of reasoning and manly and dignified elocution.' The next day Mr Pitt wrote to Dr Tomline to inform him that he had heard his own voice in the house of commons, and expressed, in a modest way, his satisfaction at the manner in which he had been received. We also find, in the parliamentary history for the year 1781, the following notice of Mr Pitt's first speech, a notice the more valuable, as it was probably written the evening the speech was delivered.

The honorable William Pitt, son to the late earl of Chatham, now rose for the first time, and in a speech directly in answer to matter that had fallen out in the course of the debate, displayed great and astonishing powers of eloquence. His voice is rich and striking, full of melody and force; his manner easy and elegant; his language beautiful and luxuriant. He gave in his first essay a specimen of eloquence not unworthy the son of his immortal parent.'

Mr Pitt made three speeches this session of parliament, and upon a division he was each time in a small minority. These speeches are reported at length in the parliamentary history, and the two first in Hathaway. His last speech was made on the 12th of June, on a motion of Mr Fox, that the house do resolve itself into a committee of the whole house, to take into consideration the present state of the American war.' In this speech, he took occasion to express the opinion held by himself concerning the American war. We shall give an extract from this speech, in order to furnish evidence, that the people of this country are not less indebted to Mr Pitt, as far as opinions were concerned, than to his great father.

A noble lord, who spoke early in the heat of his zeal, had called it an holy war. For his part, though the honorable gentleman who made the motion, and some other gentlemen had been more than once in the course of the debate severely reprehended for calling it a wicked and accursed war, he was persuaded and would affirm, that it was an accursed, wicked, barbarous, cruel, unnatural, unjust, and diabolical war. It was conceived in injustice, it was nurtured and brought forth in folly; its footsteps were marked with blood, slaughter, persecution and devastation; in truth, every thing which went to constitute moral depravity and human turpitude were to be found in it.'

It is difficult to judge of these speeches beyond what relates to the course of argument and thought, as the speeches of the debates in which Mr Pitt took a part are evidently all reported

by the same hand, and there is, therefore, a great uniformity of expression and style. It would be idle, we think, to say that these speeches, as they stand in the book, are remarkable other than as the productions of a very young man; on the contrary, we think that that uniform, monotonous, and often heavy manner and habit of excessive dilating, which in later life emphatically marked Mr Pitt's oratorical compositions, were already quite conspicuous. At the same time, they are most remarkable in another way, which is, that throughout there is manifested the most genuine dignity and self-respect, the most perfect simplicity, and presence of mind, but not a sentence or a syllable, which savours of vanity, presumption, or hardihood. We can easily conceive the delight and admiration with which the British house of commons was inspired, in beholding the son of lord Chatham, scarcely twenty-three years of age, stand up in the midst of those experienced and distinguished statesmen, without dismay or concern, and acquit himself with a dignity, modesty, and success so entirely astonishing and praiseworthy, as to call forth from Mr. Dundas, at that time opposed to him, the following remarkable panegyric, pronounced in the presence of the whole house; I must declare, that I find myself impelled to rejoice in the good fortune of my country, and my fellow subjects, who are destined at some future day to derive the most important services from so happy an union of first rate abilities, high integrity, bold and honest independency of conduct, and the most persausive eloquence.'

With respect to the manner in which Mr Pitt obtained his first seat in parliament, he failed in the general election of 1780, as a candidate to represent the university of Cambridge, but he was immediately after returned for the borough of Appleby, by the interest of sir James Lowther, and at the request of the duke of Rutland ;-a nobleman who always manifested a great friendship for Mr Pitt, and at his death in 1787, appointed Mr Pitt one of the guardians of his children, and trustee of his estate with a legacy of £3000. It is a curious but well known fact, that Mr Pitt's father also received a legacy of £10,000 from Sarah, the celebrated dutchess of Marlborough, on account of the noble defence he had made for the support of the laws of England and to prevent the ruin of his country.' Before entering into parliament, Mr Pitt became a resident of Lincoln's inn in the spring of 1780,

and was called to the bar and went the western circuit the summer of the same year. The summer of 1781 he again went a circuit, and as his professional engagements were at that time brought to a close, we beg leave to recommend to the attention of the reader the following note, copied from the work before us.

When he first made his brilliant display in parliament, those at the bar, who had seen little of him, expressed surprise; but a few who had heard him once speak in a sort of mock debate at the Crown and Anchor tavern, when a club, called the Western Circuit Club, was dissolved, agreed that he had then displayed all the various species of eloquence, for which he was afterwards celebrated. Before he distinguished himself in the house of commons, he certainly looked seriously to the law as a profession. The late Mr Justice Rooke told me, that Mr Pitt dangled seven days with a junior brief and a single guinea fee, waiting till a cause of no sort of importance should come on in the court of common pleas. At Mr Pitt's instance, an annual dinner took place for some years at Richmond hill, the party consisting of lord Erskine, lord Redesdale, sir William Grant, Mr Bond, Mr Leycester, Mr Jekyll, and others; and I well remember a dinner with Mr Pitt and several of his private friends at the Boar's Head in Eastcheap, in celebration of Shakspeare's Falstaff. We were all in high spirits, quoting and alluding to Shakspeare the whole day; and it appeared that Mr Pitt was as well and familiarly read in the poet's works as the best Shakspearians present. But to speak of his conviviality is needless. After he was minister, he continued to ask his old circuit intimates to dine with him, and his manners were unaltered.'

