were drawn from fources fcarcely known to him; he might, indeed, adopt the impreffions which the work conveyed, but he was ftill ignorant of the authority whence thofe impreffions were derived. The author, perhaps, apprehended that references to that profound erudition. which is every where traceable in the work, might to fome have appeared an oftentatious parade of learning, and from the apprehenfions of offending the taste of fome, may have fubmitted to a mode of publication which materially leffens the utility of his work to others. To fupply that defect was all the editor originally propofed, but as he advanced he became fenfible, that from the improvements which have taken place in our fyftem of equity, more might reasonably be expect ed from him. "In fome inftances, what the author had ftated as a principle the editor found, with reference to more modern decifions, fcarcely fuftainable as a general rule; and in other cafes he found that what the author had ftated as a mere precedent, had, from its frequent adoption, acquired the authority of a principle. To incorporate fuch additional matter into the text was the firft plan which fuggefted itself to the editor, but he foon found it impracticable: to recaft the whole work would have been injuftice to the author; and from fuch confiderations the editor was compelled to adopt the form in which fuch additional matter is now fubmitted; a form in fome refpects certainly inconvenient, but, as it does not injure the original work, the editor hopes it will meet with indulgence," The plan which Mr. Fonblanque has thus prescribed to himself he has executed with ability and care. In his copious notes he has amended and qualified fuch politions in the origi nal as appeared from more recent determinations to stand in need of correction; and he has enforced and fortified others by an accumulation of fubfequent authorities. He has likewife added much information by ftating the leading principle of dif tinction upon various topics in equity, and claffing the molt remarkable cafes as they fall within them refpectively. In short, fo much has been done that we are compelled to regret that more has not been attempted, and that our editor did not rather aspire to the fame of an original writer than to that of an annotator. A fcience which has been fo much cultivated and improved as equity has been, fince the time when the original treatise was written, in order to be handled fully and perfpicuously, would require a new and more comprehenfive arrangement,made with an immediate view to thofe great and elaborate judgments pronounced by Lord Hardwicke, and fome of his fuccef, fors. We are afraid likewife that the inevitable confequence of the plan adopted here will be, that the reader, finding his attention distracted between the text and the comment, will be inclined rather to confider it as a book for reference upon particular fubjects, than as one to which he ought to have recourfe for a fyftematic acquaintance with equity. We lament, there fore, fore, that these and fimilar confiderations did not induce Mr, Fonblanque, rather to give the Profeffion an original treatise upon Equity, than an edition of the old one, however well he has performed what he has undertaken; because we are sensible that fuch a work is much wanted, and we are of opinion that a gentleman of his refpectable share of talents and information would have executed it well. Regarding the general character of the notes in these vo lumes, we cannot help animadverting a little upon the ftyle in which they are written. There is a redundant pomp of words, and a studied reiteration of the fame fentiment under a different mode of expreffion, which tends rather to give the reader lax and inaccurate conceptions of the fubject than to clear up whatever is in its nature abftrufe. This defect, has, perhaps, ftruck us more strongly than it would otherwife have done, by a comparifon with the fevere fimplicity of diction, and lawyer-like precifion of the original. To point out particular paffages in a work like the prefent, in order to notice either their excellencies or defects, would, perhaps, afford our readers but little amufement. The profeffional man will, no doubt read the book, and form his own judgment upon every part of it, to every other reader the fubject muft, from its nature, appear dry and uninteresting. We thall, however, fet down a few of the obfervations that have occurred to us, premifing this general remark, that the notes in the first volume feem to have been compiled with greater accuracy, diligence, and attention than thofe in the fecond. Vol. I. Book I. Ch. vi. § 8. Note (9). There is a long note to refute an obfervation of Mr. Cox's in a note upon the cafe of Papillon and Voice, 2 P. Will. 478. That with regard to the operation of the rule laid down in Shelley's cafe, upon a devife, there is no diftinction between legal and equitable eftates, and trufts executed and executory. Mr. Fonblanque combats the latter part of this propofition, and rightly contends that the rule,does operate in the cafe of a devife of a truft executed, where it would not if the truft had been executory, Mr. Cox, in his 5th edition of Peere Williams's Reports, has not only corrected this mistake, but has added a ftrong MSS. cafe to fupport the diftinction. Our editor, however, has erroneously obferved in his note, that Mr. Cox had cited the cafe of Jones and Morgan, as proving his propofition, when it contained nothing relative to the point. We fay erroneously, because he seems not to have perceived that Mr. Cox had two branches of a propofition to fupport by authorities. The firft, in which Mr. F. agrees with him, is that with regard to to the operation of the rule there is no diftinction, whether the dewife be of a legal, or of an equitable eftate. To this opinion, in the cafe of Jones and Morgan, does apply. Mr. F. therefore, has inadvertently overlooked its being cited to establish the observation as to which it is a cafe in point, and has confidered it as being quoted to fupport the propofition controverted by him, to which it has in truth no reference. Vol. II. Book 11 Ch. iii. § 2. Note (h) contains much valuable information upon the creation and curtailment of eftates in a will by implication. Ib. § 6. Note (k). The doubt expreffed, whether an executory devife can be barred with the concurrence of those who are entitled to the benefit thereof, Mr. F. will find fettled in the affirmative, according to the inclination of his opinion, in Roe and Jones. 1 H. Black. 30. 