accomplishments which were thought fuitable to their rank and for tune. The account of their difpofitions, and progrefs in education, is related in a train of panegyrical narrative that proves interefting from the amiablenefs of their characters, and the delicate fenfibility of the ladies who are reprefented as the guardians of their youth. Befides thefe, a variety of perfonages are introduced in the courfe of the correfpondence; and feveral incidents are the confequence. But fome of the latter, however natural, feem not entirely confiftent with the defign infinuated in the beginning of the novel, and which; through a great part of it, is the burden of the narrative. The catastrophe, indeed, it may be faid, has not yet taken place; and we are ready to admit the apology; but we think that the history has proceeded fo far, as to involve no little embarraffment in difentangling, at least one of the young ladies, from the unexpected indifcretion into which he has precipitated herself. The work, however, is written with much delicacy, vivacity, and fentiment; and may afford gratification to a reader whofe tafte is even faftidious with regard to the common run of novels.

ART. 32. The Infufficiency of the Caufes to which the Increase of the Poor, and of the Poor's-Lates, have been commonly afcribed; the true one flated; with an Inquiry into the Mortality of Country Houses of Indufiry; and a flight general View of Mr. Ackland's Plan for rendering the Poor independent. By the Rev. J. Howlett, Vicar of Dunmow, Effex. 8vo. 1s. 6d. Richardfon. London, 1788.

The caufes commonly affigned for the increafe of the poor are, the injudicious fyftem of poor's-laws, and their defective execution the great number of alehoufes; the growing profligacy of the poor; and the engroffing of farms. Mr. Howlett, however, is of opinion that, though each of these caufes may have incidentally contributed fomething, they are by no means adequate to the effect. The prin cipal caufe, according to his idea, and which has operated in other countries as well as our own, has been the greater advance in the price of provifions than in the price of labour. How far this opinion is confonant to experience, would require very minute and extenfive obfervation to determine. Towards establishing the fact, it would be neceffary to afcertain the annual price of provifions in the different counties of England for feveral years back, with the correfpondent increafe of the poor. This calculation Mr. Howlett has not attempted, and the conclufion which he draws must therefore prove unfatisfactory; but he makes many judicious obfervations relative to the poor; and what he advances, merits the confideration of thofe who would inveftigate the fubject with accuracy.

ART. 33. The Subfance of the Speech of Henry Beaufoy, Efq. to the British Society for extending the Fisheries, &c. at their General Court, held on Tuesday, March 25, 1788. To which is added a Copy of the Act for the Society's Incorporation. 8vo. 2s. Cadell. London, 1788.

In this Speech Mr. Beaufoy gives a general account of the conduct of the directors of the Society, from their appointment in the month

month of August, 1786, to that of June in the following year. He then lays before the Society fuch obfervations on the general state of the country in the north weft part of Great-Britain, and on the peculiar circumftances of its coafts, as his late tour had fuggefted; and he afterwards ftates the principal proceedings of the directors, from the return of their committee of infpection to the 25th of March last. The whole fpeech is perfpicuous, and difcovers a laudable zeal and exertion for extending thofe fisheries which are the object of this ufeful fociety. It appears that, at the time when this fpeech was delivered, their fubfcriptions amounted to twenty-feven thousand pounds.

ART. 34. The Arguments of Counsel in the Ecclefiaftical Court in the Caufe of Inglefield; with the Speech of Dr. Calvert at giving Judgment. Printed from an authentic Copy of Gurney's Short-hand Notes, 8vo. 15. Murray. London, 1787.

