when twenty-four years old; within twelve years after his admission to the English bar he was its recognized leader, as admitted even by Lord Campbell. He was, for the next two decades, the moulder and leading expounder of public sentiment throughout Great Britain; in the House of Commons there was no one in his party that dared openly to oppose him, and no worthy rival in the Tory party, in power, except Canning. He was without a rival in the House of Lords. "What is the House of Lords without Brougham-Brougham is the House of Lords?" said Lord Lynhurst, and lastly, as a tribute to his leadership, the position of Lord Chancellor of Great Britain was thrust upon him, he accepting it solely because he was informed by the Prime Minister (Gray) that without such acceptance, his party, in power for the first time in twenty-five years, could not form the Government.

Lord Brougham was a phenomenon at intellectual work, his labor was untiring, and he seemed to have learned and retained and digested every branch of knowledge, legal, literary and scientific. I quote a contemporaneous writer in the following words: "We verily believe that Lord Brougham is at any time, at a week's warning, able to undertake any one of some dozen or so professorships in anyone of our universities. It would matter little what were the duties of the chair, whether belonging to classical learning, to moral or exact science. In one week, at the most, whatever rust may have gathered, he would proceed with the work wherein the vast variety and riches of his knowledge would be made to shine with a pristine light." "There go," said the Poet Rodgers jestingly, but suggestively and not derisively, as Lord Brougham drove off one morning from his residence, "Lycurgus, Demosthenes, Archimedes, Sir Isaac Newton, Lord Chesterfield and a great many more in one post-chaise."

Henry Brougham was born at Edinburgh, Scotland, on the 19th day of September, 1778, his grandfather was a lawyer, owning "Brougham Hall" in the north of England, and his father was born and reared at the family home. Lord Brougham, as often expressed by himself, would have preferred to have been an Englishman, but a rather romantic incident made him a Scotchman; his father was to have been married to an English young

lady who died the day before the marriage was to take place. He was stricken down by this calamity, which almost deprived him of his reason, and by change of scene and travel he sought consolation, and he found it at Edinburgh in the person of Eleanor Syme, a young lady of great beauty and rare talent, niece of Dr. William Robertson, the historian, she agreeing to marry him on condition that Edinburgh should be their residence, and so it came about that Henry Brougham was a Scotchman. He always ascribed his mental characteristics mainly to the Gaelic blood of his mother, and to the teachings which he received from her and Dr. Robertson. Many stories are told of his early maturity in several branches of knowledge, especially in mathematics, and he came to be noted among his fellows as a laborious student at the University of Edinburgh, and as an orator and declaimer. In 1802 Brougham, with several other rather impecunious young men, among whom were Francis Jeffrey and Sidney Smith, proposed a quarterly periodical, known now for more than a century as the "Edinburgh Review." As. principal editor Brougham's talents first found their opportunity for achievement. To the first twenty numbers he is said to have contributed not less than eighty articles upon all sorts of topics, science, politics, colonial policy, literature, poetry, mathematics, theology and fine arts, and among others a review of Byron's "Hours of Idleness," which he claimed made Byron a poet, stirring him to fury and eliciting "English Bards and Scotch Reviewers," the most scathing philippic ever penned in poetry, mingling the music of exquisite meter with the gall and wormwood of the most deadly envenomed shafts of satire. But Edinburgh was not a large enough field for Brougham's talents, or to satisfy his unlimited aspirations. He, in a few years, moved to London, was admitted as a member of one of the Inns of Court, and in 1808 was called to the English bar; he was soon recognized as a man of mark, cordially welcomed by the Whig leaders, then in opposition to the government, and two years after he was called to the bar, returned to Parliament from the Borough of Camelfield through the influence of the Duke of Bedford. His fame as a lawyer, lawmaker, parliamentary orator and a guardian of civil liberty and popular rights, rapidly spread throughout Great Britain, and

I may say the civilized world, during the next ten years; culminating in his great-brave and defiant defence, without fee or pecuniary reward, of the first and only English Queen ever brought to trial at the bar of the House of Lords.

In the year 1795 Princess Caroline of Brunswick came, by invitation, to be the wife of the then Prince of Wales, afterwards George the Fourth. Thackeray has embalmed the infamy of this Prince, who lived a life black with every sort of wickedness and unredeemed by a single virtue. The confiding woman who had entrusted her life and happiness to his care, bore with resignation for years his cruelty and unfaithfulness to her, until finally, she was thrust from his home and compelled to live on an allowance from the government. But this was not all, spies were put upon her every action and movement and vile slanders were circulated purposed to destroy her reputation. Is it to be wondered that a throb of sympathy for this outraged wife beat in the heart of every true man and woman in Great Britain? Under the advice of Mr. Canning she sought retirement in Italy. Henry Brougham advised against her going, as he foresaw there would be the trial for divorce, and thought that her character could be better protected if she remained in London surrounded by friends. Canning's advice prevailed, but the wisdom of Brougham's was soon demonstrated, for an organized plot was the result to blacken and blast her character by hired and perjured Italians.

