not say I have been right through life; I may have been wrong; but I will say that I have been consistent." SPENCER PERCEVAL. (1762-1812.) His Parliamentary Career.-Mr. Spencer Perceval, who was second son of the Earl of Egmont, was returned to Parliament for Northampton in 1796, being at the time leader of the Oxford Circuit. He supported Pitt warmly, and the minister, on the occasion of his duel with Tierney, named Perceval as competent to succeed him in the government, should he fall. He took office as Attorney-General under Addington, and in the Duke of Portland's ministry was made Chancellor of the Exchequer. He became Premier on the death of the duke in 1807. A Chancellor's Difficulty.-The illness of George III. in 1811, which incapacitated him for affixing his sign-manual to bills, gave rise to a singular discussion in the House of Commons. The matter is thus referred to in the Malmesbury Correspondence:-"Mr. Ross to the Earl of Malmesbury. Spring Gardens, January 4th, 1811. The business that is to come on in the House of Commons to-night offers none of the least curious circumstances of the present eventful times. That two deputy clerks, whose salaries are not more than 150l. per annum each, should have had the power of stopping the issue of 1,500,000l. of the public money, seems extraordinary, but so it is. Mr. Perceval (Chancellor of the Exchequer) used every means to persuade them to put the privy seal to the warrant, and amongst other reasons endeavoured to prove to them that, as the King only signed but did not write the bill (for so I understand it is called), they might venture to do it without the sign-manual. Their oath is not to put the privy seal to any bill which has not the signmanual." The sum in question was required for the service of the army and navy, and to meet the emergency the Chancellor of the Exchequer moved a resolution which was agreed to by the House, commanding the auditor and officers of the Exchequer to pay such sums as the exigency required, upon the warrants of any three or more of the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. This resolution of the Commons was also agreed to by the House of Lords. His Assassination.-On the 11th of May, 1812, Mr. Perceval was to give evidence before a committee of the whole house as to the effect produced on the trade of the country by the Orders in Council, and, there being much excitement at the time, the lobby was full of members and visitors. As he entered it with his friend Mr. Stephen, a pistol shot was heard, and the Premier, staggering forward toward the door of the house, fell upon his face. The ball had struck him near the heart, and in a few minutes he was dead. The man who fired the pistol was seized by two members standing by-General Gascoyne and Mr. Joseph Hume -and the former recognised him as John Bellingham, who had been a merchant in Liverpool, and who had been vainly seeking redress for an unjust imprisonment which he had suffered in St. Petersburg. He com plained that his suit had been neglected by Lord Granville, the English ambassador there, and said he intended to shoot his lordship had not Mr. Perceval fallen in the way; but he had no grievance against the Minister personally. He was tried, condemned, and executed within a week after firing the shot. An annuity of 20001. was voted to Mrs. Perceval, and a sum of 50,000l. to be vested in trustees for the benefit of her children. It was remembered as a remarkable circumstance that Mr. Perceval had said in the House, in 1802, with reference to the trial of the Frenchman Peltier for a libel against Napoleon, "There is something so base and disgraceful-there is something so contrary to everything that belongs to the character of an Englishman-there is something so immoral in the idea of assassination, that the exhortation to assassinate this or any other chief magistrate would be a crime against the honourable feelings of the English law." ROBERT JENKINSON, EARL OF LIVERPOOL. (1770-1828.) Superlative Praise.-In the course of the year 1790, the authority of Sir James Lowther over the borough of Appleby-the same which had the honour of giving Pitt the first opportunity of displaying his precocious genius to the Parliament of his country-was exerted to procure the election of Mr. Jenkinson (afterwards the second Lord Liverpool). He did not rise in the house till he had been for above a year a member of it; though it is no slight proof how great was the expectation which was already formed of him that, on the occasion of Mr. Whitbread moving a censure on the Government on the question known as the Russian Armament, Pitt selected him to open the debate on his side. Our parliamentary annals have recorded no maiden speech which made so great an impression. Pitt himself began his own harangue by pronouncing it "not only a more able first speech than had ever been heard from a young member, but one so full of philosophy and science, strong and perspicuous language, and sound and convincing arguments, that it would have done credit to the most practised debater and most experienced statesman that ever existed."-Yonge's "Life of Liverpool." Respectable Mediocrity.