certainly be highly beneficial to the college that this bill should pass; for, if they consented to go into a committee, he understood that the necessity almost of such a change in the regulations might be proved. There were several absurd statutes besides this, which, perhaps, it might be proper to alter, though that was not the object at present. The college was under the necessity of electing a man of the name of Allen, who should be an unmarried man, and they were obliged to proceed to the election within a fortnight from the commencement of the vacancy. It was obvious that, when vacancies frequently occurred, improper persons must therefore sometimes be chosen. He had stated so much, on account of the industry which had been exerted out of doors with respect to this bill; but in hopes that the house would suffer the bill to be committed, he should say nothing further on the subject at this time. Lord Ellenborough was decidedly adverse to the principle of the bill. The earl of Liverpool, lord Grenville, and the lord chancel lor, were for the bill going to a committee. The duke of Norfolk, though he seemed to entertain strong doubts upon some points connected with the subject, thought the bill fit to be proceeded in. It was then read a second time, and referred to an out-door committee, which was ordered to sit on Monday; to which day their lordships adjourned. But the bill was afterwards abandoned.. On the order of the day being read for the house resolving itself into a committee on the simple contract debt bill, Mr. sergeant Best opposed the speaker's leaving the chair, and stated his objections to the bill at considerable length. The law as it at present stood was sufficient to enable the creditor to recover, if certain stipulations were made in the contract: he therefore considered the bill would be in a great measure nugatory. He thought it would open a door for unjust demands being made on the property of the dead, when they could not be resisted; and would therefore be very injurious. Many of the best lawyers who had given their attention to the subject, were of opinion such a measure would be most pernicious. Under these circumstances he could not consent to such an alteration being made in the law. He moved as an amendment, that the bill should be committed on that day six months. Sir A. Pigot said, the proposition that a man who had incurred debts, and who possessed property, should not pay those debts, was one which he could not comprehend. He had long wished to see the law of the country improved with respect to simple contract debts. It was now three centuries since men had been able to dispose of property by law, in discharge of their debts; but 150 years of that time it had been in the power of testators fraudulently to disappoint even those creditors which lawyers called "creditors in. specialty." One hundred and fifty years had passed since a law had been framed to prevent those frauds; but up to the present time, if a man avoided certain forms in his contracts, he might not only leave his property to his posterity unencumbered by his debts, but he might even sell it to strangers, aliens from his blood, and thus defeat all his creditors. That such a law ought no longer to exist, if a remedy, could 1 tracted with money lenders were in this form. In the colonies of the kingdom, by the act of 5th Geo. II. estates are made liable for the debts of the proprietors; and the reason why the case was not the same in the mother country was, hethought, because the attention of parliament had never been sufficiently directed to the subject. He trusted that the house would really not find that there was any difference between the political expedience and the morality of the measure. could be found, or that it ought to have existed so long, he would never admit. He wished it to be borne in mind, on whom the loss must fall in such cases. It fell on honest, industrious creditors; on artisans, tradesmen, and manufacturers, not on the capitalist who holds a mortgage on the estate for 15 or 20,0001. The evil to which it was proposed to supply a remedy, was one which they all knew to exist. They all knew, that in many cases the simple contract creditors were utterly disappointed of Sir S. Romilly replied to the argetting that to which they were guments of the opposers of the bill. justly entitled. He had never re- To be consistent, they should have flected on this subject without be- moved the repeal of an act, which ing lost in surprise, that the law he had had the honour of proposing should have remained in its pre- several years ago, and which now sent imperfect state up to this stood on the statute-book, as every day argument which had been urged against the present bill was equally applicable to the other. He had been astonished to have the autho rity of lord Rosslyn cited as against the bill; for it actually happened, that amongst the authorities with which he had armed himself on the subject was that of lord Rosslyn, which was delivered in favour of the measure now