on which your affociations were formed, and of the objects they have purfued, might ftill fecond you, if they fhould be again called forth, as the events of every day may add new importance to them. Their continuation and their undiminished vigour may be neceffary for the prefervation of legal government. But if the principles of the man who formed the bond of union by which you are cemented, be injuriously reputed to be adverfe to the principles of the exifting limited monarchy, that union will become the object of popular jealoufy, as I have shown before; it will be weakened, and in danger of being rendered nugatory." P. iii.

The defence of the profecuted pamphlet is here undertaken in the most regular manner. Mr. Brand firft ftates the fentiments of the writer, on feveral points relating to our legal conftitution; he then confiders the paragraph read from it by Mr. Sturt; and finally vindicates the remaining parts which have been cenfured. In defending the paffage particularly excepted againft, he undertakes to prove three distinct propofitions. I. That "the fecond and third eftate owe their origin to the crown, or have fprung out of the monarchy." This is proved hiftorically and legally, and confirmed by political fpeculation. 2. That "the continuance of the functions of the houfes is temporary; that of thofe of the crown perpetual." This is thus explained according, we have no doubt, to the genuine meaning of the pamphlet defended. "In the interval between two parliaments neither of the houses can be said to exift; there are no reprefentatives; and as no parliament exifts, no peers of parliament, thefe would be peers of a non-entity; and even while a parliament exifts, the functions of the two houfes are not permanently neceflary; those of the crown are; their commencement and conclufion depend upon the will of the king, being fummoned and prorogned by him; during the life of the perfon who holds the crown, the difcontinuance of the exercife of his functions depends, by the conftitution, on the act of God alone, as in demife, by illness, &c. or his own will, declared by an act of abdication." P. 38. 3. That "the legal capacity of action may be taken from the houfes by violence, the effect of which may fubfift some time after the violence is removed; but at all times the legal capacity of action remains in the crown." The author here fuppofes a violence which fhould prevent the houfes from assembling, as might happen in a civil war; or the extermination of the Lords and the chief part of the Commons, as was nearly the cafe during the - ufurpation of Cromwell.

"If, fays he, Providence had at that time vifited the nation with this dreadful yet probable calamity, the writer allerts the tree would have remained a tree fili; for it shall be shown that a cafe refembling this is the only one he could have had in contemplation when he wrote. If this tragedy had been effected, it is paying no undeferved tribute to the moral fenfe of the lower orders in this country, to fay, that the - perpetrators would have been held in fuch execration, that the fuppo

fition of their being favourable to a restoration is no violent affumption. In that cafe, by the legal prerogatives attached to and ftill remaining in the perfon of the king (according to the author's affertions) a Houfe of Peers might have been formed, and by his writs a lawful Houfe of Commons affembled; and he would have been legally able to have formed the wheels, and fet together again the whole machine of government." P. 47.

The author apologizes at the end of this tract for the hafte with which it was put together; but we do not perceive the neceffity for fuch an apology: it is clearly written and methodically arranged, and certainly brings forward a very trong defence of a pamphlet, which has incidentally occafioned fo much difcuffion.

ART. 40. A fecond Letter to Mr. Sheridan. With Strictures on the general Conduct of Oppofition. By a Suffolk Freeholder. 8vo. 54 PP. 1s. Brown, Effex-street. 1796.

