advocates for the foulest and most odious species of traffic that ever disgraced the annals of any civilized country. We regret that we cannot contemplate this era of his Lordship's political life without feelings of disapprobation and concern: we would, however, willingly believe that his Lordship was actuated in his measures on this question, rather by his views of benefitting the commerce of the country, than by a wish. to identify himself with the individual interests of his constituents the flesh-merchants of the city of Bristol.

When the abolition of the slave trade was attempted in 1792, and both Fox and Pitt supported the measure, his Lordship reprobated the strong language made use of by these gentlemen, and took an opportunity in the course of the debate to attempt a justification of the character of the notorious Captain Kimber, then in Newgate, whom his Lordship represented as a cruelly injured man. In the event, however, Lord Sheffield assented to the proposition of putting a stop to the importation of negroes into the colonies; but the acquiescence in this measure was given in so reluctant a manner, that it looked more like a compromise than a cheerful compliance with a just and necessary suggestion. But we will present our readers with a minute of his Lordship's speech on the occasion:

"Lord Sheffield deprecated the dangerous and mischievous consequences resulting from the frequent agitation of this question. Some gentlemen urged their theories to the very brink of ruin; but as Mr. Dundas's measures (those leading to a gradual abolition, which has never been effected) seemed calculated to arrest the mischief, by effectually serving the country, they demanded and should receive his warmest support. He was exceedingly concerned that, in his opinion, the abolition of the slave trade could never be carried into effect by the proposition of last year, unless we were to shut up the ports in the West Indies; and it was too well known to need a comment, what destruction to our trade that would occasion. The act for shutting up the port of Boston was indeed a precedent; but it was such a one as it would be more prudent to avoid than to follow. It was true, we had a right to say, the slave trade, as far as it regarded us, should be

abolished: but were we prepared to say the ports should not be supplied by other means? We had a right to do what we pleased with the property which we derived to ourselves from this trade; but we had no right to injure others. If we were constitutionally empowered to forbid the importation of live flesh, we might equally forbid that of dead flesh, and thus completely starve our colonies. We had a right, it was true, to enjoin all owners and captains of British ships not to take on board an African slave; but what right had we to dictate to the planters, and say, they should not supply themselves with slaves, either by purchasing them from other nations, or importing them in their own ships, and under the authority of their own laws? He wished the cessation of the trade by removing the necessity of importing negroes. We should then be consistent as well as humane. We should remember that our colonies were entitled to the protection of our colonial law. He begged it to be understood, that those who were the warmest friends to the abolition of the trade, acted unjustifiably, when they charged their opponents with inhumanity: the fact was, they saw the danger of these discussions; they saw that these discussions might lead the negroes to place themselves in a situation they were not fit for, because proceedings here were misrepresented to them. Insurrections might ensue, and if murder was the conse quence, he could not help saying, that our modern declaimers would, in fact, be the cause of these murders.

"He felt himself entitled to complain, on another account, in the course of these proceedings; for, of all violent reformers of the traffic, upon what they called the principles of justice and humanity, not one of them had the candour to come forward and say, that those whose property was to be sacrificed in this pursuit should have any compensation whatever for their losses. Much stress had been laid on the number of petitions presented for the abolition of the slave trade. Upon this he felt himself entitled also to observe, that parliament should not listen to these petitions, nor indulge the wishes of those who presented them: for the mode in which they had been obtained, rendered them totally unworthy of attention in a grave and enlightened assembly. They had been obtained by artifice, influence, and deception; by a mode truly unconstitutional; and he did not consider this interference of a certain class of persons, who had no particular interest to support, 'much better than the Jacobins in France.

"The truth was, that if the trade should be abolished at all, considerable time should be allowed for that purpose; a short period would by no means answer even the desire of the abolitionists

themselves. He conceived, that the earliest time for the abolition was the year 1800."

A few days after his Lordship had put forth these opinions, he asserted that he was not to be captivated by "a splendid abuse of words;" that he " was confirmed in his former opinion," and that "the miserable half measure of an abolition at the end of three years, was the most contemptible of all, not having the glory, if it deserved that appellation, of an immediate abolition, nor the merit of a gradual abolition.”

In the debate upon the new forest bill, Lord Sheffield * discussed the question in a very able and impartial manner. He insisted upon the impolicy of copyholds, as far as the cultivation of timber trees is concerned, it being the interest of the copyholder to suffer no tree to grow beyond a certain standard. "He wished," he said, "that copyholders might be timber free; and that heriots and arbitrary fines should be compensated: one checked improvement in the breed of cattle, and the other in respect to building and agriculture. "Nothing could be more odious," he added, " than the barbarous custom of lords of manors hovering round the house of a person on his death-bed, and at the moment that the family is in the greatest distress, rushing in to seize the best cattle or best furniture, and if they do not find enough to their minds, taking favourite dogs; in short, we had better part with such unworthy and unnecessary privileges for a valuable · compensation, than wait until they are wrested from us with all the violence that had been experienced in a neighbouring kingdom." With these sentiments every one must accord: they are worthy the enlightened head and generous heart of the nobleman from whom they proceeded.

