can make any law, but the three must mutually join; when, from their united influence spring those laws that are obligatory on the subject, In this sense the lords spiritual by themselves, have no pretence to be a distinct estate; that is they have not by themselves a negative voice, which is, as I conceive, (it is Mr, Care that speaks) the proper characteristic or essential mark of each of the three estates; for, suppose a bill pass the Commons, and being brought into the house of Lords, and the 26 bishops should be against it, and some of the temporal lords, yet if the other temporal lords are more in number than the bishops, and those that are with them, the bill shall pass as the act of the whole house; and if his Majesty please to give it his royal assent, it is undoubtedly law. This sufficiently shews that the bishops of themselves have not as a distinct estate a negative voice, and consequently are not of themselves of the estates of the realm." British Liberties, p. 148.

You inform us Mr. Editor, p. lxxxvii."That Lord Grenville begged leave to correct an error into which his noble friend, Earl Spencer had, he was sure, inadvertently fallen, in calling the sovereign power of this country the third estate of the realm." (Lord G. I suppose meant the sovereign himself, and not the sovereign power which our writers in general call the legislative power.) "He (Lord G.) had heard this expression with the more concern, for it was an error too prevalent, and which in his opinion had a tendency to misrepresent and degrade the monarchy." ~(Indeed! I should think the monarch very much injured and degraded too by being left out of this tripartite division,--degraded truly! by exercising as much power in the legislature as the whole collective body of Lords, and that of the Commous each separately possess: but now for the cream of it -) "The no

bility, the clergy, and the Commons represented in parliament, were the three estates of the realm, and the subjects of the sovereign head the King."-Head !-head of what? this is rather an unfortunate word, this head, we plainly see what his lordship is driving at ;-he is a great statesman, in the opinion of the Morning Chronicle at least! He wants to have a parliament without a king, and an operative parliament too; one that can make laws and bind the prince, &c. and yet be the subjects of the sovereign, and consequently obedient, and loyal, and so forth; but then come the word head which spoils all, for what does that mean but caput parliamenti, and is not the head a part of the body? The parliament without a king has been called, and very properly, a headless trunk, but what pray would the king be were he turned out of parliament, agreeably to the sage politics of Lord Grenville? Does not a trunkless head make as wretched a figure as a headless trunk? There was a time when such an exhibition was witnessed in this country, about a century and a half ago: we had then a parliament without a head, and unfortunately a monarch likewise under a similar predicament. One would think that his lordship would be more tender than in alluding to such doctrines as these; but he thinks he has a plaister for the sore, by making his headless parliament the subject of the monarch; yet I think he would do better to leave the body politic entire with its head on, and if he needs must be guillotining, try to chop off the head of that monster, commonly called faction. In my opinion you guessed shrewdly Mr. Editor, when you supposed his lordship's Oxonian friends had put this new state crotchet into his head; though it is not quite new neither, for the clergy have often attempted to erect themselves into a separate estate, but they could

never bring the point to bear. On the 21st July, 1683, the university of Oxford made a famous declaration in full convention, in which among other things it was declared, that it was "a pernicious and damnable doctrine to say, that the sovereignty of England is vested in three estates of King, Lords and Commons." Another circumstance I beg to call to your recollection, the protest of the bishops in 1681. We are told by Lord Clarendon, Vol. I. p. 354. that in consequence of this protest," the Commons impeached the bishops of high treason, in regard that they claimed to be a distinct estate, having a voice upon the matter as negative as the king's, which inferred a fourth estate, or negative in parliament; and therefore the Commons urged that this proceeding of the bishops tended to subvert the constitution, and to change the fundamental form of the government."

This in my humble opinion is no bad hint for his lordship; and indeed, for our statesmen in general, who are daily racking and torturing the constitution, to make it assume such a shape and form as suits their purposes. To subvert the constitution is high treason; that is evident; and yet we hear of some of these great statesmen who would throw the monarch overboard; of others who would substitute his great seal in the place of himself; and of others again who barter away the representative rights of the people, and are excused from the very notoriety of the traffic! Notwithstanding all this, it is a fact, that to subvert the constitution is high treason; but our statesmen are not such subverters; they are all wise and virtuous men. You have Sir, told us what was said to a poor unfortunate individual who dared to question this-it was said to him, at the time that he was consigned to a house of correction for twelve months, in order to vindicate the character of one of these virtuous

fit to charge his lordship with acting in his high capacity from mo"tives of personal ill will towards a private individual; and with having made use of his authority and "influence, as secretary of state, to "harrass and oppress such indivi"dual, in a way, which, if true, "would not only render him unfit to "fill that high station in which he "had been placed, but would prove

one of the most base of individuals." (Pol. Rev. Vol. VIII. p. 400.) Such punishments may no doubt deter the populace from calling these honourable subverters of our representative rights," the most base of individuals;" but they will hardly convince the people that they enjoy all the birthright blessings of the constitution;-They will hardly con vince the people that as our ances tors held it high treason to subvert that constitution, it can be a crime in us, their descendants to restore it to its genuine purity, by the means of a parliamentary reform.

