They are all yet in the land of the living; but Horne and Sugden are the only two who are regularly to be found in their old place, pleading before a very different kind of Judge. Wetherell was the same clever, grotesque, vehement person, that he still is in the House of Commons ;-but he deserves a sketch to himself. Hart, who was subsequently Vice-Chancellor, and then Lord Chancellor of Ireland, was a most singular-looking person, and quite a man for a portrait. He was a tall, or rather a long, ill-favoured, elderly man, with a long rugged face, and small dark eyes, which used to glitter in a strange, slow, lazy manner; he wore spectacles, which were uniformly fixed upon the point of a nose, so long, that had he been a short-sighted man, he would have required an eye-glass to see his spectacles. While he spoke, his principal action consisted in pulling off these nose ornaments, and putting them on again. He used to rest himself as tailors do, by standing up, or slowly pacing along with his hands behind him under his gown, as he may be seen in any of the old collections of the caricature shops. He was an extremely able lawyer, and pursued his argument with a most leisure imperturbable obstinacy, in spite of the interruptions and cavillings of his learned friends on the other side. He was as slow and as sure as Lord Eldon himself, or as the death of one's rich relations. Sometimes he smiled, "and smiled in such a sort," as would scare any one accustomed only to smiles of honesty and simplicity. It was good for young lawyers to hear him and Lord Eldon discussing the points of a case; they both knew all its bearings as well as a city clerk does the geography of the desk, at which he has been sitting ten hours a day for five-and-forty years. Agar was loud, bustling, and vulgar, both in appearance and manner. Heald was a tall, handsome man, with a stoop, who spoke with a Lincolnshire brogue, and knew his business well; he was very rich, and when his wife died, and his spirits became very much depressed, he left the bar. Horne was, as he is, frowning and vigorous, and always breathing battle. Shadwell, now the Vice-Chancellor, seemed always to be out of his place, with a lawyer's wig and gown on. His rosy complexion, effeminate voice, and continual simpering smile, gave him an effeminate appearance, and he appeared too well pleased with himself, as he bent forward over his brief, his arms extended, and the points of the fingers and thumb of one hand, joined to the similar extremities of the other, while, smiling all the time, he addressed the Court respecting exceptions, re-hearings, reports of the Master, and other highly interesting topics. He knew practice, however, as well as any man of his standing. Such were the men with whom Mr. Sugden had daily to compete in the exercise of his duties as a Chancery barrister, and it struck me that he always appeared to advantage. He was always at his post, always ready for his cause, even when it was unexpectedly called on, and though he did not advocate it with eloquence, or any particular energy of expression, he spoke with much propriety and gentlemanly ease, and evidently with a most complete knowledge of his subject. Sir Edward is in Court a man of agreeable though not commanding appearance; his figure is neat and small, his face handsome, but the somewhat sunken cheek, and lawyer-like hue of his complexion, are witnesses of the laborious study to which he has de voted himself. The prevailing character of his appearance and manner is neatness. Every thing is compact-every thing ready-every thing well arranged, even to the holding of his pen, so as not to sully his fingers. He sits and stands unusually erect,-one would suppose that having "consulted the authorities," and found that no man could, by taking thought, add a cubit to his stature, he resolved that he would at least not diminish his by a thoughtful stoop. In speaking, he holds his head as high as he possibly can, and rests his left hand on his brief, while his right is stretched out towards the Judge, with the fore-finger extended. In this attitude, he will harangue you for three or four hours at a stretch, in a most even strain of conversational fluency. I do not know a more fluent man,-no breaks, no stops, no difficulty in his discourse, but with no more passion or feeling in it, than in a French tragedy. He is correct, copious, smooth, and intelligible, but without one spark of the soul of oratory. While you listen to him, the blood never rushes to your brow, nor the tear to your eye; you never clench your hand, nor stand with suspended breath, you think he is doing very well, yet you wish he had done— he is the Sir Robert Peel of the Court of Chancery. If he uses a strong expression, it is connected with something technical, which takes away its force, and he will tell the Court that "his client could not dive into the recesses of the plaintiff's heart, and discover that he had determined to resist the payment of costs." Proud of his knowledge of the principles and practice of equity law, he frequently delivers himself as if he were