On the 3d of April 1793, Lord Sheffield had the misfortune to lose his amiable consort. She died suddenly at his Lordship's house in Downing-street, leaving two daughters, Maria Josepha†,

* May 3, 1792.

† Maria Josepha, married October 11, 1796, to John Thomas Stanley, Esq. now Sir Thomas Stanley of Adderley, in Cheshire.

and Louisa Dorothea*. Her Ladyship was a woman of most exemplary character. She is reported to have felt so uncommon a degree of sympathy for the unfortunate victims of the French revolution, that she fitted up an hospital for the reception of such of them in her own neighbourhood as stood in need of surgical advice and attendance, whilst she opened her house and table to the nobility and clergy who were refugees in the vicinity of Sheffield-place. Nor does her Lord appear to have been less hospitably disposed towards these wretched exiles than herselft. In a letter

* Louisa Dorothea, married March 14, 1797, her cousin, Major-General William Henry Clinton, eldest son of the late Lieutenant-General Sir Henry Clinton, K. B.

†The following character of Lady Sheffield was published immediately after her death:

"Society in general, and the virtuous in particular, but more especially the unfortunate and indigent, have suffered a severe and sudden loss. An unexpected death has taken off in four days Lady Sheffield, the most respectable of women, of wives, mothers, and friends: of manners as gentle as pure; of a mind as modest as improved; of a heart alike noble and sensible; and of a pity whose delicacy was equal to its prodigality. Such are the qualities lamented by all who knew her. Ever since the disastrous events that have thrown among us so many victims of the French frenzy, she has rivalled her generous partner and lord in softening the lot of so many unhappy persons. Priests, laity, men, women, of all ranks and opinions, provided they were honest and unfortunate, found protection in the house, relief in the bounty, and comfort in the friendship of this virtuous couple. It is to be feared that Lady Sheffield fell a victim to her zeal and goodness. For some time she had been afflicted with a violent and almost incessant pain in her side, which did not however interrupt the course of her benevolence. Sometimes she with her own hands administered relief to the French women, thus sparing their delicacy, while she provided for their wants; at other times she brought them medical assistants, although she did not consult them in her own case. In concert with her husband, she commissioned their friends to find out all the unfortunate sick emigrants, whom she placed in an hospital, of which her brother is governor; and she furnished clothes to those who wanted them.

"She had just fitted up a house for the accommodation of those who, by contagious diseases, were kept at a distance from all places of relief. On Good Friday she spent near two hours in this hospital, and two more at church, in extreme cold weather. On Saturday morning a pleurisy came on; on Tuesday the symptoms of death appeared; and the next morning she died, leaving her family and friends in the deepest affliction. All the unfortunate persons whom she was acquainted with, regret her loss; and there is not a French emigrant but must bedew her ashes with tears.

to his friend Lord Sheffield, dated Lausanne, Oct. 1792 * anticipating the approach of the French towards Lausanne, Gibbon says, "Should I ever be forced to take refuge in England, you would perhaps receive me as kindly as you do the French priests; — a noble act of hospitality." And again, in the same pacquet; "Your protection of the French refugees is highly applauded †.”

The following letter of condolence, addressed to Lord Sheffield by Gibbon, immediately on the loss of his Lady, cannot fail of proving interesting to our readers:

66

"Lausanne, April 27, 1793.

My dearest friend, for such you most surely are, nor does there exist a person who obtains, or shall ever obtain, a superior place in my esteem and affection,

"After too long a silence I was sitting down to write, when only yesterday morning I was suddenly struck, — struck, indeed, to the heart, by the fatal intelligence from Sir Henry Clinton and Mr. De Lally. Alas, what is life, and what are our hopes and projects! When I embraced her at your departure from Lausanne, could I imagine that it was for the last time? When I postponed to another summer my journey to England, could I apprehend that I should never see her again? I always hoped that she would spin her feeble thread to a long duration; and that her delicate frame would survive (as is often the case) many constitutions of a stouter appearance. In four days! in your absence! in that of her children! But she is now at rest, and if there be a future life, her mild virtues have surely entitled her to the reward of pure and perfect felicity. It is for you that I feel, and I can judge of your sentiments by conparing them with my own. I have lost, it is true, an amiable and affectionate friend, whom I had known and loved above three and twenty years; and whom I often styled by the endearing name of-sister. sister. But you are deprived of the companion of your life, the wife of

* Gibbon's Miscellaneous Works, vol. i. p. 358.

+ Ibid. p. 365.