I am, Sir, &c.

TIMOTHY TRUEMAN. Devonshire, March 10.

P.S. In the time of Elizabeth it appears that there was an affectation to consider parliament as comprising the three estates without the mo narch; all the kingdoms on the continent had formerly an assembly of estates comprising the three orders of clergy, nobility, and commons, or the tiers etat, and Queen Elizabeth affected to consider her parliament in that light; they even addressed her,We your most loving and faithful subjects representing the three estates of your realm of England. But we cannot call this the language of the constitution; for a regard to which her reign is by no means remarkable. When the lords and commons sat together, and voted together, parliament then was said

to consist of six estates, or more properly speaking, six ranks or degrees, thus enumerated, Lex Parl. p. 59. Rex est caput principium et finis parliamenti, et ita non habet parem in suo gradu, et sic a rege solo primus gradus est. Secundus gradus est ex archiepiscopis, episcopis, abbatibus, prioribus, per baroniain. Tertius gradus est de procuratoribus cleri, Quartus gradus est de comitibus baronibus et aliis magnatibus. Quintus gradus est de militibus comitatuum. Sextus gradus est de civibus et burgensibus et ita est parlamentum ex sex gradibus. The king is the head, commencement, and conclusion of parliament, and therefore without equal in his rank; he is the first degree. The second rank or degree consists of the archbishops, bishops, abbots, and priors, who hold by barony. The third rank consists of the proctors or representatives of the clergy. The fourth rank is the counts, barons, and other magnats, or great men. The fifth is composed of the knights. And the sixth of the citizens and burgesses. And thus parliament consists of six estates or degrees. This was the state of parliament from before the conquest (as it is called) says Minshiew, till the separation into two houses. So far from the clergy forming a distinct estate, it appears that as clergy they are not recognised at all by the constitution, that they are received in parliament in a lay light only, per baronium et liberum tenementum, with a view to their temporal interests in consequence of the baronies and freeholds in their possession. The procuratores cleri or proctors no longer exist, because the inferior clergy are represented by the knights of counties, and as to the archbishops, bishops, abbots, &c. we perceive they did. not sit as spiritual lords but per baroniam, in consequence of the baronies they held; in like manner the inferior clergy vote for knights of the shife as holders of freeholds which

their benefices really are. It was the separation of the houses that naturally produced the division into three estates, the King representing the monarchical part of the constitution, the Lords representing baronies in lay and spiritual hands, the Commons representing the freeholders and free burghers,

REMARKS ON A PASSAGE IN MISS PLUMPTRE'S NARRATIVE &c.

SIR,

Chance has lately put into my hands a work entitled: "A Narrative of a three years' residence in France," by a certain ANNE PLUMP TRE, who pretends to know every thing from the best authority, and who professes herself an enthusiastic admirer of liberty, and consequently of its destroyer, Buonaparte.

Although I intend to bestow some comments and strictures upon the whole performance of this Miss Anne Plumptre, yet an event she relates in explanation of an equivocal statement of Mr. Burdon, affords such a specimen of the accuracy of her own narrative, that I beg to recommend it to your Political Review, without delay.

*

In page 363, volume the 3d. she quotes from Mr. Burdon the following passage.

"The younger Polignac, who "with his brother was arrested,' as "being concerned in the plot of "Pichegru and Georges for the re"establishment of the monarchy,

"had himself no tie to render his "life of any importance."

Miss Aune Plumptre then observes: So far Mr. Burdon relates to the infinite honour of the younger Polignac; but here he leaves "the story, with the impression upon the reader's mind, that his prayer was granted, and that he was executed; he could not pre"vail upon himself to add, what “in justice he ought to have added, that a free pardon was granted by "Bonaparte to both the Messieurs Bonaparte to both the Messieurs "Polignac."