expounding the law to an auditory of pupils, rather than reasoning a particular case for adjudication; and he speaks as though he were reading from one of his books. The facility and neatness of the expression, as well as the nature of the matter spoken, serve to confirm the idea that he is repeating something which he has previously written. I am sure I have sometimes heard him pronounce a doctrine of equity in an epigrammatic manner, very like the following, which is in print:-" Equity looks upon things agreed to be done as actually performed; consequently, when a contract is made for the sale of an estate, equity considers the vendor as a trustee for the purchaser of the estate sold, and the purchaser as a trustee of the purchase-money for the vendor." Sir Edward Sugden is well aware of his own qualifications, and does not always bear them with that meekness, and indulgence to others less informed, which is the best grace of superior ability. He sometimes becomes very elaborately indignant where there is but little occasion, and he is too often short and waspish to his juniors. It is but fair to suppose, however, that these are defects of temper rather than of the heart; and his humane interference respecting the unfortunate people confined for contempt of Court, deserves to be mentioned to his praise, and as a proof that he can feel for the distresses of others, and exert himself for their relief. In Parliament Sir Edward Sugden does not appear to advantage. When he parts with such adventitious dignity as the legal dress affords to personal appearance, he loses more than he can afford, and his Parliamentary speaking has the common fault of lawyers' speeches in Parliament,-it is too prolix, too tame, too much about one thing, for the House of Commons. The pernicious habit which barristers so uniformly indulge in before the Judges, of speaking a long time, and dwelling upon every ramification of the case, in order to twist the mind of the Court or jury from the truth, and the uniformity and declamatory style of their speaking, make them for the most part incapable of taking up the manner which Parliament requires. Lawyers, when they come into the House of Commons, forget that the Judges before whom they usually speak are paid some five or six thousand a-year each for the trouble of listening, and therefore they will listen, though not in the least interested nor amused; but the Members of the House are very differently circumstanced, and they must be interested or amused, in order to induce them to bear a speech patiently. Mr. Campbell interests the House, and has the prudence not to trespass long on their patience. Sir Charles Wetherell amuses them, and is respected for his blunt honesty; so he may talk as long or as short as he pleases, and will be listened to; but Sir Edward Sugden is rather dull and lengthy, and Chancerybarrister-ish. To give an example: he wanted the other night to acquaint the House that the clerks in the Registrar's Office in the Court of Chancery did not give the attendance which they ought, and he stated this simple matter in the bundle of words which follows:-"The effect of the arrangements in the Registrar's Office is, that the officers cannot give the attendance which is necessary. There are frequent complaints, therefore, that business is delayed for want of their attendance. During term time the attendance which the Registrars can give is by no means sufficient. I took the liberty of asking one of those gentlemen how this happened, and he did me the favour to state the facts. He said it was quite impossible that the present number of Registrars could give the attendance required by the great increase of business." Who could patiently listen to such prolixity as this, unless they were well paid for it? Sir Edward should, in the House, carefully eschew lengthiness and solemnity; he has talents for being epigrammatic and pungent, and these he should cultivate for Parliament, dispatching his details with as much brevity as their nature will admit of. Sir Edward's late speech, however, upon the abuses in the Chancery system is, taking it for all in all, an able and candid statement, and the honest desire for reform which it exhibits, is worthy of being mentioned to his praise. We cannot close a sketch. of Sir Edward Sugden at the present time, without some allusion to the palpable hostility which he bears to the present Lord Chancellor, and which he has lately shown in so marked and disagreeable a manner in the Court of Chancery. That so learned and acute an equity lawyer as Sir Edward Sugden should have to act daily as Counsel before a Judge who is not a learned equity lawyer, is doubtless a reasonable cause for some mortification, and, perhaps it may be a public grievance, which Sir Edward would be justified in taking public notice of; but the captious asperity which he has displayed, is professionally unbecoming, and wholly unsuited to the grievance, if such it be. If Sir Edward Sugden thinks the Lord Chancellor unfit for his place, he knows the constitutional mode of seeking redress, and his situation as a