me this is not the course of divine justice, or there is no truth in the Gospels of Heaven. If the general tenour of a man's conduct be such as I have represented, he may walk through the shadow of death, with all his faults about him, with as much cheerfulness as in the common paths of life, because he knows that, instead of a stern accuser, to expose before the Author of his nature those frail passages which, like the scored matter in the book before you, chequers the volume of the brightest and best spent life, his mercy will obscure them from the eyes of his purity, and our repentance blot them out for ever."

That Lord Erskine was not altogether free from the weakness of vanity, a weakness not unfrequently found in persons who, in other respects, possess the strongest minds, is evident even from his speeches. There is, upon various occasions, an obvious endeavour to introduce himself and his own actions to the notice of the audience; an ungraceful practice, which increased upon him in the later part of his life, and of which an instance may be seen in the debates in the house of lords of the 1st of March, 1806.* It has been said of Lord Erskine†, that “thoroughly acquainted with the world, he even condescended to have recourse to little artifices, pardonable in themselves, to aid his purposes. He examined the court the night before the trial, in order to select the most advantageous place for addressing the jury. On the cause being called, the crowded audience were, perhaps, kept waiting a few minutes before the celebrated stranger made his appearance; and when at length he gratified their impatient curiosity, a particularly nice wig, and a pair of new yellow gloves, distinguished and embellished his person, beyond the ordinary costume of the barristers of the circuit.”

The demeanour of Lord Erskine in court was to the bench respectful, though never subservient; to the bar, kind, courteous, and engaging. It has been said, that during his long practice he was never known, but upon

Cobbett's Parl. Deb. vol. vi. p. 247. + Annual Obituary, vol. ix. p. 57.

one occasion, to utter a harsh or rude word to those opposed to him, and that, in the single instance in which his temper mastered him, he made ample amends by a voluntary and instantaneous apology.*

In person, Lord Erskine possessed many advantages: his features were regular, intelligent, and animated, and his action is said to have been exceedingly graceful. His constitution was remarkably strong; and it was mentioned by himself in the house of lords †, as a singular fact, that during the twenty-seven years of his practice he had not been for a single day prevented in his attendance on the courts by any indisposition or corporeal infirmity.

SIR SAMUEL ROMILLY.

1757-1818.

SAMUEL ROMILLY was born on the first of March, 1757, in Frith-street, Soho, Westminster. His grandfather, a native of France, retired from that country on the revocation of the edict of Nantz, and settled in England, where his son, Peter Romilly, was brought up to the trade of a jeweller, and married a lady of the name of Garnault, the descendant of a French family: of this marriage the only children who attained the age of maturity were Thomas, Catherine, and Samuel, the subject of this memoir.

He was distinguished in his early youth by great vivacity and sensibility of temperament, the frequent companions of genius. Of his education little has been recorded; but he appears to have been principally indebted for his acquirements to his own exertions, aided by the suggestions and advice of his friend the Rev. John Roget, who subsequently married his only sister. Being originally destined for the profession of an attorney, he * Annual Obituary, vol. ix. p. 59. + Cobbett's Parl. Deb. vol. vi. p. 247.

was placed by his father under a respectable gentleman in the six clerks' office; but in consequence of the strong predilection which he manifested for the bar, he became, in May, 1778, a member of Gray's Inn, and studied for some time in the chambers of Mr. Spranger. In a letter addressed to Mr. Roget, who was then travelling on the Continent, he gives the following account of the manner in which he passed his time:-" You ask me how I spend my time; in a manner so uniformly the same, that a journal of one day is a journal of all. At six or sooner I rise, go into the cold bath, walk to Islington to drink a chalybeate water (from which I have found great benefit), return and write or read till ten; then go to Mr. Spranger's, where I study till three, dine in Frithstreet, and afterwards return to Mr. Spranger's, where I remain till nine. This is the history of every day, with little other variation than that of my frequently attending the courts of justice in the morning, instead of going to Mr. Spranger's, and of often passing my afternoons at one of the houses of parliament.”