66

Thus Miss Anne Plumptre assumes to correct Mr. Burdon's state

ment, (which is certainly erroneous) by a statement still more erroneous, Doubtless Miss Anne Plumptre will admit as correct, the statement of Buonaparte's official Moniteur, which, under the date of the 27th of June, 1807, noticed, that the reprieved Armand-François-Heraclius Polignac was to be confined four years in the castle of Ham, in Picardy, and afterwards transported ; and that his brother Jules Polignac should be confined two years in the same prison. Wonderful mercy!

It was not the brother, (who was bimself under confinement) but the wife of the condemned Polignac, who solicited and obtained of Bonaparte the life of her husband.

In addition to the above instance

of the perversion of truth by Miss Anne Plumptre, who was then in France, and must have read the French papers, she may be charged with carelessness in quoting verses from Voltaire, and ascribing them

"Le premier qui fut roi, un soldat ❝heureux;

"Qui sert bien son pays, n'a pas besoin d'ayeux."

These verses are in the mouth of Poliphonte, in the tragedy of Merope, by Voltaire.

incorrect in ascribing to Bonaparte's Miss Anne Plumptre is equally her 3d volume. Among the various Joséphine the verses at the end of accomplishments of the creole Josè phine Lapagérie, she never could boast of poetry.

The quoted verses were written who was the mother of Joséphine's by the Countess de Beauharnois, first and unfortunate husband. The Countess de Beauharnois wrote also the following ingenious verses on the occasion of the late queen of France, Marie-Antoinette's first child, (now Duchess of Angoulême) born in

1788:

"Oui, pour Fée étourdie à vos
"traits je me livre ;
"Mais si ma prophétie a manqué
"son effet,

"Il faut Vous l'avouer, c'est que'n
" ouvrant mon livre,

"J'avais, pour le premier, pris le "le second feuillet."

This alluded to the Countess's mistake in having predicted to the queen that her first child would be a male and not a female. The dis

appointment is happily expessed.

Plumptre's faithful narrative will not
This specimen of Miss Anne
be the only one offered to the public.
I remain, Sir,

Your humble Servant,
W. B.

Epping, March 15.

REMARKS ON THE SPEECH OF

THE PRINCE REGENT.

[From the Moniteur.]

House of Lords, Feb. 12. The Lord Chancellor read the speech of the Regent for opening the session, which was as follows:

[Here follows the whole of the speech, from which we select such passages only as are commented upon.]

Speech-(1)" The capture of the "Islands of Bourbon and Amboyna "have still further reduced the colo"nial dependencies of the enemy." Note in the Moniteur.-The naval superiority of the enemy necessarily places at his disposal all the small French colonies. Martinique, Guadaloupe, the Isle of Reunion, the isle of France, must of course be long to the squadrous which had the command of the ocean. Their garrisons could not have amounted at most to more than 2000 men, Had they been more numerous, they could not have procured means of subsistence. It is evident that 2000 men, at a thousand leagues distance from their country, could not make an effectual resistance when they should become the object of the successive attacks of 12,000 men.

But is the occupation of these colonies by the English a inisfortune to France under existing circumstances?

These colonies suffered much from the strict blockade in which they were held. The connection which binds these colonies to the mother country will become more close, and their haughtiness will encrease under the tyranny of a government which finds no greater pleasure than that of humbling every thing that falls under its power. The inhabitants of Canada, who have been sc

parated from France for a century, are still as much French as the inhabitants of the banks of the Loire."

In the present state of affairs, Mar tinique, Guadaloupe, the isles of Reunion and France, furnished nothing to the parent state, and cost it more than twenty millions a year. These twenty millions would build ten ships of the line a year; which at the end of the five or six years that the war may probably lust, will produce fifty ships of the line.

The coffee, sugar, and cotton, which these colonies produced, are at so cheap a rate in London, that their sale will not pay the expence of carriage to Europe. It is doubtful whether these islands will sup port the expence of the government and the military which the English government will be obliged to maintain there. They must keep up gar risons in them. In scattering her forces England will become vulnerable in a great number of points.

The colonies occupied by England will be restored to the mother country at a peace, or when the empire shall have 120 sail of the line, and 200 frigates or smaller vessels. This period, which is foreseen and calculated, is not far distant from us.

The possibility of having so great a naval force, arises from the parti cular situation of the empire. The woods of Istria, Italy, France, and Germany, reach us by the rivers of which we command the navigation. The Adriatic, the Zuyder sea, the Scheldt, the roads of Brest and Toulon, the coasting trade of the immense maritime borders of the empire, serve to instruct our sailors, and furnish us with the means of manning all the vessels we can build.

(2) Speech- "The attack on the "island of Sicily, which was an"nounced to the world with a presumptuous anticipation of success,