active proceedings. The projected union | of the prince of Wales with his cousin, the princess Caroline of Brunswick, was noticed. The majority for the ministers was very large; Canning took an active part in their support, but Wilberforce, much to his honour, though a constant advocate for the administration, strongly deprecated the language used by ministers, which spoke their determination to continue the war until France was again under its old government, or our country should sink under its efforts to produce such a result. He had been abroad, and had seen the state of things under the old régime, and he could not as Christian, and a well-wisher for his fellow-men, desire its restoration.

The Habeas Corpus Act was again suspended. Sheridan, Fox, and Erskine contended that the result of the late prosecutions for treason showed there was no ground for alarm at the alleged conspiracies; while Windham and Adair loudly censured the verdicts of the juries. The army and navy were augmented. Twenty-seven millions were required for the expenditure of the year, eighteen of which were raised by loan. Among the additional taxes was one upon the wearing of hair powder, a foolish custom then prevalent, which has now disappeared. This impost, having called the attention of people in general to its dirty and wasteful absurdity, was beneficial, and the general effect upon the habits of personal cleanliness rendered it an improvement of some importance.

The prospects of the war were not hopeful. The rulers of Holland had found it necessary to make peace with France; that country was rapidly occupied by the French armies during the winter, the rivers and lakes having been frozen over so as to bear the passage of heavy artillery. The English forces retreated, and were embarked for England. The Stadtholder withdrew, and a Dutch revolutionary government was formed; but the people did not give way to the horrid excesses even then prevalent in France. It was evident that Spain and Prussia were likely to make peace. Austria was willing to continue the war, but required a loan, which in fact was a subsidy, of four millions. This was acceded to, though it was notorious that the money advanced to Prussia had been chiefly expended for objects connected with the subjugation of Poland. France boasted of having won nearly thirty battles in a

year and a half, and of having acquired territory peopled with thirteen millions of inhabitants.

In England, during the debates of this session, there was much ground for the complaints made by the opposition; but it must be remarked, that in them, and throughout the whole of the lengthened opposition by Fox and his party, during the long years of warfare, there ever was a disgraceful anxiety manifested to exalt the enemy, and to depreciate the efforts and successes of Britain, and to represent all and any attempts to resist France as utterly useless. It was on one of these occasions that the arguments for the necessity of resistance were perverted into an idea of conquering France, and ridiculed as an imagination more foolish and insane than any vision of the knight of La Mancha. The orator who indulged in this mistaken ridicule did not live to behold the event, but many who then heard him survived. They saw, and even visited France as a conquered country; twice in two successive years occupied by the armies of the allies, and then obliged to taste, though but in a slight degree, the bitter cup she had forced others to drink. The wretched infidelity of Fox and his supporters caused them to despise the Bible, or they might have recalled and applied the memorable prophetic vision, when the seer was commanded to take the wine cup of Divine wrath, and, beginning at Jerusalem, to cause all the kingdoms of the earth, one with another, to drink. A similar day of wrath evidently was at hand. To the reflecting Christian it was plain that "the Lord had a controversy with the nations; that he would plead with all flesh;" that evil would go forth from nation to nation, and a great whirlwind be raised up from the coasts of the earth, (see Jer. xxv. 32.) Why should men be so unwise as to close their Bibles, and refuse to mark what has been, as it fully shews forth what will be, even to that period when time shall be no more?

Many who were individuals of note during the preceding years, departed this life about this time. Among them were the historians Robertson and Gibbon, eminent for their writings;-the latter ever to be guarded against for his infidel principles; and the former scarcely less censurable for his indifference to those truths which he had engaged to set forth as a professed minister of Christ. Lord George Gordon, and earl Camden, also, widely different characters, departed; and

Bruce, the celebrated traveller in Abyssinia, after returning in safety from many perils, died from the effects of a fall down the stairs in his own house! Sir William Jones, one of the few Christian statesmen of that day, died in India, about this time. Fox and his party failed in their efforts to exaggerate the French power during the debates of this session, and little else of moment passed, except the settlement of the affairs of the prince of Wales, by which he had a revenue of nearly 140,000l. per annum assigned, but half of it was to be set aside to meet his debts, these amounted to 620,000l.