proposed, in no equivocal terms. The honourable and learned gentleman then read the authority of lord Rosslyn, which was clearly in his favour. Mr. Stephen observed, that his honourable friend had defended the proposed reformation in the law on the broad foundation that it was required by justice. It had been at tempted to show, that such a reformation would be inconvenient; but he would ask, was inconvenience in some minor points to be opposed to the moral question of right or wrong? He had not the least fear of being contradicted when he said, that of the debts incurred by the proprietors of landed estates, the most unjust were those by bond; yet, as the law now stood, these were the only debts the payment of which was secured. All debts con CHAPTER IV, Lord Stanhope on the Mesne Process-Debates on Mr. Wilberforce's Motion on the Slave Trade-Subsidiary Treaties-Corn Laws-War Taxes~~~~ Prince Regent's Message respecting the Duke of Wellington, Sc.-Debate on Lord Grey's Motion respecting Norway-Lord Liverpool on the Regent's Message-Debate on Mr. Wynne's Motion on Norway. H TOUSE of lords, May 2-Lord Stanhope observed that an act had passed inJuly last, commanding some small allowance to be made for debtors imprisoned on mesne process, who would swear that they were not worth 107., and that they had no other means of subsistence. This had, however, not been carried into execution. Of this his lordship mentioned some instances. He could compare this system of imprisonment, he said, for mesne process, with all its consequences, to nothing but the African slave trade: it was a British slave trade, which ought to be abolished. He then presented two petitions relative to these facts. These being read, and ordered to lie on the table; his lordship stated that the object of his motion was to discover how far the statute of the 51st of his present majesty had been complied with, which ordered a table of fees, inspected by the judges, to be hung up in the most conspicuous place in the prison. This motion was agreed to. His lordship then stated that he had two bills to bring forward on the subject of mesne process. In the report of a committee appointed by the house of lords, it was stated that a man imprisoned on mesne process might remain seven months in gaol before the plaintiff was obliged to state his cause of action; and that he might even be imprisoned twelve months on the single oath of his adversary that he owed him 157. If the verdict was for the defendant, he had no compensation except taxed costs, which were not sufficient to defray the expenses of his defence. Even when the original debt was only a few shillings, a rascally attorney might have raised it to 101. or 151. by costs, and then imprison the debtor. Nay, it often had happened, that the plaintiff and defendant met in the same gaol, the one for debt and the other for costs: this put his lordship in mind of the lawyer in the fable, who had to divide an oyster between two clients. According to the evidence of a very respectable magistrate, who had been sheriff of the county of Middlesex, out of 520 creditors, who had instituted proceedings within a certain period, 400 had not recovered their debts. A London lawyer was always remarkably clever at finding out the means of putting money in his own pockets. A person had taken a pair of leather breeches out of a cottage in Kent, without any intention of theft; but a London lawyer thought the eircumstance actionable, and instantly set about drawing up a declaration. There were no less than twelve counts in this declaration about taking away the leather breeches. There was no forceno vi et armis in the business, for there was nobody belonging to the cottage at home when the breeches were taken away; and he was therefore somewhat surprised to find it charged that the defendant had with guns, pikes, halberts, pistols, and a variety of other deadly weapons, broken open this cottage and taken away the leather breeches. This was the first count. On looking at the second, he found that the defendant, not content with small arms, had attacked this cottage with cannons, cannon-balls, bombs, and other similar arms, and taken away the leather breeches. In the third count 100 horses, and 100 horsemen upon these 100 horses, had been brought into this village to storm the unfortunate cottage, and carry away the leather breeches; and, in short, out of the twelve counts eleven were pure fictions, there being only one which bore the least resemblance to the truth. He naturally asked the lawyer what was the meaning of these, pikes, pistols, &c. The lawyer, smiling at his ignorance, answered, "Oh, I see your lordship don't understand those matters; that is what we lawyers call a nullity." What do you mean by these cannons, bombs, &c.? "That is what we lawyers call a nullity." What do you mean by this troop of horse coming to carry away the leather breeches? "That is what we lawyers call a nullity." In short, all were nullities except one. Absurd fictions of this kind were alleged in the declarations in proceedings in every court of law, with no other motive than to swell out the costs; and this put his lordship in mind of a story told of Wilkes and Brook Watson. They happened to be at a meeting, where Brook Watson, who had a wooden leg, railed at the lawyers. Some one asked Wilkes what made his brother alderman rail in this way at the lawyers, "Don't you see," replied Wilkes, "that he has lost one of his legs by the bite of a shark?" His lordship then presented a bill to abolish imprisonment in mesne process, which was not carried. House of commons, May 3.