much too quaint to be eloquent. Some idea may be formed of their style, by looking into the judgments in Coke's Reports, and into the speeches in the State Trials. Chudleigh's Case on the Statute of Uses, 1 Rep., furnishes some excellent specimens of the judicial eloquence of that period. Thus, "Baron Clarke said some have supposed these future uses were preserved in the bowels of the land, and that the land should be charged with them in whose hands soever it should come; and some have supposed they were preserved in nubibus and in the custody of the law, but he said, in our case, be they below in the land, there they should be perpetually buried and should never rise again, and be they above in nubibus, in the clouds, there they should always remain and should never descend." Another of the Judges "resembled the Statute of Uses to Nebuchadnezzar's Tree." Sir Edward Coke may, perhaps, be said to furnish a fair specimen of the forensic oratory of his time, and his speech, when Attorney-General, on the trial of Garnet the Jesuit, may be taken as a favourable example of his powers. It is full of the quaintness which at that day was so much in fashion. "He hath many gifts," says Coke, speaking of Garnet," and endowments of nature, by art learned, a good linguist, and by profession a Jesuit, and a Superior, as indeed he is superior to all his predecessors in devilish treason; a doctor

of Jesuits, that is, a doctor of five D D's, as dissimulation, deposing of Princes, disposing of kingdoms, daunting and deterring of subjects, and destruction." (2 St. Tr. 234.)

In the reign of Charles I. a finer style of oratory began to prevail in our Courts of Justice, as the following speech of Lord Chief Justice Crewe, will sufficiently demonstrate. In the year 1626, a contest arose on the death of Henry de Vere, Earl of Oxford, respecting the right to that Earldom, between Robert de Vere, claiming under an entail created 16 Rich. II. as heir male of the body of Aubrey de Vere, and Lord Willoughby of Eresby, claiming as heir general to the last Earl. The following is the eloquent exordium of Chief Justice Crewe's speech upon this occasion.

"This great and weighty cause, incomparable to any other that hath happened at any time, requires great deliberation, and solid and mature judgment to determine it; and I wish that all the Judges of England had heard it, (being a fit case for all,) to the end we all together might have given our humble advice to your Lordships herein. Here is represented to your Lordships certamen honoris, and as I well say may illustris honoris, illustrious honour. I heard a great peer of this realm and a learned, say, when he lived there was no King in Christendom had such a subject as Ox

ford.* He came in with the Conqueror, Earl of Gwynes; shortly after the Conquest, made Great Chamberlain of England, above 500 years ago, by Henry I. the Conqueror's son, brother to Rufus; by Maud, the Empress, Earl of Oxford; confirmed and approved by Henry II. Alberico comiti, so Earl before. This great honour, this high and noble dignity, hath continued ever since in the remarkable surname of De Vere, by so many ages, descents, and generations, as no other kingdom can produce such a peer in one and the self-same name and title. I find in all this length of time but two attainders of this noble family, and those in stormy and tempestuous times, when the government was unsettled and the kingdom in competition. I have laboured to make a covenant with myself that affection may not press upon judgment, for I suppose there is no man that hath any apprehension of gentry or nobleness, but his affection stands to the continuance of so noble a name and house, and would take hold of a twig or a twine-thread to uphold it. And yet Time hath his revolutions ;-there must be a period and an end to all temporal things—finis

It has been said that the three noblest names in Europe were the De Veres of England, the Fitzgeralds of Ireland, and the Montmorencys of France.

rerum, an end of names and dignities, and whatsoever is terrene, and why not of De Vere? For where is Bohun? Where is Mowbray? Where is Mortimer? Nay, which is more and most of all, where is Plantagenet? They are entombed in the urns and sepulchres of mortality.-And yet let the name and dignity of De Vere stand so long as it pleaseth God!" (See Sir W. Jones's Rep. 101.)

BAXTER AND JEFFERIES.

The coarse violence of Jefferies's temper was never exhibited in a stronger light than upon the trial of Richard Baxter, the well-known non-conformist minister; he was indicted for his Paraphrase on the New Testament, and committed to the King's Bench, on a warrant issued by Jefferies. "He was," says Mr. Fox, "a pious and learned man, of exemplary character, always remarkable for his attachment to monarchy, and for leaning to moderate measures, in the differences between the church and those of his persuasion. The pretence for this prosecution was a supposed reference of some passages in one of his works to the bishops of the Church of England, a reference which was undoubtedly not made by him, and which certainly could not have been made out to any jury that had been less prejudiced, or under any other direction than that of Jefferies. The

66

real motive was his desire of punishing an eminent dissenting minister, whose reputation was high among his sect, and who was supposed to favour the political opinions of the whigs." (Fox's Historical Work, p. 96.). On May 14, 1685, being indisposed, Baxter moved, by his Counsel, that he might have further time given him for his trial; a request which was denied, Jefferies exclaiming, I will not give him a minute's time more to save his life. We have had to do with other sort of persons; but now we have a saint to deal with, and I know how to deal with saints as well as sinners. Yonder stands Oates in the pillory, (as he actually did at that time in New Palace Yard,) and he says he suffers for the truth, and so says Baxter; but if Baxter did but stand on the other side of the pillory with him, I would say two of the greatest rogues and rascals in the kingdom stood there." On the 30th May, he was tried at Guildhall, before Jefferies, when his Counsel, Mr. Wallop, made the following obsérvations: "He conceived," he said, "that the matter depending, being a point of doctrine, ought to be referred to the Bishop, his Ordinary; but if not, he humbly conceived the doctrine was innocent and justifiable; setting aside the inuendos for which there was no colour, there being no antecedent to refer them to, (that is, no Bishop or Clergy of the Church of England named,) he