Lord Bacon, or attempt to sketch his character. This much, however, we will say, that we have no doubt great injustice has been done the memory of this extraordinary man by those who have written most about him. He was, doubtless, destitute of moral courage and had no strong attachments. This was the cause of all the infamy which has attached to his character. Had he possessed moral courage, he never would have pleaded guilty to the charges brought against him in his impeachment, and permitted himself to become the scape-goat of the sins and unpopularity of James and Buckingham. Had he possessed personal attachment, his conduct towards Essex would have been far different, and the crime of foul and wanton ingratitude would not have blackened his character. Though without gratitude or friendship, he possessed no animosity or revenge. As a companion he was pleasant, social and agreeable, disposed to talk himself and to make others talk. He excelled, as an orator, all his contemporaries. As a statesman he was wise and sagacious. His morals were above reproach. None of his decisions were ever reversed whilst Lord Chancellor, and though he received bribes, he always decided justly. As a philosopher, he transcended all who went before him or have succeeded him in the paths of philosophy. "He was of a middling stature-his limbs well formed, though not robust-his forehead high, spacious and openhis eye lively and penetrating; there were deep lines of thinking in his face-his smile was both intellectual and benevolent-the marks of age were prematurely impressed upon him-in advanced life his whole appearance was unusually pleasing, so that a stranger was insensibly drawn to love, before knowing how much reason there was to admire him." Bishop Williams, the successor of Lord Bacon, was the last ecclesiastic, who ever filled the office of Lord Chancellor. He was a man of great industry and scholastic attainment, but not distinguished for any high qualities of head or heart. He slept but three hours in twenty-four throughout his life! His fortune was made by pleading a cause before King James respecting the right of his parishoners to dance round a Maypole. The writ "ne exeat regno," was first issued by Chancellor Williams. We must pass over the lives of Sir Thomas Coventry, Sir John Finch and Sir Edward Lyttleton, who held the Great Seal during the reign of Charles I., and were close. ly identified with the important events and measures which brought that unfortunate monarch to the block. We also pass over, necessarily, the lives of Whitelock, Bradsbone, Herbert and their associates, who held the Great Seal during the Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell. The lives of these Lord Chancellors are deeply interwoven with the rebellion and commonwealth of England. Lord Campbell's views of the conduct and measures of the Stuarts are by no means so favourable as those of Hume. He gives pretty fairly both sides, whilst Hume endeavors to present but one. The lives of Clarendon, Shaftesbury, Bridgemore, Nottingham, Guilford and Jeffreys, are exceedingly interesting, perhaps the most so of any in the whole work. We were particularly pleased with the account of Lord Shaftesbury. He was bold, reckless, full of genius and high talents, and did much for English liberty and the constitution of Great Britain. His name too is connected in history, with SouthCarolina, as one of the original Lords Proprietors of the colony. ASHLEY and COOPER RIVERS were called after him, whose name was Anthony Astley Cooper. It was at his instance that Locke wrote his famous constitution for SouthCarolina. The great "Test Bill," proposing slavish submission, was defeated by the extraordinary sagacity and energy of Shaftesbury, though it commanded a majority of both Houses of Parliament! He was the author of the habeas corpus, and had it passed by a minority in the House of Lords! There was a miscount, which Shaftesbury, by his dexterity, prevented being corrected, until it was too late to affect the bill. His knowledge of character and the secret motives of human conduct seemed to be instinctive. Rarely could he be deceived. On one occasion, whilst at the house of the Earl of Clarendon, he remarked the great deference paid one of her daughters at table by Lady Clarendon. After he had left the house, he remarked to a friend who accompanied him, that either Charles, or James the Duke of York, was married to Clarendon's eldest daughter. No human being out of the family had at that time suspected such a marriage. He was once invited with a number of gentlemen to dine at the house of a rich old widower. Whilst at the table, the widower began to speak of a contemplated marriage with his housekeeper, whom he represented as a most excellent and worthy lady, and desired the advice of his friends as to the propriety of such a match. Instantly one of the guests began to protest against it, and reminded him of the disgrace such an alliance would bring upon his family. "Stop," said Shaftesbury-" are you not already married to this woman?" addressing himself to the supposed widower, who hesitated, and at length confessed that he was. "Then bring out your wife and let us see her," was the Earl's reply. The manner in which the subject had been broached, satisfied Shaftesbury that the wedding had already taken place. His talent at repartee was equal to his sagacity in discerning the secret motives of his fellow men. King Charles II., said to him one day, "Shaftesbury, you are the most profligate man in my dominions"-" of a subject, I believe I am," said Shaftsbury. As a lawyer he was profoundly ignorant, never having studied