—Mr. Wilberforce rose to make a motion for an address to his royal highness the prince regent, to take the present opportunity of proposing to foreign powers the abolition of the slave trade. In 1806 and 1810, the house had voted nem. con, addresses of a nature similar to the present. It was impossible, however, for any person not to see, that there never was a period more favourable, a better prospect of success, or more powerful motives for interference, than there was at the present time. It was a time in which the British cabinet and foreign governments were more closely drawn together, and more intimately connected, than at any former period. It was a time when all the nations of Europe were about to revive their commercial relations with each other, and to study the elements of a lasting peace. When we consi. .dered the extraordinary circumstances in which we now stood, and the extraordinary successes we had experienced in a long course of providential events, it appeared to him that there was no better or more acceptable mode of expressing our gratitude to that providence which had brought us in safety and F3 triumph 1 triumph out of all our trials, than to do what in us lay to diminish the mass of human suffering. Never did any time appear fitter for the proposition he had now to make. The great continental pow. ers had distinguished themselves by their moderation and generosity, and had shown a temper and character that left no doubt but that they would be well disposed to contribute to any great plan for the relief of suffering nations. When the present circumstances were taken into consideration, when it was considered what great provocations some of the allied powers had received from France, and what noble revenge they had taken by returning benefits for injuries, and good for evil, he felt a most sanguine hope, that when they were made thoroughly acquainted with the nature of this horrid traffic, they would, as a sequel to their noble conduct, join heartily in this great act of justice and humanity. At the time when this question was first agitated, there were great and powerful interests contending against it. It was then represented that the commerce and marine of this country would be ruined by the adoption of such a measure; that the estates in the West Indies could no longer be cultivated; and that the slaves which were now sold to our islands, would be, in future, murdered on the coasts of Africa. Those things were so confidently asserted, that it naturally produced some hesitation. We had, however, ventured to try the experiment, and the threatened evils had not taken place, We had, therefore, tried the experiment for all other nations; and in now proposing to them to abolish this trade, we could confidently tell them that those evils were not like ly to ensue. The slave trade of France had been practically destroyed by the war, and therefore that country had nothing to give up in this respect. He did not wish to appear to insult over him who had lately fallen: but in justice to his subject he must say, that there appeared such a connection between the slave trade and Bonaparte, that while he was in power there was but little prospect of any general agreement of nations to abolish it. He considered Bonaparte a far greater enemy to mankind, from his principles, than even from his conquests; from his openly laughing to scorn all the established principles of religion and morals, he was indeed a deadly enemy to the happiness of mankind. The abolition of the slave trade could never be agreed to by him, as he had not principle enough even to understand the motives of it. When that most able and eloquent champion of the abolition (Mr. Fox) spoke to him upon the subject, he found it impossible to convince him that England, or any other country, could seriously wish for the abolition of a measure from which revenues were derived, from motives of mere humanity. The present king, however, would be faithful to the great duties of the station he occupied, and there was something even in the misfortunes which he had experienced, that naturally opened the mind of men to relieve the miseries of others. As to Spain, she was no longer in those delicate and critical circumstances, when the government would be afraid of adopting a measure that might give cilence to the merchants of Cadiz, or some other town that might be interested in the trade. As to Portugal, it was known that the prince regent of |