This pamphlet contains the arguments of Dr. Harris and Dr. Compton in behalf of Mrs. Inglefield, who inftituted a fuit in the Ecclefiaftical Court against her husband, on account of desertion; with the replies of Dr. Wynne, and Dr. Scott, and the fentence of the judge. The allegation of the counfel in behalf of Mr. Inglefield for not cohabiting with his wife, was, adultery, in Mrs. Inglefield, of which the judge did not think there was fufficient proof, and therefore gave the decree applied for by the counfel in behalf of Mrs. Inglefield, which was a reftitution of conjugal rights, and a monition to Mr. Inglefield to treat his wife kindly. We think the fewer remarks that are made on a pamphlet of this nature the better. All that we have to obferve is, that the fpeech of Dr. Scott feems to us, in point of language and argument, though fhort, one of the most clear, eloquent, and mafterly compofitions that we have met with for a long time; and as fuch we take the liberty of recommending an attentive perufal of it, not only to profeffional men of the law, but to all thofe who afpire to the palm of eloquence. ART. 35. Mrs. Inglefield's fuftification; containing the Proceedings in the Ecclefiaftical Court, before the Right Worshipful Dr. Calvert, LL.D. with a Preface and Notes by Mrs. Ann Inglefield. 8vo. Is. Sewell, London, 1787.

The proceedings here publifhed contain extracts from the allegations and depofitions of witneffes as ftated by the counfel on each fide at the opening of the caufe, with their feveral fpeeches, which we have already noticed. Mrs. Inglefield then, in a fummary addrefs to the public, recapitulates the whole of the evidence, and makes fome remarks on its abfurdity and inconfiftency, in order to make her innocence appear more ftrongly. In the appendix, fhe has given the depofitions at length of the principal witneffes in her behalf. The preface is an apology from Mrs. Inglefield for inftituting a fuit of defertion in the Commons against her husband, which the fays was done folely to clear her character to the world, and her children. She here mentions feveral particulars refpecting her

conduct,

conduct, which, it appears, have been miftated, and were spread abroad to prejudice her in the eyes of the world.

ART. 36. Captain Inglefield's Vindication of his Conduct; or, A Reply to a Pamphlet entitled Mrs. Inglefield's Juftification. 8vo. is. Murray. London, 1787.

It rarely happens, when two people differ, but that there are faults and miftatements on both fides. This pamphlet is an attack upon several affertions made by Mrs. Inglefield in her juftification refpecting Mr. Inglefield's family; the receipts and disbursements of monies not unaccounted for; and other particulars; which we cannot help joining in opinion with Mr. Inglefield's friends, whom our author, at the beginning of his pamphlet obferves, were for recommending him not to notice.

ART. 37. An Answer to Captain Inglefield's Vindication of his Condu&t. 8vo. Is. Sewell. London, 1787.

We cannot refrain from making the fame remark on this pamphlet we did on the preceding one, that it would have been much better, after a final fentence in a court of law, to let fuch an unhappy fubject of difcuffion be buried in oblivion. After Mrs. Inglefield had given the beft juftification to the world in her power, by a fummary of the proceedings in the Ecclefiaftical Court, we think the might have ftopped. This pamphlet is written to controvert feveral affertions made by Mr. Inglefield refpecting her extravagance, her being familiar with Webb the black, and other matters tending to reprefent Mrs. Inglefield's conduct in a disadvantageous point of view to the world.

ART. 38. Two Pair of Portraits, prefented to all the unbiaffed Electors of Great Britain, and especially to the Electors of Westminster, By John Horn Togke, an Elector of Westminster. 8vo. Is. Johnfon. London, 1788.

Envy and disappointment at the defeat which the party of this learned gentleman met with in the late election for Weftminster, feem to have embittered his pen; and his party having been rather unexpectedly out manoeuvred by the indefatigable exertions of their opponents, our author, in order to take revenge, feems to have recourfe to the expedients of little minds, in railing and throwing out the most bitter invectives against the political principles and private character of one of their leaders, and his nearest and dearest connexions. The two pair of portraits are, first, thofe of the late Lord Chatham and Lord Holland; and then those of Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox. The outlines of their characters are fo extravagantly drawn, and fo high-coloured, that they bear little refemblance to nature. Thofe of Lord Chatham and Mr. Pitt, are reprefented as having almost every perfection; while thofe of Lord Holland and Mr. Fox, are compofed of almoft every fpecies of depravity. The first pair feem to be by far the best drawn. In pourtraying the fe cond, our author is comparatively tedious and prolix. After giving the two pair of portraits, he concludes with a few political queries, and an enumeration of the rights, of which, our author fays, Mr. Fox wishes to deprive the crown and the people.