The union of the prince of Wales with his cousin, Caroline of Brunswick, had important influence on the subsequent history of Great Britain. It fully shows that while God brings good out of evil, he frequently, even in this life, causes those who forsake his word to punish themselves. The rigorous law, passed especially at the instance of George III., to limit the marriages of the royal family, has been already noticed; the determination of the king evidently was, that his children should not marry among his subjects. Assuredly, such unions were likely to promote political discords and party proceedings, but the object of the king seems to have been to prevent unions which he considered derogatory, though many of the English nobility were superior in every respect to the petty potentates of Germany. This feeling had led to the wretched position of the prince of Wales with Mrs. Fitzherbert, and subsequently to a still more scandalous preference of lady Jersey, the wife of one of the officers of his court. The prince was now urged to marry some foreign Protestant princess; he consented, but, apparently, his main object was to get his debts paid. At first the niece of the queen (Louisa of Mechlenberg) was proposed, who became the revered queen of Prussia, that sank under the troubles of her land; but the king decided for his own niece, Caroline, daughter of the duke of Brunswick. A worse choice could hardly have been made, or a more unhappy union formed.

Lord Malmesbury was sent to conclude this match towards the close of 1794. The preliminaries were soon settled, but the negotiator has left decided evidence, that from the first he had strong misgivings as to the result. The princess Caroline was an uneducated, frivolous woman-the creature of impulse, not

pleasing in person, and careless in her dress and habits, yet good-natured, and not difficult to manage. The negotiator came to the conclusion, that "the princess, in the hands of a steady and sensible man, would probably turn out well; but where it is likely she will find faults analogous to her own, she will fail." And it was a signal failure. Her journey to England was attended with some difficulties and dangers. She had to leave the direct route, and, after some delay, to go round by Hamburg, to avoid the advancing armies of the French. At length she arrived in England, on April 5th, 1795, after a stormy passage. Snares were laid for her on her arrival. Lady Jersey was appointed one of her attendants, and actually sent to meet her! The prince was evidently prejudiced and disgusted. On her being introduced, he said barely one word, turned round, and retired. The marriage, however, took place; but a separation soon followed. One child, the princess Charlotte, (born January 7th, 1796,) was the only fruit of this unhappy union. The mother was an object of pity, but not of respect-insulted by her husband and his paramours, without discretion, forbearance, or wisdom to meet the difficulties of her position, or real friends to advise her. The prince refused to treat her as his wife; the king was almost her only advocate; the queen was induced to take the part of her son. A separation soon took place, when the evils to the nation from such a state of things speedily began to appear. It has been too truly said, "Unhappy couple! victims of defective education, mismanagement, and the dangers and temptations of an exalted station. Surrounded by all the glorious things of earth, possessed of everything which the mean man envies, and the poor man longs and struggles for, they were two of the most pitiable, miserable beings in the world." Yet still more miserable were those by whom they were designedly misled; and plain is the lesson, that those who become companions of fools are not wise; let it not be forgotten, that in the sense of Scripture, folly is wickedness! A previous marriage of the duke of Sussex with lady Augusta Murray, at Rome, in 1792, much displeased the king, who absolutely refused his sanction; therefore, although in every other respect a correct, and not an undesirable union, it was set aside in the ecclesiastical courts by a suit in the king's name!

The proceedings against Warren Hastings were at length brought to a close. They had been resumed in February, 1792, when his counsel proceeded with his defence in legal form. One of them spoke for five days, without going farther than the first charge: twenty days were occupied by these speeches and evidence. The trial was then adjourned till February, 1793, when Hastings shortened the proceedings on his part, closing them by proving that the property he brought from India was not more than £72,400; but the managers of the prosecution obtained delay until the following year. The prosecutors, after various wranglings, closed their additional evidence and replies on June 16th, 1794, when Burke spoke for nine days. But all was not yet overthere were matters to argue in the House of Lords, so that it was April 23rd, 1795, when the Lords assembled for pronouncing judgment, sixty out of the one hundred and sixty who had been present at the beginning of this memorable trial having departed this life. Only twenty-nine attended on that day, and of them only six pronounced Hastings guilty. He was then called to the bar and discharged. But his property was gone. He was only saved from a prison by a yearly pension of £4000 from the East India Company, granted for eighteen years, afterwards extended for his life, with a loan of £50,000, to enable him to pay the law expenses. Thus ended this extraordinary affair. There certainly were grounds for arraigning his conduct; but these proceeded rather from the position he was placed in, and the line of conduct he was required to pursue, than from any personal disposition to tyrannize; and, although acquitted, he suffered no light punishment from the long and expensive prosecution. It was one of those cases in which the English law punishes the accused, while ultimately it declares him not guilty. He lived till 1818 in retirement, amusing himself with a country life. In his latter days he was treated with much respect on several public occasions. Of the managers of the impeachment, it is unnecessary to say more than that it is not easy to suppose they were actuated only by principles of rectitude in their violent proceedings; party spirit, to say nothing of more interested motives, had much influence over their conduct. Burke, probably, was the most honest of those concerned in the affair; certainly, some good resulted from his vehemence;

the affairs of India were more fully known in England, and the rulers of India saw the need of increased caution in their proceedings.