Member of Parliament gives him the opportunity to avail himself of this mode; but if he thinks his unfitness is not so glaring as to justify so bold a step, he will act with much more dignity, by giving to the Lord Chancellor all the advantage which he is able from his great knowledge and his position in the Chancery Court, and thus make the best he can of a system, which renders it inevitable that the principal Judge of equity in this country should often be chosen for his abilities as a statesman, without reference to his capabilities as a Judge. It should be remembered also, that Lord Brougham is a man with powers of thought, and habits of industry so wonderfully great, that what would be preposterous with regard to almost any other man, is not so with regard to him. It is certainly impossible that, at his time of life, even with his unparalleled industry, he should ever arrive at the minute and extensive knowledge of the law of real property possessed by Sir Edward Sugden; but the duties of a Chancellor are so numerous, so lofty, and so miscellaneous, that, after all, a man of vast general knowledge, of clear judgment, and great habits of dispatch, is, as the office stands, much more fitted for it than any mere lawyer, however well versed in that branch of the law with which the Court of Chancery chiefly has to do. If Lord Brougham remains in his office two years, and supposing him (which, viewing him as a Judge, we are bound to do,) divested of political prejudices and hostilities, he will then be more fit for his office than any other man in the country; because there is no man, that the country knows any thing about, of so clear, and vigorous, and capacious an understanding. It would be more becoming in Sir Edward Sugden to let such a man alone. STANZAS Oh! ask me not to sing to-night. I sung for friends beloved and dear, I gaze around-I view a throng, M. A. ON THE PRINCIPLES OF PROPERTY AND THE POOR-LAWS. THERE undoubtedly exists both misconception and misrepresentation as to the moral influence of the Poor-laws. Nothing is more common than to hear of their degrading effects, nor of lamentations for the humiliating change they have produced on the spirit of the people. Let us look at the soundness of this general opinion; for, undoubtedly, it seems strange that a provision, intended to lessen the discomforts of poverty, should have a tendency to produce the worst moral result of that evil. The only fair way in which the investigation can proceed, is, First, to ascertain if there be any cause among the higher classes, by which they have an interest in making it felt to be disgraceful to receive assistance from the parish; Second, whether the administrators of the law have any motive to enforce this notion; and Third, if the paupers themselves are likely to admit the correctness of the opinion by which their superiors and the parish officers are seemingly so compassionately affected. With respect to the first inquiry, it must be evident that the rates levied for the support of the poor constitute a great grievance to the rich; and that every addition which happens to parochial distress comes in the shape of a hand into their pockets. An increase of the poor-rates diminishes their ability to procure comforts and pleasures for themselves; it subtracts from their means, and, in consequence, they must have a natural wish that the pauper should, as long as possible, endure the bitterness of his condition patiently, and trouble them as little as he can. Nothing therefore can be more clear, than that the rich should strenuously cherish that pride in the labourer, which has so long made him endeavour to be independent of parish aid. To accept assistance from the poor-rates cannot, indeed, in their eyes, but be the most humbling meanness, and they cannot otherwise, under that feeling, and sympathising with the supposed effects of it on the energies of the kingdom, endeavour, by all imaginable exhortations, to make the poor think of it as they do. But there is perhaps a serious misconception in this. The doctrine is advantageous only to the rich-it is the reverse to the poor. tends to keep in the hands of the former the money absorbed by the poor-rates, and it imposes on the latter a patient endurance of sufferings. There is no equitable result in the practice-all the desirable advantage goes to the rich, and all the privation to the poor. It The result of the second inquiry is equally obvious. The administrators of the law have, without a direct pecuniary motive, a strong inducement to throw every stigma in their power on the practice of asking parish assistance. The operation of it gives them trouble; the voice of complaint and adversity is ever grievous, and it is natural that they should foster the idea of men becoming guilty of meanspiritedness, who rely on aid from their parish. But is it therefore likely that the poor can be of the same opinion as those who are bound by law to contribute to their support, and those who administer the fund formed by the contributions? Undoubtedly not. The progress of knowledge has taught the labourer |