Parliament met again on the 27th November. Mr Pitt spoke for the first time upon the report of the address in answer to his majesty's speech. He spoke with great warmth against the continuance of the American war, which fruitlessly wasted the blood and treasure of the kingdom, and he also delivered himself in terms of strong censure of those ministers, 'who by their fatal system had led the country to a situation which threatened the final dissolution of the empire, if not prevented by timely, wise, and vigorous efforts.' This speech was received with high applause in the house of commons. The reader of those debates will observe, that most extravagant compliments were paid to Mr Pitt on that occasion by Mr Fox, but particularly by Mr Dundas. We cannot but here observe, that the habit of offering exaggerated and un

meaning commendation to talents and learning has been long practised in the house of commons, and abounds especially with those who are politically opposed, and whose measures are at the same time subject of violent, and to our feelings unbecoming crimination and condemnation. Neither of these habits is to be observed in the same degree, in the debates of the American congress. Part of this difference may be accounted for, from the circumstance, that as the government has no representative, no minister in either branch of congress, the principal cause and stimulant of personal censure or compliment does not exist; for one naturally leads to the other. Mr Fox, after striving to demonstrate for two hours, with every species of vehement declamation, that Mr Pitt, in his public capacity, was either an idiot, or knave, or madman, would express himself at the close of his harangue concerning the endowments, the accomplishments, and the private virtues of that gentleman, with such a gentleness, sweetness, sincerity, force, and persuasion, as to remind us of the most splendid panegyrics of classic literature, or of the melodious strains of classic mythology. In the particular case of Mr Pitt, we have somewhere read the insinuation, that Mr Dundas, discovering at once the great talents of that individual, and foreseeing the power he was likely to possess in the country, had early taken his precautions to conciliate the favorable opinion of Mr Pitt, and to prepare himself to enter into any league, which circumstances might make advantageous. The sagacity and prudence of the northern statesman were, in this instance, well rewarded, for he clung to the treasury bench with Mr Pitt till 1801, and as a token of his private friendship it has always been said, that no man had the honor of emptying so many bottles of old port with the chancellor, as the lord advocate.

In this parliament Mr Pitt took a conspicuous part in eight vehement, protracted, and most important debates, all in relation to the state of the nation, and having an immediate tendency to change the course of measures, and voted in four desperate minorities, and in several encouraging ones, till at last on the 20th of March 1782, lord North declared in the house of commons, that his majesty had come to a full determination to change his ministers.' The 28th of the same month it was announced to the house, that a new administration had been formed, at the head of which was placed the marquis of Rockingham, the only marquis at that time in

Great Britain, as first lord commissioner of the treasury; and lord Shelburne the first marquis of Lansdowne, and Mr Fox were appointed secretaries of state. It is well established in all the histories of the day, that the minister before accepting the seals stipulated for the following condition with the king: that peace should be made with the Americans and their independence acknowledged. Various situations were offered to Mr Pitt, and among others, that of vice treasurer of Ireland, a place which his father held; but he refused to accept any situation which should pledge him to the measures of administration without giving him a seat in the cabinet.

It was another circumstance, equally favorable and fortunate for Mr Pitt's advancement, that in the very commencement of his career he should have been able to take advantage of all the popularity at that time possessed by Mr Fox and his powerful party, and should have been seconded by the zeal and ardor of the whole nation, who went heart and hand with that party in their triumph over lord North. It will be seen in the sequel, and it is another proof of Pitt's great sagacity and judgment, that he was the only person who took advantage of these auspicious circumstances.

By the death of the marquis of Rockingham in July, the administration was dissolved, and the king appointed lord Shelburne to succeed him as first lord of the treasury. We learn from the history of the times, that when lord Chatham formed a new administration in 1766, lord Shelburne was placed at the head of the department of the colonies. This office he resigned in 1768, and continued firmly and steadily in opposition to all measures connected with America, till lord North's resignation. His lordship was not accounted a man of great talents; but he possessed vast political knowledge, greatly improved by a study of foreign affairs and long experience in the ministry and legislature of his own country. Among the causes of the great aversion and hostility of the Rockingham party, the great body of the whigs,' to this nobleman, may be mentioned a jealousy and contention for power, a symptom of which will be discovered in the sending of Mr Oswald by lord Shelburne, and of Mr Grenville by Mr. Fox at the same time to Paris, both to negotiate peace with America. At any rate, most certain it is, that when lord Shelburne's promotion took place, and when, towards the end of the autumn, Mr Pitt waited, by appointment, upon Mr Fox