In March, earl Fitzwilliam was recalled from being viceroy of Ireland. It was considered inexpedient to proceed with the measure called "Catholie Emancipation," to which he was pledged, the delay of which, he said, would raise a flame that could only be extinguished by military force. The society of United Irishmen soon began rapidly to increase. The known progress of the disaffected caused additional efforts from the Orangemen, a name given to the bulk of the Protestants there, from a political association in which they were united.

As the year 1795 advanced, the failure of the alliance against France became clearly manifest. The conduct of the sovereign of Prussia was disgraceful, and paralyzed the confederation. Great part of his troops were withdrawn from the confederate army, while those who remained, in consideration of a heavy subsidy, were secretly ordered not to give efficient assistance to the Austrians. To Russia, mainly, this failure of the allied efforts was owing. Bitterly in after years did that power suffer for its dishonest and selfish policy. A treaty of peace and alliance between Prussia and France was concluded in April, 1795. The partition of Poland evidently was the absorbing object with the rulers of Russia, Prussia, and Austria;-it was a public crime for which they were chastised. But the evil policy of those rulers was only in unison with the mistaken feelings then prevalent on the continent. In October, 1794, a few months previously, Lord Malmesbury described the rapid progress of French opinions in Germany, adding, "The nobility, the gentry, and large capitalists cannot be made to understand the danger with which they are threatened, and which is at their very gates. They are all clamorous for peace, and, by the most fatal error which ever perverted the human understanding, attribute the evils of war, and its duration, not to the enemy who is endeavouring so strenuously to destroy them, but to the very powers who are endeavouring to rescue them from destruction. They are in a manner stunned into security; and it is as impossible to awaken them to a sense of their danger, as it is to rouse in them a due spirit of resistance and indignation." early had the continental rulers been

Thus

punished by the spirit they had sought to excite.

Spain concluded a treaty of peace with France, in July, 1795. The grand duke of Tuscany had done so previously. Sweden and Switzerland, with some of the smaller German states, also recognised the republic. On the other hand, Russia entered into alliance with Britain and Austria, but was too far distant from the scene of operations, and too busy in completing the subjugation of Poland, to take any active part against France.

In England much distress was occasioned by scarcity, chiefly arising from unfavourable seasons. There were riots in several parts of the kingdom, but they were soon put down. The winter had been very severe, and inclement weather in the spring injured the crops, and destroyed many thousand sheep. The rise in prices was also occasioned by the increased monetary circulation, and the

wasteful expenditure of warfare. In July, flour rose to 70s. a sack, and the quartern loaf to a shilling; but a plentiful harvest followed, when the prices somewhat declined. This was followed by a season comparatively mild, the average warmth of the month of January, 1796, being more than twenty degrees above that of January 1794. The effect of extreme cold to increase mortality also appeared. The number of burials in London, within five weeks during the former period, exceeded 2800; in January, 1796, they were only 1470. In December, 1796, and January, 1797, the cold was again

severe.

PATRIARCHAL CONTEMPORARIES.

As appropriate to biblical history, and as interesting in themselves, we here insert two tables relating to the early chronology of the world.

From this table several very valuable points | of information are gained. The thought has probably arisen in the mind of every liberal student, "Is there not reason to apprehend that the account of creation and of the early events in the history of the world, such as the garden of Eden, the temptation, fall and expulsion of our first parents, etc., would be greatly corrupted by passing through so many generations, when there were no letters to perpetuate a historical event? Would not the imaginations of men and the love of the marvellous intermingle much of fancy with truth, in the account transmitted to subsequent generations?"

This sceptical suggestion arises from

1930 930

130 1042 912 235 1140 905

325 1235 910

395 1280 895

460 1422 962

622 987 365

687 1656 969

874 1651 777

1056 2006 950 1556 2156 600 1656

the idea that the story must have passed through many narrators, and that few opportunities of comparing and correcting one account by another were enjoyed. Look at the table as illustrating these points.

And first, the number of times that the story must be repeated by different persons. Noah and his three sons could receive the account of creation at the second rehearsal, and that through several distinct channels. 1. Adam could relate it to Enos for six hundred and ninety-five years, and Enos to Noah for eighty-four years. Or, 2. Adam, during six hundred and five years could discourse of it to Cainaan, and Cainaan one hundred and