George the Third died on the 29th of January, 1820, and the Prince of Wales, then Prince Regent, was proclaimed King, as George the Fourth, but where was the Queen of Great Britain? It was decided that the name of her who was the legal Queen should be omitted from the order of prayer in the Church, foreign Courts were requested not to recognize her abroad; her allowance from the civil list had ceased with the death of George the Third, and had it not been for friends in Parliament she would have been left to wander a beggar in foreign lands. Is it to be wondered that, conscious of her innocence, she felt as if her silence longer would justify her condemnation and that she determined to return to England, confront her enemies and appeal to a generous people. The Prime Minister, Lord Liver

pool, induced Brougham to go to the Continent the bearer of an offer from the King to settle fifty thousand pounds a year on her if she would desist, remain abroad and make no claim or exercise no right as Queen; she replied, probably by the advice of Brougham, in substance, that her outraged honor could not be bought for money; and she landed at Dover on the 5th of June, 1820, on her way to London. The people of the whole United Kingdom rejoiced to welcome her back as their Queen. On her arrival in London she was met with an overwhelming popular ovation, an immense throng followed her carriage, shouting "The Queen Forever" and heaping vituperations and curses on the King and his Ministers. The Common Council of the City of London presented an address of welcome, the example was speedily followed throughout the country, and for months the metropolis was kept in a ferment, bordering on revolution, by addresses and processions gotten up by all manner of people, of trades, of bodies corporate and not corporate in honor of the Queen's return.

How different the reception by her husband and King. On the day after the Queen's arrival infamous charges were laid before Parliament, they were received in the House of Commons with indignant protest and scorn. Mr. Canning, the Tory leader, vowed he would never place himself in the situation of her accuser, and resigned his office in the Ministry.

In the House of Lords, Lord Liverpool, Prime Minister, proceeded to propose the "Bill of Pains and Penalties,” an everlasting disgrace to his administration, the bill was "an Act to deprive her Majesty, Queen Caroline Amelia Elizabeth, of title, prerogatives, rights, privileges and exemptions of Queen Consort of this realm and to dissolve the marriage between his Majesty and the said Caroline Amelia Elizabeth." The trial proceeded on the second reading of the bill on the 17th day of August, two hundred and seventeen Lords being present, presided over by Lord Chancellor Eldon, and as it proceeded revolutionary indignation spread among the people. The King retired within his guarded palace, the Italian witnesses, also guarded like a gang of criminals, were pelted and groaned at wherever seen. Daily was the fervent prayer, "God help her," repeated, ten thousand times at

the family altars of English homes, and daily did the Queen appear at the trial "exhausted by fatigue and anxiety" awaiting the day of her vindication, which came at last. On the 3rd day of October, the House of Lords, two hundred and seventeen in number, all standing, heard the shouts of the multitudes without mingled with the sound of the "drum and flourish" announcing the arrival of the Queen, she entered supported by Henry Brougham, and took her seat on the crimson chair of state, only three feet from the bar, the Lord Chancellor and the Lords were seated. Amid breathless silence Brougham arose to defend his client and his Queen; tall and spare of figure, forty-two years old, in the meridian of his manly, intellectual and physical powers, his eyes flashing defiance at the Ministry; dressed amid all this grandeur as a plain commoner, in striking contrast with the pageant around him, he presented a dramatic picture, which was long daguerrotyped on the minds and memories of those who heard him.

Time forbids me to repeat more than a few lines of the opening and closing of his great speech, he commenced as follows:

"My Lords: The Princess Caroline, of Brunswick, arrived in this country in the year 1795-the niece of our sovereign, the intended consort of the Heir Apparent, and herself a not very remote heir to the crown of these realms. But I now go back to that period only for the purpose of passing over all the interval which elapsed between her arrival then and her departure in 1814. I rejoice that, for the present at least, the most faithful discharge of my duty permits me to draw this veil. But I cannot do so without pausing for an instant to guard myself against a misrepresentation to which I know that this cause may not unnaturally be exposed; and to assure your Lordships most solemnly that if I did not think the case of the Queen, as attempted to be established by the evidence against her, not only does not require recrimination at present-not only imposes no duty of even uttering one whisper, whether by way of attack, or by way of insinuation, against her illustrious husband— but that it rather prescribed to me, for the present, silence