first Letters; which now stands as a prefatory discourse in vindication of the whole work 3.

Mr. Holliday, in his Life of Lord Mansfield, has printed an epitaph on sir Thomas Dennison, knt. one of the judges, as composed by his lordship.

In the same work it is stated as a real fact, that the earl dictated a political sermon, which was preached by Dr. Johnson, bishop of Worcester, before the house of lords, on Nov. 29, 1759, being a day of general thanksgiving for signal successes obtained by the national arms; and in consequence of this statement Mr. Holliday has reprinted the discourse in his Appendix.

Mr. Reed has a printed copy of "Lord Chief Justice Mansfield's Argument in Wyndham versus Chetwynd, debated in Michaelmas Term, 17575." It is annexed to lord Camden's " Argument in Doe versus Kersey."]

Pp. 277, 488, et seq.

• See Preface, p. 76; and Works, vol. vii. p. 555.

5 Mr. Holliday has given an abstract of this very important case in his forensic biography of the chief justice, p. 119.

CHARLES PRATT,

EARL CAMDEN,

[WAS As son of sir John Pratt, lord chief justice of the court of king's bench, who died in 1724, when this son was an infant. After a scholastic education at Eton, he was sent to King's College, Cambridge, on the election in 1731, and became a fellow of that society. In 1735 he took the degree of B. A.; in 1739 that of M. A. and determining on the law for his profession he entered himself a member of Lincolns Inn. In due time he was called to the bar; but for many years his attendance in Westminster Hall was little noticed, and his prospects were so inadequate to his expectations, that he resolved at one period to relinquish his profession, and abandon his country 2. Fortunately for himself and for the public, so hasty and desponding a measure was not carried into execution. His diligence and application at length

It may be conjectured that at this juncture his collegiate friend, Dr. Sneyd Davies, wrote his poetical epistle, in which he earnestly encouraged him to look up to the examples of Cowper, Talbot, Somers, and Yorke, who at the English bar "Pleaded their way to glory's chair supreme, And worthy fill'd it. Let not those great names Damp, but incite; nor Murray's praise obscure Thy younger merit. Know, these lights, ere yet To noon-day lustre kindled, had their dawn. Proceed familiar to the gate of fame, Nor think the task severe, the prize too high Of toil and honour for thy father's son !"

Dodsley's Collection, vol. vi. p. 266.

were noticed, and he obtained what his talents entitled him to a considerable share of practice. In 1754 he was chosen member for Downton; and on a bill being proposed in the house of commons to extend the benefits of the Habeas Corpus act, is said to have written the pamphlet cited below. From this period he became the most rising advocate at the bar. A firm friendship between him and Mr. Pitt had taken place, and Mr. Pratt was chosen recorder of Bath in 1759. In the same year he was appointed attorney-general; and in 1761 was knighted and constituted chief justice of the common pleas. During the time he presided in that court the case of Mr. Wilkes came in various shapes before him; and the resolutions which the bench came to on those occasions, contributed greatly to increase the popularity of the chief justice. The freedom of the city of London was soon after presented to him by that corporation. In 1765 he was created a peer of Great Britain by the title of baron Camden; In 1766 he was named lord chancellor, a post he held with great honour to himself and satisfaction to the public till 1776, when he resigned in consequence of disapproving the measures respecting America. In March 1782 he was appointed president of the council, and with the exception of a short secession held the same during life. In May 1786 he was advanced to the farther dignities of viscount Bayham and earl Camden, and lived to enjoy his well-earned honours till April 18, 17943.

Europ. Mag. vol. xiii. p. 308; and Gent. Mag. vol. xiv. p. 389, where many of his speeches are referred to.

Lord Camden's title to introduction in the present work, rests on the following tracts:

"An Inquiry into the Nature and Effect of the Writ of Habeas Corpus, the great Bulwark of English Liberty, both at common Law, and under the Act of Parliament and also into the Propriety of explaining and extending that Act." Lond. 1758, 8vo.4.

"Lord Camden's Argument in Doe on the Demise of Hindson, &c. versus Kersey: wherein Lord Mansfield's Argument in Wyndham versus Chetwynd is considered and answered." Dublin, 1766, 8vo. 5. The introductory part of the former pamphlet furnishes an extract.

"Whether we consider mankind as naturally inclined to social life, or as having been reduced to it by necessity or accident; from whatever cause we suppose political societies to have taken their rise, whether from the choice and compact of the many, or from the power and conquest of a few; or whether in fact the state be so formed as best to promote the happiness of every member, or to satisfy the pride and ambition of its governors; we cannot conceive it void of that principle of self-preservation which is common to every congregate, as well as to every single body.

4 This is ascribed to his lordship on the authority of the late James West, esq. who was secretary to the treasury. Vide Bibl. Westiana, p. 88.

› Mr. Reed informs me that this pamphlet was first printed in 4to. at London, where it was suppressed by an order of the court of common pleas, over which lord Camden at that time presided.

Whether therefore the government be established on the plan of liberty or tyranny, it will certainly make some laws for the preservation of the properties and persons of the subjects; since some such are necessary to the very existence of the state, and without such, either more or less liberal, it wants an essential quality, and must degenerate into absolute anarchy and confusion. There is no civilized nation in the world that has not some legal institution or system, at least for the defence of the subject's body and estate against the encroachments of others of equal rank.

"In those governments where certain individuals, in right of their public posts or of their possessions, are intitled by the laws themselves to make use of the persons and fortunes of their inferiors, at their free will and pleasure (which is the case more or less in every arbitrary and despotic government), the laws relating to liberty and property are few, and extend to the preservation of them only as between private persons of equal rank in the community, and every subject still remains under the arbitrary power of his sovereign; every tenant, villain, or slave, under the absolute controul of his particular lord or master: but as it is the interest of the sovereign, the lord, and the master, to protect his particular subject, tenant, or slave, from the oppression of any other than himself; you will find no country where the government is so arbitrary as not to have some laws to prevent such oppression.

"On the other hand, under a free government, under which (if we suppose, as it is reasonable to