-Lord Liverpool held office as Prime Minister for the fifteen years from 1812 to 1827-a term exceeded only by Sir Robert Walpole and the younger Pitt. Lord Brougham says of him, 'No minister-nay, few men in any subordinate public station-ever passed his time with so little ill-will directed towards himself, had so much forbearance shown him upon all occasions, nay, few engaged uniformly so large a share of personal esteem. To what did he owe the rare felicity of his lot? This question may, perhaps, be answered by observing that the abilities of Lord Liverpool were far more solid than shining, and that men are apt to be jealous, perhaps envious, certainly distrustful, of great and brilliant genius in statesmen. Respectable mediocrity offends nobody. . . No popular outcry ever assailed Lord Liverpool. While others were the objects of alternate execration and scorn, he was generally respected. The fate that befel him was that which might have mortified others, but well suited his tastes-to be little thought of, less talked about; or if, in debate, any measure was to be exposed, any member to be attacked, means were ever found, nay, pains were taken, to "assure the House that nothing was meant against the respected nobleman at the head of his Majesty's Government, for whom we all entertain feelings of et cetera, and of et cetera, and of et cetera." His Character as a Debater.-He was never known (writes Brougham) to utter a word at which any one could take exception. He was, besides, the most fair and candid of all debaters. No advantage to be derived from a misrepresentation, or even an omission, ever tempted him to forego the honest and the manly satisfaction of stating the fact as it was, treating his adversary as he deserved, and at least reciting fairly what had been urged against him, if he could not successfully answer it. JOHN HORNE TOOKE. His Return for Old Sarum.-Professor Pryme relates that Lord Camelford once took a freak to cross in a boat from Dover to Calais, while we were at war with France. The police, hearing of his design, apprehended him. Mr. Pitt, who was his kinsman, instituted an inquiry, and in a few days ordered his release. Lord Camelford was so angry at his not giving, on hearing who it was that had been arrested, an instant order for his discharge, that he said to Horne Tooke, with whom he was well acquainted, "How can I avenge myself?" He answered that he could do it very well by putting his black servant, Mungo, into his borough of Old Sarum. Lord Camelford agreed, but the next day thought better of it, and told Horne Tooke so. 'Well," said he, "then the next best thing you can do is to put me in." This was done, and Horne Tooke, who had in early life taken holy orders, sat till the end of that Parliament. Addington, then Prime Minister, timidly dreading his eloquent attacks, to get rid of him had a bill brought in to prevent clergymen being returned as representatives. 66 Exclusion of Clergymen.-Horne Tooke entered the House on the 16th of February, 1801. He was introduced by Sir Francis Burdett and Mr. Wilson. This being done, Earl Temple rose and said, "he had observed a gentleman who had just retired from the table after having taken the oaths, whom he conceived incapable of a seat in that House, in consequence of his having taken priest's orders and been inducted into a living. He should wait the allotted time of fourteen days, to see whether there was any petition presented against this return. If not, he should then move that the return for Old Sarum be taken into consideration." Three days after, the clerical member addressed the House on Mr. Sturt's motion respecting the failure of the expedition to Ferrol. In supporting the motion he said: "If the House refuse to go into a committee of inquiry, with what propriety can they enter into the merits of the borough of Old Sarum and its member? How can they plunge themselves into inquiries and discussions about what is or is not a priest, and whether a thirty years' quarantine is not sufficient to guard against the infection of his original character? Yet, in recommending this line of conduct to the House, I sacrifice my interest to my duty, as well as I sacrifice my wishes to truth, in defending the right honourable Secretary of State-a service which he never has done, and I daresay never will do, for me." On the 10th of March, at the instance of Earl Temple, a committee was appointed to inquire into the eligibility of persons in holy orders to sit in the House. The result was the passing of a bill (May 19th) to prevent it, and in consequence Horne Tooke was unable to offer himself for re-election, after the dissolution in the following year. Before the bill passed, however, Tooke proposed an amendment, which was negatived. In support of his amendment he entertained the House with an illustrative anecdote. "He had heard of casuists splitting hairs, but this was the first instance he ever heard of a casuist splitting sacraments; and he was sure the learned gentleman (Sir W. Scott) must have borrowed the idea from a learned casuist in divinity, of whose intense research and