Out of the numerous freeholders of Suffolk, who it may be that thus delights occafionally to addrefs Mr. Sheridan, &c. we cannot undertake to guess; but that he is far from unsuccessful in his mode of ftating what he wishes to convey, as we have already teftified*, fo we here find occafion to repeat. The topics of the prefent letter are principally the conduct of the gentleman addreffed, in the state-trials for high-treafon, and refpecting the two bills against fedition, &c. On the former occafion, he compliments him for his chriftian forgiveness of Mr. Horne Tooke, feveral of whose severe attacks on Meffrs. Fox and Sheridan, he takes the opportunity to infert. He then gives a fketch of fome of the principal events of Mr. Tooke's life, to fhow in what manner he had merited protection. The refult of the trials, he briefly exhibits by remarking, that Mr. Erskine effected the defence of his clients, not by palliating the attempts which the report of the fecret committees evidently fixed upon them, but by proving Hardy a foolish ignorant tool, Horne a man of complete duplicity, and Thelwall a vapouring braggart, who boafted of crimes which he never committed. By this event, fays he, "though the virtuous interference of the lords and gentlemen in oppofition did not alone produce it, yet the confpirators were encouraged, and the focieties convinced that they might undertake any act of patriotism, and be fecure of fapport and protection."

The author then proceeds to the Copenhagen-houfe meeting, and its confequences: and concludes by expatiating upon the doctrine of refiftance, as stated by Mr. Fox, and the gentleman to whom he writes. He particularly marks the connection between the meeting abovementioned, and the attacks made upon the king three days after, by citing the teftimony of Sir Francis Baffet in the House of Commons, that the circumftance of the King's going to the Houfe was intimated to the populace at Copenhagen-Houfe, and the company prefent earneftly defired to attend. Among the traits of calm irony which cha

3

*See British Critic, Vol. VI. p. 439.

racterize

racterize the Suffolk Freeholder, we were pleased with this. Nothing has ftruck fo much terror and difmay into the advocates of def potifm and limited monarchy, (which are fynonymous terms) as," &c. If the difhoneft abettors of fedition could feel, this allufion to their invariable practice of confounding things moft oppofite, would not be thrown away upon them; it will at least be relished by thofe who fee and hate their difingenuous tricks.

MEDICINE.

ART. 41. Experiments on the infenfible Perfpiration of the human Body, fhowing its Affinity to Refpiration. Published originally in 1779, and now republished with Additions and Corrections. By William Cruik fbank. 8vo. 104 pp. 35. Nicol. 1795.

When thefe experiments were firft publifhed, they were accompanied with obfervations on the absorbent fyftem, but as the latter have been fince enlarged, and added to the author's anatomy of the absorbing veffels, he has thought it proper to republifh the experiments by themfelves. The object of the experiments is to fhow, that the matter of infenfible perfpiration is not a fimple aqueous fluid, but contains phlogifton, and another fubftance, capable of converting atmospheric into fixed air; or, in other words, has the fame qualities as the vapour that paffes from the lungs in refpiration.

The author begins by giving an anatomical defcription of the fkin. This has ufually been described as confifting of the cuticle or outward lamella, the rete mucofum, containing the pigment or colouring matter, on which the complexion depends, and the true cutis. But to these the author adds three other lamellæ, which he thinks he has difcovered. Thefe lamellæ, he confiders as cuticule, ready to perform the office of the external cuticle, which is conftantly wearing away and falling off, in small portions like fcales, p. 44. But as he did not feem perfectly fatisfied with the obfervations he had made, he faid he meant to profecute the fubject. The fubject, however, remains in the fame doubtful state, and the author, at the end of fixteen years, fince he made the promise, repeats it in the fame words he used before.

To afcertain the nature and qualities of the matter of infenfible perspiration, the author inclofed his hand in a wide-mouthed glafs, fecuring the aperture by a bladder, which was fastened round the neck of the bottle and to his wrift. In a few minutes he perceived the inner furface of the glafs to be covered with a mift. This condenfing and trickling down the fides of the glafs, he found, at the end of an hour, that he had collected a tea-fpoonful of a tranfparent infipid fluid, which weighed thirty grains. If we could fuppofe, he fays, that the perfpiration from the reft of the furface of his body was equally copious, the quantity perfpired in the hour would be three ounces and fix drams, and, in the twenty-four hours, feven pounds and fix ounces. The author afterwards tried the experiment with his hand covered with a fhamoy leather glove, and with his foot, on which he had drawn

a dry