that temperate and sober cast, that nothing he was sure would have induced him, (but especially at such a time) to drink to such excess, as to stupify his understanding, and bewilder his senses, which was evidently the condition of all the Gentlemen in the witnesses' box. Had his Client been to attend personally, he was confident he would have felt such an awe and respect for the Court in general, as well as for the laws and public institutions of his country, as to have suffered his tongue to be cut out, rather than utter such speeches as had been so recently addressed to the Judge, the Jury, and himself, by the Gentlemen who appeared against him. His client was a man so attentive to all matters of established decorum, that it was most likely, that if he had been called to appear before the Court, he would have been seen there in decent, clean, and comely apparel, not in dirty boots, and dirty shirts, and dirty breeches, like the Gentlemen then before them.

To judge therefore from appearances, and in comparing his client with the "Gentlemen" who disputed his right to that appellation, he was afraid he must give way upon those three points,

inasmuch as being sober, civil, and cleanly, he could not be such a Gentleman as they were.

But there were other traits in his client's character, which he was afraid, upon comparison with the characters and habits of the Gentlemen before them, might tend still farther to degrade him in their eyes. His fortune for instance, was small, not exceeding a few hundreds a year, but, entirely unencumbered, which he was apprehensive would be thought not gentlemanlike by many persons of much larger fortunes; nor yet his mode of spending his income, for he never went beyond it; never squandered any portion of it in idle, useless, and unnecessary expences; never gambled with it; never ran in debt. He bred up his family, (three daughters and a son), in a plain and frugal manner. He was careful to set them the example of a moral and religious life. He hallowed the sabbath, and gave rest to all dependent on him, both man and beast. He was careful above all things, not to travel on a Sunday, to the disturbance of the rest of others, and profanation of the Lord's Day; in fine, however ungentlemanlike it might appear to the opposite party, he did not wish to conceal from the

court, that his client was in all respects a good Christian, a good husband, a good father, a good master, a good neighbour, and a good friend!— for, after all, it was friendship alone, that had brought him into the predicament in which he now stood. Friendship not for the living, but the dead. It was entirely in consequence of an old promise to a dead friend, that at 70 years of age, he had acceded to the proposal of his friend's son, to ride the race. He need not go

further into particulars; he had stated these things exactly as they were, for the information of the Court. What effect they might produce, he could not pretend to judge; there were those present, who seemed to say, that a person of this description did not come up to their ideas of a Gentleman; it would remain with the Court and Jury to say whether he came up to their ideas of such a character. I am happy to have to record, that this worthy person so described was in the fullest manner allowed by the Judge and the Jury to be a proper English Gentleman, to the great satisfaction of a most crowded hall, who hailed the decision with the loudest acclamations!

Though the title of Gentleman has thus been

solemnly placed upon so respectable a footing, and though there is nothing upon which men more pride themselves than that of passing for Gentlemen, yet as I said before, they do not like to be formally denominated such.

It seems to be the fashion to consider A. B. Esquire, as many degrees above A. B. Gent.— and this has had the effect of rendering the former title too common. Upon which I shall have more to say hereafter. At present I shall go on with what I have to observe upon the term Gentleman. One definition of a Gentleman amongst us, is that of being able to "live without manual labour." All such are said to be Gentlemen in England; and perhaps this is as good a description as any we could have. It excludes all who are dependent upon manual labour for their maintenance, and includes every body else, however distinguished in other particulars. Selden acknowledges that it is a title, concerning which writers of all countries have disputed. The author of an" Historical and critical History on the true rise of Nobility, political and civil,” observes, that in the question of Nobility, not only the ignorant, but even the learned also much err, whilst they agree not upon the proper

signification of the six following words; Eugenia, Nobilitas, Generosus, Nobilis, Ingenuus, Gentilis, which he renders," Honor of birth, Nobility, a Gentleman, a Nobleman, a man free born, a Gentleman." We have here therefore two words signifying Gentleman, Generosus and Gentilis; but it seems to bring us no nearer to the mark, as the author himself indeed tells us ; for learned

men (says he) still differ about them both. The odd thing is, that the less we attempt to explain it, the more it seems to have in it. If we go to explain it, it seems distinct from, and inferior to, the term Nobleman; but yet there is not a Nobleman upon earth probably who would not resent being told that he was not a Gentleman. Gentilis and Nobilis were used by the ancients nearly in the same sense, and we read that Henry VI. created one Bernard Auquin a Gentleman, by the term Nobilitamus. Sir Thomas Smith indeed, in his book de Republicâ Anglorum, begins his twentieth chapter "de nobilibus minorum gentium," in the following manner. "Gentlemen, id est, nobiles, sunt, quos natalium series dignitasque claros efficiunt, Græcis Evyenes dicti, Latinis nobiles, Gallice nobles." And his remarks upon derived and inherent gentility, are admirable; he