In Townsend's sketch of Ellenborough, in "Lives of Twelve Eminent Judges," we find the following reference to Matthews's acting in this piece, and the "special" reasons that led to its sudden withdrawal: "The effect, we are told, was quite astonishing. The pit was almost filled with men of law. Soon after, Matthews received a request that he would go to Carlton House on a certain evening. He found the prince surrounded by a very small circle. After a most gracious reception, the general conversation was resumed; and Matthews was for some time at a loss to guess the immediate cause of his invitation. At length the prince began to speak of the extraordinary sensation Matthews's recent imitation had caused, adding that he had the greatest desire in the world to hear it, and concluded by saying that it would be considered as a favor if Matthews would then give the charge to the jury as he had given it on the first night of the new farce. Matthews obviously hesitated; and the prince said, 'Oh! don't be afraid, Mr. Matthews: we're all tiled here. Come, pray oblige me: I'm longing to hear it; I am something of a mimic myself. My brother, here' (turning to the Duke of York), 'can tell you that I give a very fair imitation of Lord Eldon. With respect to yours of Lord Ellenborough, it was not so well, when you found it so taken up, to continue it in public; and I am very glad your own good taste and feeling prompted you to refuse a repetition of it: but here you need have no scruples.' There were about twenty present. Matthews, of course, obeyed. The prince was in raptures, and declared himself astonished at the closeness of the imitation, shutting his eyes while he listened to it with excessive enjoyment. 'It is the man himself!' he

Mr.

exclaimed. The Duke of York approved in peals of laughter. The clever mimic returned home delighted with his intoxicating reception, and the prince's object was gained."

One other passage from this play is worth quoting. Flexible, being asked if he can prove black is white, becomes enraged. "Shall a timber-merchant dare contend with me on points of law? Traduce its professors, asperse, blacken, detract, defame, contemn, injure, insult, hurt, wrong, annoy, calumniate, and heap them with contumely? Provoke wrath, generate choler, and kindle contention? Sir, are you acquainted with statute and common law? Do you know predicaments, præmunires, and precedents, nolle prosequis, fi. fas., and fieri facias, with all the horrible dangers of scandalum magnatum? Any one of which, much more their united conglomeration, might sink you and your whole property, trade, credit, friends, family, and connections, in one vast, tremendous, irresistible, and uncontractible ruin !”

II.

AS DEPICTED BY THE NOVELISTS.

CERVANTES.

RIGHT here is a good place to skip over to the island of Barataria, and speak of that wise governor, Sancho Panza, who made a very judicious decision on a criminal complaint, which will always stand as a model for succeeding judges. A woman haled a man before the governor, complaining that he had ravished her. She told the usual story, unexpected attack, unavailing resistance, and final triumph of superior force. The defence was, that the complainant consented. There were no other witnesses. Under modern administration, where women have no rights, the defendant would have been mulcted and imprisoned in short order. But Sancho was not of the nineteenth century. He asked the man if he had any money about him, and being answered that he had twenty silver pieces, commanded him to give them to the woman, and ordered the latter to leave the court. She went, with thanks to this "second Daniel." Then Sancho directed the man to pursue her, and take away the money from her. He went; and both soon returned into the governor's presence, the woman clamoring for fresh justice against the man for attempted robbery. "What, then," asked the governor, "did he take the money from you?"

The woman replied that she was no such baby as to allow him to succeed; and the man confessed that he could not, with all his strength, accomplish the governor's purpose. Therefore the governor commanded the woman to return the silver, and banished her the realm, under pain of stripes, with the intimation that if she had been as careful of her chastity as of her money, she would never have lost it. The exquisite humor of this scene can be appreciated only by reading the chapter: it is too broad for quotation, without having first received the revisions of some such gentleman as Mr. Bowdler, who edited an expurgated "Family Shakspeare." Peter Pindar has imitated this scene; but as is not unusual in imitations, the humor is converted into deliberate vulgarity.

SMOLLETT.

One of the most entertaining legal characters in fiction is Tom Clarke, the attorney, in "Sir Launcelot Greaves.” The character of a lawyer simply good would, of course, be utterly uninteresting; and so the author has contrived to invest this character with interest by rendering him ineffably tedious. He says of him at the outset, that his "goodness of heart, even the exercise of his profession had not been able to corrupt. Before strangers he never owned himself an attorney without blushing, though he had no reason to blush for his own practice. . . . He piqued himself on understanding the practice of the courts, and in private company he took pleasure in laying down the law; but he was an indifferent orator, and tediously circumstantial in his explanations.”

Capt. Crowe narrates how his grandmother and his maiden aunt, by the assistance of an attorney, "hove him

out of his inheritance.". "Yes, indeed, sir !' added Mr. Clarke, 'those two malicious old women docked the intail, and left the estate to an alien.' Here Mr. Ferrett thought proper to intermingle in the conversation with a 'Pish! what, dost talk of docking the intail? Dost not know, that by the statute Westm., 2, 13 Ed., the will and intention of the donor must be fulfilled, and the tenant in tail shall not alien after issue had, or before?' — ' Give me leave, sir,' replied Tom, 'I presume you are a practitioner in the law. Now, you know, that in the case of a contingent remainder, the intail may be destroyed by levying a fine, and suffering a recovery; or otherwise destroying the particular estate, before the contingency happens. If feoffees, who possess an estate only during the life of a son, where divers remainders are limited over, make a feoffment in fee to him, by the feoffment all the future remainders are destroyed. Indeed, a person in remainder may have a writ of intrusion, if any do intrude after the death of a tenant for life; and the writ ex gravi querela lies to execute a devise in remainder after the death of a tenant in tail without issue.'—'Spoke like a true disciple of Geber,' cried Ferrett. 'No, sir,' replied Mr. Clarke: 'Counsellor Caper is in the conveyancing way -I was clerk to Serjeant Croaker.' — 'Ay, now you may set up for yourself,' resumed the other; 'for you can prate as unintelligibly as the best of them.' 'Perhaps,' said Tom, 'I do not make myself understood. If so be as how that is the case, let us change the position, and suppose that this here case is tail after possibility of issue extinct. If a tenant in tail after a possibility make a feoffment of his land, he in reversion may enter for the forfeiture. Then we must make a distinction