and his brother James; and it had been put in force, though unfrequently, after the Revolution. A greater injustice cannot be imagined, than the practice of torture to extort confession, although it once made a part of judicial procedure in every country of Europe, and is still resorted to in some continental nations. It is easy to conceive, that a timid man, or one peculiarly sensible to pain, will confess crimes of which he is innocent, to avoid or escape from the infliction of extreme torture; while a villain, of a hardy disposition of mind and body, will endure the worst torment that can be imposed on him, rather than avow offences of which he is actually guilty.

The laws of both countries conformed but too well in adding to the punishment of high treason certain aggravations, which, while they must disgust and terrify the humane and civilized, tend only to brutalize the vulgar and unthinking part of the spectators, and to familiarize them with acts of cruelty. On this the laws of England were painfully minute. They enjoined that the traitor should be cut down from the gibbet before life and sensibility to pain were extinguished-that while halfstrangled, his heart should be torn from his breast and thrown into the fire-his body opened and embowelled, and,-omitting other more shamefully savage injunctions,-that his corpse should be quartered, and exposed upon bridges and city towers, and abandoned to the carrion crow and the eagle. Admitting that high treason, as it implies the destruction of the government under which we live,

is the highest of all possible crimes, still the forfeiture of life, which it does, and ought to infer, is the highest punishment which our mortal state affords. All the butchery, therefore, which the former laws of England prescribed, only disgusts or hardens the heart of the spectator; while the apparatus of terror seldom affects the criminal, who has been generally led to commit the crime by some strong enthusiastic feeling, either implanted in him by education, or caught up from sympathy with others; and which, as it leads him to hazard life itself, is not subdued or daunted by the additional or protracted tortures, which can be added to the manner in which death is inflicted.

Another penalty annexed to the crime' of high treason, was the forfeiture of the estates of the criminal to the crown, to the disinheriting of his children, or natural heirs. There is something in this difficult to reconcile to moral feeling, since it may, in some degree, be termed visiting the crimes of the parents upon the children. It may be also alleged, that it is hard to forfeit and take away from the lawful line of succession property which may have been acquired by the talents and industry of the criminal's forefathers, or, perhaps, by their meritorious services to the state. But, on the other hand, it must be considered, that there is something not unappropriate in the punishment of reducing to poverty the family of him, who by his attack on the state, might have wrought the ruin of thousands of families. Nor is it less to be admitted, that this branch of the punishment has a quality always de

sirable—namely, a strong tendency to deter men from the crime. High treason is usually the offence of men of rank and wealth; at least such being the leaders in civil war, are usually selected for punishment. It is natural that such individuals, however willingly they may venture their own persons, should be apt to hesitate when the enterprise involves all the fortunes of their house, name, rank, and other advantages, which, having received perhaps from a long train of ancestors, they are naturally and laudably desirous to transmit to their posterity.

The proposal for extending the treason law of England into North Britain, was introduced under the title of a bill for further completing and perfecting the Union. Many of the Scottish members alleged, on the contrary, that the proposed enactments were rather a violation of the national treaty, since the bill was directly calculated to encroach on the powers of the Court of Justiciary, which had been guaranteed by the Union. This objection was lessened at least by an amendment on the bill, which declared, that three of the Judges of Justiciary (so the Criminal Court of Scotland is termed) should be always included in any Commission of Oyer and Terminer. The bill passed into a statute, and has been ever since the law of the land.

Thus was the Union completed. We shall next endeavour to show, in the phrase of mechanics, how this new machine worked; or, in other words, how this great alteration on the internal Constitution of Great Britain answered the expectations of those by whom the changes were introduced.

CHAPTER LXIII.

Characters of the Leading Men in Scotland-the Dukes of Hamilton, Argyle, and the Earl of Mar-Reception of the Scottish Members in Parliament-Differences between the Scottish Peers and Commoners-Reconciliation between them in consequence of the Discussion of the Question, whether Scottish Peers, on being created Peers of Great Britain, had a right to sit in the House of Lords -Debate on the Question, whether the Mult Tax ought to be extended to Scotland-Motion for the Abolition of the Union-negatived by a Majority of only Four-Ferment occasioned by the Publication of Swift's Pamphlet on "The Public Spirit of the Whigs."

[1708-1713.]

In order to give you a distinct idea of the situation in which Great Britain was placed at this eventful period, I shall first sketch the character of three or four of the principal persons of Scotland whose influence had most effect in producing the course of events which followed. I shall then

explain the course pursued by the Scottish representatives in the national Parliament; and these preliminaries being discussed, I shall, thirdly, endeavour to trace the general measures of Britain respecting her foreign relations, and to explain the effect which these produced upon the public tranquillity of the United Kingdom.

The Duke of Hamilton you are already somewhat acquainted with, as a distinguished character during the last Parliament of Scotland, when he headed the opposition to the treaty of Union; and also during the plot for invading Scotland and restoring the Stewart family, when he seems to have been regarded as the leader of the Lowland Jacobites, those of the Highlands rather inclining to the Duke of Athole. He was the peer of the highest rank in Scotland, and nearly connected with the royal family; which made some accuse him of looking towards the crown, a folly of which his acknowledged good sense might be allowed to acquit him. He was handsome in person, courtly and amiable in manners, generally popular with all classes, and the natural head of the gentry of Lanarkshire, many of whom are descended from his family. Through the influence of his mother, the Duchess, he had always preserved a strong interest among the Hillmen, or Cameronians, who had since the Revolution shown themselves in arms more than once; and, in case of a civil war or invasion, must have been of material avail. With all these advantages of birth, character, and influence, the Duke of Hamilton had a defect which prevented his attaining eminence as a political leader. He pos

sessed personal valour, as he showed in his last and tragic scene, but he was destitute of political courage and decision. Dangers which he had braved at a distance, appalled him when they approached near; he was apt to disappoint his friends, as the horse who baulks the leap to which he has come