3 Term Rep. 93. Ib. Book II. Ch. v. $3. Note (k). The information contained here, as to whether the purposes of a teftator's perfonal eftate undifpofed of by his will, fhall go to the executor, and where to the next of kin, is borrowed from a note of Mr. Cox's, to Farringdon v. Knightly, 2 P. Wins. 549. As Mr. F. has added nothing new either in point of obfervation or information to what is given there, and has only altered the arrangement, without gaining even additional perfpicuity, he should have acknowledged his obligation to the original au thor. Ib. Book IV. Pt. 1. Ch. iv. § 1. Note (h) laft line, page 325. "father" is printed by mistake for mother. Ib. Ch. xi. § 1. Note (b). The doctrine of implied revocation of a will, under certain circumftances, either by the fubfequent marriage of the teftator, or by the birth of a child to him, is well, although rather prolixly, confidered, and we incline to coincide with Mr. F. in his opinion upon both points. Upon the whole, this edition is to be confidered as an useful acquifition to the legal profeffion. It will give a degree of fyftem and regularity to the investigations of the ftudent, which he might in vain have hoped to acquire, either from the ill-arranged and partial felections of the very imperfect titles relating to Equity, in our law abridgements, or from the loofe hints which lie fcattered in the indexes of the feveral reporters. Το the experienced practitioner it cannot be of equal advantage, because it will not apprife him of any thing that he can confider either as difficult or as new, but ftill it may ferve as a synopfis to his knowledge: fometimes fixing in his mind that learning which lay floating there unattached to any fettled principle; and fometimes guiding him to the most remarkable determination upon particular fubjects, where they may happen to become the objects of his more immediate contemplation. ART. ART. X. The Cabinet. By a Society of Gentlemen. Vol. I. Norwich, March; London. 8vo. pp. 310. 59. 1795. PERIODICAL Effays have ever been found the most convenient vehicle for the diffemination of political opinions, and, indeed, they have other and appropriate advantages. The experienced and fkilful writer who has any particular point to accomplish, knows that his draught becomes much more palatable and more likely to operate as he wishes, by thus condenfing or fimplifying its ingredients; and the unfledged stripling, whofe ardour is ever difproportioned to his ftrength, when he feels his vigour exhausted, and his limbs tremble, may pause at the barrier of this eafy Circus, till his fpirits are renewed and his ftrength recovered. If we had perufed the preface only of the work before us, we fhould have fuppofed the writers of the Cabinet to have been entirely compofed of the latter defeription, and thould have been inclined to throw away the book with contempt and difguft at its turgid and empty declamation, its imbecility of flyle, and feeblenefs of argument. Who would but fmile at the ignorance and childishness of editors who at a time when the licentioufnefs of the Prefs can hardly be exceeded, fay that they enter on their work" tremblingly alive" to the horrors of a minifterial defpotifm, unparalleled in the history of this country fince the Revolution :— they entered on a path beset with many dangers, in the course of which they were to meet with much and ferious difficulty: the public tafte was vitiated, the public mind depreffed by a dark and gloomy melancholy, the baleful effect of a system of abafement and fraud." In the progrefs, however, which our duty obliged us to make through the volume, we candidly acknowledge that we occafionally met with manly vigour, and no mean portion of ingenuity. Yet never were the words of Horace more forcibly applicable than to the compofition of the Cabinet: Inceptis gravibus plerumque et magná profeflis, Affuitur pannus. The spirit of the whole demonftrates itfelf in violent complaints of the profligacy, the incapacity, the tyranny of thofe in power, much exaggeration of real, or creation of imaginary grievances, with frequent, warm, and enthufiaftic admiration of the French Revolution. It feems odd, that this Society of Gentlemen thould, as appears from their preface, and their first paper, have placed not their Achilles, but a Therfites in the van. The first paper is on the Liberty of the Prefs, and contains a violent anathema against the Tyrants of this Country, an expreffion in itself ridiculous. "If tyrants," fays this puny writer, "did not read at Milan (alluding to the work of the Marquis Beccaria) do they not read in this country? not indeed to improve their minds, or to learn the ends and purposes of the authority they are abufing, but to mark for perfecution and pe nalty a careless or unguarded stricture, a warm or intemperate remonftrance." Thefe tyrants mean those who would enforce refpect to the juft laws of a free country; while in France the freedom of the prefs is wholly deftroyed, without tyranny.The fecond paper, on Forms of Government, is very well written. The affertion, however, at the conclufion, that when "the French may carry their system (viz. of perfect toleration, equal rights, and popular confent) into execution with fafety and fecurity, they will exhibit a model of purer and completer inftitution than the world has yet feen," is in argument begging the queftion, and, in fact, very difputable. The story in the following paper is abfurd and unnatural, but the letters on Emigration are good. They are profeffedly written" with fome faint allufion to the ftyle and manner of Lord Bolingbroke;" they are certainly nervous and elegant ; but full of the moft gloomy affertions concerning the fuppofed mifery and degeneracy of our country, which refutes and difdains the imputation. The imitation of Alcæus, by Sir William Jones, was published by Maty in his review. The parody of this, and the verfes at the conclufion of the volume, on the opening of the last campaign, are very spirited. We commend alfo, without hefitation, and in unqualified terms, the remarks on the German play of the Robbers; and it is generally obfervable, that the papers which are diftinguished by a hand at the conclufion, are written by a hand of fuperior vigour and experience. The hiftory of the war affumes as data, what always has been, and always will be, difputed. Of the Treaty of Pavia, these writers fpeak almoft in the fame words as the impartial Hiftory in the New Annual Register. They argue that, as the real treaty is not publifhed, it was probably worse than the fiction: but, fince it is by no means certain that any treaty was there figned, this argument, in itself weak and captious, is wholly infignificant. Somewhere alfo one of the effayifls talks very gravely of the elegant Fitzofborne's Letters, not knowing what moft fchool-boys know, that the publication fo called, was written by the claffical pen of Mr. Melmoth. We fhall give the reader a fpecimen of this work from the firft letter on Emigration, in which the writer feems to have had |