ART.

ART. 39. Reflections on a late Refolution of the Houfe of Peers refpecting the Peerage of Scotland. Addreffed to the Chancellor and Chief Justice of the Common Pleas. 8vo. 1s. 6d. Bell. London, 1788.

This pamphlet contains fome remarks on the contradictions, which our author fays, the Houfe of Lords have fallen into, and the abfur dities they are likely to give rife to, by their decifions on the articles of the act of union, refpecting the election of peers in Scotland to ferve as reprefentatives for the Scottish peerage in the British parliament. We are forry to obferve, that there feems fuch a want of connexion and perfpicuity, in the author's ideas, that we are at a loss throughout the whole of his pamphlet to comprehend the force of his arguments.

THIS

HIS month Great-Britain has been vifited by a calamity the moft grievous that it has experienced for many years, At a time when the internal affairs of the nation were profperous, almoft beyond the example of any former period, and when the vigour of her government was revered in every quarter of the globe, the lamentable indifpofition of a fovereign, whofe amiable virtues and mild administration have univerfally endeared him to his people, affords fubject of general regret, and awakens in every loyal breast the moft anxious concern, both for his recovery and the fafety of the flate. The disaster, however, though great and ominous, it is to be hoped, will prove only of temporary duration; and that, in the mercy of Providence, he will yet be reftored to enjoy, for a length of years, the affection and gratitude of his kingdoms. In the mean time, this extraordinery occurrence has produced an event of which but few examples are to be found in the historical records of our country; namely, that of a

CONVENTION PARLIAMENT;

in which the two eftates of the kingdom affemble, after a prorogation, without any formal fummons from the crown. This is one of thofe great emergencies where there arises an im mediate neceffity for decifive measures; and the spirit of the conftitution muft fupply the incidental defect, which would therwise fufpend all the vital motions of government.

REGENCY.

The first object of this irregular, but abfolutely neceffary, parliament, will be to appoint a regency for the government of the kingdom during the continuance of his majesty's indisposi tion. There have been times, when the ambition of obtaining this vicarious power, has excited all the efforts of intrigue in thofe who afpired to that envied preeminence; but there is reason to think that, on the prefent occafion, the contest, if any should arife, will be confined to the abettors of a particular regency, and be fupported by no interefted views of any perfon or perfons that may be appointed to this important ftation. Should the parliament, as ufually happens on fubjects of such extraordinary magnitude, be divided in opinion, the debate will probably turn upon three points: the propriety of a Regency; whether the Regency ought to be fingular or plural? and, if plural, who are the perfons moft fit to be nominated to the exercife of this delegated authority? The determination of these important questions may eventually involve in its confequences the dearest rights and interefts of the nation.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST A REGENCY.

The oppofers of a Regency will naturally remark, that, while a fovereign is expofed equally with the meanneft fubject to the infirmities incidental to human nature, his fecurity is not proportionably guarded against the ambition of individuals, who may be interested in fupporting a general belief of the royal indifpofition, even after it has ceafed to exift. If a Regency is appointed, what pofitive criterion is to determine the capacity of the fovereign for refuming the functions of government? And to what incorruptible tribunal must we resort for the ultimate decifion of fuch capacity? It is feldom that any regent ever voluntarily relinquifhed the alluring exercise of regal authority; and there is great danger left, to maintain fo enviable a ftation, every poffible fpecies of influence fhould be practised by thofe regents, in whom the luft of civil power has been increafed by the habit of enjoyment. This circumftance affords reafon for ascertaining, by the ftricteft examination, the honour, the patriotifm, the loyalty, and difintereftednefs, of thofe perfons who fhall be nominated to fuch an exalted situation in fociety; and, to the reproach of human nature, hiftory prefents us with examples, where even filial piety has been shipwrecked on this dangerous rock of ungovernable and daring ambition.