so much honour, and which was heightened by their habits of intimacy, and their opportunities of observing his character; but the virtues by which he was distinguished were not confined within the circle of his acquaintance, or concealed from the view of the world. Every one who saw Mr. Horner had the means of judging of his temper, his mildness, and his personal virtues; for they were seen by all. He carried with him to public life, and into the duties and the business of his public station, all that gentleness of disposition, all that amenity of feeling, which adorned his private life, and endeared him to his private friends. Amidst the heats and contests of the house, amidst the vehemence of political discussion, amidst the greatest conflicts of opinion and opposition of judgement, he main tained the same mildness and serenity of disposition and temper. No eagerness of debate, no warmth of feeling, no enthusiasm for his own opinions, or conviction of the errors of others, ever betrayed him into any uncandid construction of motives, or any asperity towards the conduct of his opponents. His loss was great, and would long be regretted."

Sir S. Romilly said, "that the long and most intimate friendship which he had enjoyed with the honourable member whose loss the house had to deplore, might, he hoped, entitle him to the melancholy satisfaction of saying a few words on this distressing occasion. Though no person better knew, or more highly estimated the private virtues of Mr. Horner than himself, yet, as he was not sure that he should be able to utter what he felt on that subject, he would speak of him only as a public man.

"Of all the estimable qualities

which distinguished his character. he considered as the most valuable that independence of mind which in him was so remarkable. It was from a consciousness of that independence, and from a just sense of its importance, that, at the same time that he was storing his mind with the most various knowledge on all subjects connected with our internal economy and foreign politics, and that he was taking a conspicuous and most successful part in all the great questions which have lately been discussed in parliament, he laboriously devoted himself to all the painful duties of his profession. Though his success at the bar was not at all adequate to his merits, he yet steadfastly persevered in his labours, and seemed to consider it as essential to his independence, that he should look forward to his profession alone for the honours and emoluments to which his extraordinary taients gave him so just a claim.

"In the course of the last twelve years the house had lost some of the most considerable men that ever had enlightened and adorned it': there was this, however, peculiar in their present loss. When those great and eminent men to whom he alluded were taken from them, the house knew the whole extent of the loss it had sustained, for they had arrived at the full maturity of their great powers and endowments. But no person could recollect-how, in every year, since his lamented friend had first taken part in their debates, his talents had been improving, his faculties had been developed, and his commanding eloquence had been rising with the important subjects on which it had been employedhow every session he had spoken with still increasing weight and authority and effect, and had called

forth

forth new resources of his enlightened and comprehensive mind-and not be led to conjecture, that, notwithstanding the great excellence which, in the last session, he had attained, yet if he had been longer spared, he would have discovered powers not yet discovered to the house, and of which perhaps he was unconscious himself. He should very ill express what he felt upon this occasion, if he were to consider the extraordinary qualities which Mr. Horner possessed apart from the ends and objects to which they were directed. The greatest eloquence was in itself only an object of vain and transient admiration; it was only when ennobled by the uses to which it was applied, when directed to great and virtuous ends, to the protection of the oppressed, to the enfranchisement of the enslaved, to the extension of knowledge, to dispelling the clouds of ignorance and superstition, to the advancement of the best interests of the country, and to enlarging the sphere of human happiness, that it became a national benefit and a public blessing; and it was because the powerful talents, of which they were now deprived, had been uniformly exerted in the pursuit and promoting of such objects, that he considered the loss which they had to lament as one of the greatest which, in the present state of this country, it could possibly have sustained."

Mr. W. Elliot." Amongst his other friends, sir, I cannot refuse to myself the melancholy consolation of paying my humble tribute of esteem and affection to the memory of a person, of whose rich, culti vated, and enlightened mind I have so often profited, and whose exquisite talents-whose ardent zeal for truth-whose just, sedate, and discriminating judgement-whose for

cible but chastened eloquence-and, above all, whose inflexible virtue and integrity rendered him one of the most distinguished members of this house, one of the brightest ornaments of the profession to which he belonged, and held him forth as a finished model for the imitation of the rising generation.

"The full amount of such a loss, at such a conjuncture, and under all the various circumstances and considerations of the case, I dare not attempt to estimate. My learned friend (sir S. Romilly) has well observed, that, if the present loss be great, the future is greater: for, by dispensations far above the reach of human scrutiny, he has been taken from us at a period when he was only in his progress towards those high stations in the state, in which, so far as human foresight could discern, his merits must have placed him, and which would have given to his country the full and ripened benefits of his rare and admirable qualities."