In another letter to the same correspondent, we find traces of that admirable spirit of benevolence which at a subsequent period directed all his exertions in public life. "Have you ever heard of a book published here some time since by a Mr. Howard, on the state of prisons in England and several other countries? You may conjecture from the subject that it is not a book of great literary merit; but it has a merit infinitely superior: it is one of those works which have been rare in all ages of the world, being written with a view only to the good of mankind. The author was some time ago a sheriff in the country, in the execution of which office numerous instances of abuses practised in prisons came under his observation. Shocked with what he saw, he began to enquire whether the prisons in the adjacent counties were on a better footing, and finding every where the same injustice prevail, he resolved, though a private individual, to attempt the reform of abuses which had become as general as they were shocking to humanity.

Accordingly, he made a visit to every prison and house of correction in England, with invincible perseverance and courage; for some of the prisons were so infected with diseases and putrid air, that he was obliged to hold a cloth steeped in vinegar to his nostrils during the whole time he remained in them, and to change his clothes the moment he returned. After having devoted so much time to this painful employment here, he set out on a tour through a great part of Holland, Germany, and Switzerland, to visit their prisons. What a singular journey!—not to admire the wonders of art and nature→→→ not to visit courts and ape their manners; but to compare the misery of men in different countries, and to study the art of mitigating the torment of mankind! What a contrast might be drawn between the painful labour of this man, and the ostentatious sensibility which turns aside from scenes of misery, and, with the mocking of a few barren tears, leaves it to seek comfort in its own distresses!"

In the year 1781, Mr. Romilly passed several months on the Continent, visiting Switzerland, the borders of Italy, and the principal parts of France.

At Paris, he became acquainted with several of the most distinguished men of letters of that day. His correspondence with his friends presents a lively picture of the impressions which he received from the state of society in France.

After spending the usual period of probation in unremitting and successful labour, Mr. Romilly was called to the bar on the second of June, 1783. In a letter written at this period, he has described the feelings with which he contemplated the entering upon his profession, -feelings which betray the nervous and susceptible tem→ perament with which he had to struggle. "The nearer I approach the term, which I formerly so often wished for, the more I dread it. I sometimes lose all courage, and wonder what fond opinion of my talents could ever have induced me to venture on so bold an undertaking: but it often happens (and I fear it has been my case),

that men mistake the desire for the ability of acting some very distinguished part.”

In another letter we find the early traces of that noble and pure ambition which, throughout the whole of his public life, elevated the character of Sir Samuel Romilly. “It would seem, my dear Roget, by your last letter, that you thought I had affected doubt of succeeding in the way of life on which I am to enter, in order to draw from you such praises as might encourage me in my pursuit. I assure you that I had no such wish, and that what I wrote to you was but a faithful transcript of what I felt. Could I but realise the partial hopes and expectations of my friends, there would be no doubt of my success, almost beyond my wishes; but in myself I have a much less indulgent censor, and in this, perhaps, alone, I cannot suffer their judgment to have equal weight with my own. I have taught myself, however, a very useful lesson of practical philosophy, which is, not to suffer my happiness to depend upon my success. Should my wishes be gratified, I promise myself to employ all the talents and all the authority I may acquire for the public good-Patriæ impendere vitam. Should I fail in my pursuit, I console myself with thinking that the humblest situation in life has its duties, which one must feel a satisfaction in discharging; that at least my conscience will bear me the pleasing testimony of having intended well; and that, after all, true happiness is much less likely to be found in the high walks of ambition than in the secretum iter et fallentis semita vitæ. Were it not for these consolations, and did I consider my success at the bar as decisive of my future happiness, my apprehensions would be such that I might truly say, Cum illius diei mihi venit in mentem, quo mihi dicendum sit, non solum commoveor animo, sed etiam toto corpore perhorresco.”

For several years the anticipations of Mr. Romilly seemed to be but too correct. It was truly said by Lord Erskine *, when speaking of advancement in his

Cobbett's Parl. Deb, vol. vi. p. 427.