the first painciples of the common law. But as an orator he was the most effective speaker in either House of Parliament. As a mere politician he was perhaps never surpassed. In his character, which was that of a high bred English gentleman, during the reign of Charles II., there was much to censure and much to admire. In conclusion, we again commend to the reader, "The Lives of the Lord Chancellors." In this work will be found a truer insight into the character of public men, as well as a more full and minute detail of events, than is usually met with in the history of England. The lives are all written manifestly with an effort at truth and impartiality. A great deal of information is imparted in the work which has hitherto been overlooked and omitted by historians. For instance, we may refer to the life of Sir Robert Burnel, Chancellor of Edward I., to whom the English nation is indebted for all those great improvements in the common law which gave Edward the title of the English Justinian. Nothing for centuries had been known of this wise and illustrious We shall look forward with great interest to the publication of the second series of "The Lives of the Lord Chancellors," when our readers may expect a continuation of the present article. man. ART. V. THE TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. 1. Speech of the Hon. W. L. Dayton of New-Jersey, in the United States Senate, on the Three Million Bill. 1st March, 1847. 2. Speech of the Hon. Henry Clay of Kentucky, in the United States Senate, on the Public Lands. 1832. 3. Speech of the Hon. John C. Calhoun of South-Carolina, in the United States Senate, on the Distribution of the Proceeds of the Public Lands. 1841. 4. Speech of the Hon. R. B. Rhett of South-Carolina, in the House of Representatives, on the Oregon Territory Bill. 1847. 5. Ordinance of Congress for the Government of the Territory north and west of the Ohio 13th July, 1787. THE interesting questions which are rapidly developing themselves in relation to the constitutional powers of the government of the United States over its Territories, are now addressed to the reflecting minds of the people, in a serious and imposing form. The law which should govern in such cases, has from the earliest time presented embarrassment. But difficult as the adjustment has been, it presented obstacles easily overcome, when compared with that which is now produced by the admixture of these doubts with the institution of slavery in the South. A spirit of very stern fanaticism on the one hand, and a just sensibility to the danger of aggressive encroachment on the other, surround the settlement of this question with "clouds and darkness." To its pacific adjustment, all good men would invoke the aid of reason, justice, and above all, a patriotic temper, warmed by the recollection of the past dangers through which the Union has passed, its present unexampled success, in all that excites our admiration in peace or war-and the future glory that should not only perpetuate the blessings we enjoy, but infinitely multiply the sources of relief to mankind, wherever it suffers. Grave and important as are the difficulties to be surmounted-high as is the duty of settling them and responsible as is the attempt to pervert or thwart the course of its adjustment, we know no mode better calculated to put an end to this unhappy dispute, than a dis passionate review of the whole matter in controversy pre sents. According to the anthority of Mr. Madison, one of the great difficulties incident to the formation of the confederacy, was the case of the Crown lands, which at the commencement of the Revolution were held by the British Crown. No grant for the same having been made prior to the Revolution, these lands were claimed by the States within whose chartered or asserted limits they were, as belonging to them; while on the other hand, it was contended that the united efforts of all the States having been employed in their acquisition, they enured of right for the equal benefit of all.* The controversy which was thus occasioned was long and ardent, and threatened not only the peace, but the stability of the Government.f In a very particular manner did the controversy thus excited, postpone the agreement of the several States to the articles of confederation; which although reported as early as the 12th July, 1776, were debated and amended until the 17th November, 1777, and not finally consummated by the ratification of all the States, until the 1st March, 1781. Until that time, Maryland had refused her assent, on the ground that these vacant lands acquired from the British Crown, should be a common fund. Her objections were only yielded to the promptings of a spirit of patriotism, which induced her to feel the great benefit that would result from an established government, not only on foreign nations, but also on Great Britain. She looked to it also as promising a successful termination of this dangerous and unhappy dispute. Several of the States most largely interested in the subject, influenced no doubt by considerations of the general welfare, yielded to the solicitations of Congress, and ceded for the benefit of the United States, their right in these lands: Congress, on its part, declaring that the territory should be held for the United States, and disposed of for their benefit: That these lands should be held in trust "for the common benefit of the Union," "and formed into republican States, with the same rights of sovereignty, freedom and independence as the other States." Other stipulations were also *2 Mad. Pap. 691. †2 Story Com. 185. 2 Mad. Pap. 689. § Id. 691. #3 Story Com. 185 |