Mr. C. Grant "had known his lamented friend before he had distinguished himself so much as he had subsequently done, and could not be silent when such an opportunity occurred of paying a tribute to his memory. Whatever difference of opinion they might have on public questions, he could suspend that difference to admire his talents, his worth, and his virtues. It was not his talents alone that were developed in his eloquence. His eloquence displayed his heart: through it were seen his high-minded probity, his philanthropy, his benevo lence, and all those qualities which not only exacted applause, but excited love. It was the mind that appeared in speeches that gave them character. He would not enter into the account of his private life, al

though

though his private virtues were at least on a level with his public me rits. Amid all the cares and interests of public life, he never lost his relish for domestic society, or his attachment to his family. The last time that he (Mr. G.) conversed with him, he was anticipating with pleasure the arrival of a season of leisure, when he could spend a short time in the bosom of his family, and amid the endearments of his friends. When he looked at his public or private conduct, his virtues, or his talents, he would be allowed to have earned applause to which few other men ever entitled themselves."

Lord Lascelles" hoped to be excused for adding a few words to what had been said, though he had not the honour of a private acquaintance with Mr. Horner, whom he knew only in this house, where they had almost uniformly voted on opposite sides on every great question. Notwithstanding these differences, he had often said in private, that Mr. Horner was one of the greatest ornaments of his country; and he would now say in public, that the country could not have suffered a greater loss. The forms of parlia ment allowed no means of expressing the collective opinion of the house on the honour due to his memory; but it must be consolatory to his friends to see that if it had been possible to have come to such a vote, it would certainly have been unanimous."

The following character, admirable alike for its elegance and its truth, paints some of the features of Mr. Horner's mind not noticed in the eulogiums passed on him in the house of commcns. "With an inflexible integrity and ardent attachment to liberty, Mr. Horner conjoined a temperance and discretion not always found to accompany

these virtues. The respect in which he was held, and the deference with which he was listened to in the house of commons, is a striking proof of the effect of moral qualities in a popular assembly. Without the adventitious aids of station or fortune, he had acquired a weight and influence in parliament, which few men, whose lives were passed in opposition, have been able to obtain; and for this consideration he was infinitely less indebted to his eloquence and talents, eminent as they were, than to the opinion universally entertained of his public and private rectitude. His understand. ing was strong and comprehensive, his knowledge extensive and accurate, his judgement sound and clear, his conduct plain and direct. eloquence, like his character, was grave and forcible, without a particle of vanity or presumption, free from rancour and personality, but full of deep and generous indignation against fraud, hypocrisy, or injustice. He was a warm, zealous, and affectionate friend-high-minded and disinterested in his conduct

His

firm and decided in his opinions modest and unassuming in his manners. To his private friends his death is a calamity they can never cease to deplore. To the public it is a loss not easily to be repaired, and, in times like these, most severely to be felt."

The subject of this well-merited praise, and of all these sincere but ineffectual regrets, was born at Edinburgh, on the 12th of August 1778. In the month of October 1786, he entered the high school of that city and having remained at this seminary for six years, during the four first of which he was the pupil of Mr. Nicol, and the two last of the celebrated Dr. Adam, he passed on to the university in October 1792.

In November 1795, he was placed under the care of the rev. Mr. Hew lett in London, with whom he lived, and who superintended his education for a period of two years. He then returned to Edinburgh, and applied himself to the study of the law, and passed advocate in the year 100. Soon after, he took up his residence in London, with the view of preparing himself for the English bar. In 1806, he was ap pointed by the East India company one of the commissioners for the liquidation of the debts of the nabob of Arcot; but resigned this laborious situation in little more than two years, finding that the duties which it imposed on him were incompatible with the application due to his professional pursuits. In October 1806, he was returned member of parliament for St. Ives. The following year he was elected member for Wendover, and was called to the English bar. In 1813, he In 1813, he was chosen to represent the borough of St. Mawes in the present parlia

ment.