perspicacity he would relate an anecdote. The divine alluded to wished to investigate the mystery related in the Scripture, of the legion of devils entering into a herd of swine; and, in order first to ascertain the number of devils composing a legion, he applied to his glossary, and found that a legion in the Roman army meant a certain number of men, more or less in different reigns; but he took as his medium the number as it stood in the reign of Tiberius. He next set about inquiring into the number that composed a herd of swine, and for this purpose he directed his investigations into Syria and other countries; and having taken the swineries of Mesopotamia as the most probable standard, he divided the number of a herd there by the number he had before ascertained of a legion, and the quotient proved to him that each hog was possessed of exactly a devil and a half, or somewhat less than a devil and three-quarters. The name of the divine was Dr. Smallwell, or Smallbridge, or Smallbrock; but ever after the learned casuist was called Dr. Splitdevil." Good Authority.-" So I understand, Mr. Tooke, you have all the blackguards in London with you," said O'Brien to him on the hustings at Westminster. "I am happy to have it, sir, on such good authority."S. Rogers' "Recollections." LORD BYRON. Byron's First Speech.-He made his first speech in the House of Lords in February, 1812, on the Nottingham Frame-breaking Bill. He was then twenty-four years of age. In a letter addressed to a friend soon afterwards he writes: " Lords Holland and Grenville, particularly the latter, paid me some high compliments in the course of their speeches, as * In 1873, the Hon. H. Villiers Stuart, who had been in holy orders but had divested himself of them under the provisions of a recent Act, was returned to Parliament for the county of Waterford, and was the first ex-clergyman after Horne Tooke to enter the House of Commons. you may have seen in the papers, and Lords Eldon and Harrowby answered me. I have had many marvellous eulogies repeated to me since, in person and by proxy, from divers persons ministerial-yea, ministerial!—as well as oppositionists; of them I shall only mention Sir F. Burdett. He says it is the best speech by a lord since the 'Lord knows when,' probably from a fellow-feeling in the sentiments. Lord H. tells me I shall beat them all if I persevere; and Lord G. remarked that the construction of some of my periods are very like Burke's!! And so much for vanity. I spoke very violent sentences with a sort of modest impudence, abused everything and everybody, and put the Lord Chancellor (Eldon) very much out of humour; and, if I may believe what I hear, have not lost any character by the experiment. As to my delivery, loud and fluent enough, perhaps a little theatrical. I could not recognise myself or any one else in the newspapers." A Forgotten Grievance.-Byron's second display, says Moore, was less promising than his first. "His delivery was thought mouthing and theatrical, being infected, I take for granted (having never heard him speak in Parliament), with the same chanting tone that disfigured his recitation of poetry." In the following year he made his third and last appearance as an orator in the Lords. "In his way home,” writes Moore again," he called at my lodgings. He was, I recollect, in a state of most humorous exaltation after his display, and spouted forth, in a sort of mock heroic voice, detached sentences of the speech he had just been delivering. I told them,' he said, 'that it was a most flagrant violation of the constitution-that, if such things were permitted, there was an end of English freedom.' 'But what was this dreadful grievance ?' I asked, interrupting him in his eloquence. The grievance ?' he repeated, pausing, as if to consider. Oh, that I forget.' man. Prose versus Poetry.-Reviewing his own parliamentary appearances, Byron thus wrote: "Sheridan told me he was sure I should make an orator, if I would but take to speaking, and grow a Parliament He never ceased harping upon this to me to the last; and I remember my old tutor, Dr. Drury, had the same notion when I was a boy; but it never was my turn of inclination to try. I spoke once or twice, as all young peers do, as a kind of introduction into public life; but dissipation, shyness, haughty and reserved opinions, together with the short time I lived in England after my majority (only about five years in all), prevented me from resuming the experiment. As far as it went, it was not discouraging, particularly my first speech (I spoke three or four times in all); but just after it my poem of 'Childe Harold' was published, and nobody ever thought about my prose afterwards, nor indeed did I; it became to me a secondary and neglected object, though I sometimes wonder to myself if I should have succeeded." Parliamentary Impressions. "I never," said Byron, "heard the speech that was not too long for the auditors, and not very intelligible, except here and there. The whole thing is a grand deception, and as tedious and tiresome as may be, to those who must be often present. The impression of Parliament upon me was that the . |