The disease which proved fatal to Mr. Horner was an induration and contraction of the lungs; a ma lady, the existence of which is not marked by any decided symptom; and which is wholly beyond the reach of medical aid. He died at Pisa on the 8th of February 1817, aged thirty-eight years and six months, and was interred in the protestant burying-ground at Leghorn.

The death of Mr. Ponsonby, which took place during the session of 1817, was a loss to the opposition, rather because they were thus deprived of a leader, than on account of any superior or very useful talents which he possessed as a public man.

Between the regular opposition, who on almost all questions act to

gether, and the ardent and extreme reformists, Mr. Brougham and a few members of inferior talents take their stand. Mr. Brougham was the youthful friend and fellow-student of Mr. Horner: they left Edinburgh for London nearly at the same time; they were first brought into the notice and attracted the respect of the literary world, by their ar ticles on politics and political economy in the Edinburgh Review. Great expectations were formed of Mr. Brougham when he first entered public life; but these have in some measure been disappointed: that his talents are of a very superior order,-that his information is very extensive,-that his eloquence is uncommonly ready, clear, exuberant and tasteful, no one will deny; in most of these respects he is superior to his friend Mr. Horner; but he falls far below him in those qualifications, without which the most splendid talents and eloquence must be of little avail, in commanding respect or producing benefit. Mr. Horner never spoke except on subjects, that not only fell within the general sphere of his reading and reflection, but had been purposely and particularly studied by him for the occasion :-hence all he said was fraught with good sense;

it showed him master of his subject. Besides, he carefully abstained from introducing irrelevant matter; especially such as would irritate rather than persuade. Mr. Brougham, on the contrary, speaks on many subjects of which he is not master; hazards assertions not sufficiently proved, and arguments not suffi ciently weighed: tries to irritate, and too often loses his own temper; mixes up irrelevant matter; and, in short, has more than once, by his violence and want of judgement, materially injured the cause he was

desirous

desirous to support. On other occasions, however, when he has well studied his subject, and brought to bear upon it his luminous and powerful mind, under the guidance and control of good sense, moderation and temper, he has spoken with wonderful effect.

Of his political opinions regarding the great subject of parliamentary reform, it is impossible from his speeches to obtain a clear idea: sometimes he seems disposed to join sir Francis Burdett; on other occasions he has bent the full force of his intellect and superior information to overwhelm the crude and erroneous opinions that have been broached in the house of commons by lord Cochrane and some other of the ultra reformists.

From the sketch we have given of the political parties as they existed in 1817, it will be evident that there is a regular gradation from one extreme to another. Placing ministers at one end of the line, we have next lord Grenville and his friends: perhaps, however, nearer to ministers may be placed what is called the religious party in the house of commons, namely, Mr. Wilberforce and his friends, who, though they generally support ministers, on some important questions oppose them. Next to the parties of lord Grenville and Mr. Wilberforce, there is a branch that has very lately broken off from the opposition; or rather, a few members who on some questions (but not so many or such important ones as receive the support of lord Grenville and Mr. Wilberforce, and their respective friends,) vote with ministers. Next to these is the old and regular opposition; at the head of which, during the session of 1817, were Mr. Ponsonby and Mr. Tierney. The members composing this

old and regular opposition may be considered as occupying the middle of the line. Beyond them a few members take their place (such as Mr. Brougham), who on many points are disposed to go further than the opposition, but who stop short of the principles and projects of the ultra-reformers.

The great distinction between the regular opposition and the reformers seems to be this :-the former think that the machinery of government, as at present consti tuted, is good, and quite efficient for all beneficial purposes, provided it was superintended and watched by able people: the reformers, on the other hand, contend, that the machinery is so ill constructed in its parts, and also in its principles, that no talents, skill, or attention, could make it perform its work well. The opposition wish for retrenchment to a certain degree.and for a change in some parts of our domestic and foreign policy; but they would not touch, or only slightly and superficially touch, the house of commons as at present constituted. The reformers, on the contrary, would change the representation at once, and most materially; contending, that the house of commons, as now constituted, is the cause of all the distress under which the country labours, and of all the infringement on liberty by which the nation is oppressed; and that it is a mockery and insult to the people, to promise them any amelioration of their condition, so long as they are not fairly and fully represented.

In our volume for the year 1816, we stated that reformers, more violent and disposed to proceed to greater lengths than even sir Francis Burdett, had sprung up. With these sir Francis was not inclined

to