amiable of women; and the charms of her addrefs and converfation, aided the impreffion which her lovely figure made on the hearts of all beholders. Ambitious and active in her temper, yet inclined to chearfulness and fociety; of a lofty fpirit, constant, and even vehement in her purpofe; yet polite and gentle, and affable in her demeanor, the feemed to partake only fo much of the male virtues as to render her eftimable, without relinquishing thofe foft graces which compofe the proper ornaments of her sex. In order to form a juft idea of her character, we must set aside one part of her conduct, while fhe abandoned herself to the guidance of a profligate man; and must consider thefe faults, whether we admit them to be imprudences or crimes, as the refult of an inexplicable, though not uncommon, inconftancy in the human mind, of the frailty of our nature, of the violence of paflion, and of the influence which fituations, and fometimes momentary incidents, have on perfons whose princi ples are not thoroughly confirmed by experience and reflection. Enraged by the ungrateful conduct of her hufband, feduced by the treacherous counsels of one in whom the repofed confidence, transported by the violence of her own temper, which never lay fufficiently under the guidance of difcretion, the was betrayed into actions, which may, with fome difficulty, be accounted for, but which admit of no apology, nor even of alleviation. An enumeration of her qualities might carry the appearance of a panegyric; an account of her conduct muft, in fome parts, wear the afpect of a fevere fatire and inve&ive.'

We fhall close our extracts with the Hiftorian's character of Elizabeth, and his reflections on her government.

There are few great perfonages in hiftory, who have been more expofed to the calumny of enemies, and the adulation of friends, than Queen Elizabeth; and yet there fcarce is any, whofe reputation has been more certainly determined, by the unanimous confent of pofterity. The unufual length of her adminiftration, and the ftrong features of her character, were able to overcome all prejudices; and obliging her detractors to abate much of their invectives, and her admirers fomewhat of their panegyrics, have at laft, in spite of political factions, and what is more, of religious animofities, produced an uniform judgment with regard to her conduct. Her vigour, her conftancy, her magnanimity, her penetration, vigilance, addrefs, are allowed to merit the highest praifes, and appear not to have been furpaffed by any perfon who ever filled a throne: A conduct less rigorous, lefs imperious, more fincere, inore indulgent to her people, would have been requifite to form a perfect character. By the force of her mind, the controuled all her more active and stronger qualities, and prevented them from running into

excess:

excefs: her heroifm was exempt from all temerity, her frugality from avarice, her friendship from partiality, her enterprize from turbulency and a vain ambition: fhe guarded not herself with equal care, or equal fuccefs, from leffer infirmities; the rivalfhip of beauty, the defire of admiration, the jealousy of love, and the fallies of anger.

Her fingular talents for government were founded equally on her temper, and on her capacity. Endowed with a great command over herself, the foon obtained an uncontrouled af cendant over her people; and while fhe merited all their esteem by her real virtues, the' alfo engaged their affection by her pretended ones. Few fovereigns of England fucceeded to the throne in more difficult circumftances; and none ever conducted the government with fuch uniform fuccefs and felicity. Though unacquainted with the practice of toleration, the true fecret for managing religious factions, the preferved her people, by her fuperior prudence, from thofe confufions in which theological controverfy had involved all the neighbouring nations: and though her enemies were the most powerful princes of Europe, the most active, the moft enterprizing, the leaft fcrupulous, the was able by her vigour to make deep impreffions on their state: her own greatnefs mean while remained untouched, and unimpaired.

The wife minifters, and brave warriors, who flourished during her reign, fhare the praife of her fuccefs; but inftead of lef fening the applaufe due to her, they make great addition to it. They owed, all of them, their advancement to her choice; they were fupported by her conftancy; and with all their ability they were never able to acquire any undue afcendant over her. In her family, in her court, in her kingdom, the remained e,qually mistress: the force of the tender paffions was great over her, but the force of her mind was ftill fuperior; and the combat which her victory vifibly coft her, ferves only to display the firmness of her refolution, and the loftinefs of her ambitious fentiments.

• The fame of this princess, though it has furmounted the prejudices both of faction and of bigotry, yet lies ftill exposed

Perhaps, however, the Hiftorian pays her too great a compliment when he fays, her friendship was exempt from partiality.' Her trufting Leicester with fuch an important command, at the time of the Spanith Invafion, when the nation was in fuch imminent danger, is a proof to the contrary. He had given fo many frequent and flagrant inAtances of his incapacity, that nothing but her extreme fondness for him, could determine her to place fuch a confidence in a man who fo little deferved it."

to

to another prejudice, which is more durable because more natural, and which, according to the different views in which we furvey her, is capable either of exalting beyond measure, or diminishing the luftre of her character. This prejudice is founded on the confideration of her fex. When we contemplate her

as a woman, we are apt be ftruck with the highest admiration of her great qualities and extenfive capacity; but we are also apt to require fome more foftnefs of difpofition, fome greater lenity of temper, fome of thofe amiable weakneffes by which her fex is diftinguished. But the true method of eftimating her merit, is to lay afide all thefe confiderations, and to confider her merely as a rational being, placed in authority, and entrusted with the government of mankind. We may find it difficult to reconcile our fancy to her as a wife or a miftrefs; but her qualitics as a fovereign, though with fome confiderable exceptions, are the object of undifputed applause and approbation.'

It must be allowed, that this portraiture is drawn with a mafterly hand. It is, indeed, piura loquens. The whole caft of the features is juft, animated, and expreffive. But in his reflections on her government, the Hiftorian has advanced fentiments which are extremely fingular and exceptionable.

The party amongst us,' fays he, who have diftinguished themselves by their adherence to liberty, and a popular government, have long indulged their prejudices against the fucceeding race of princes, by beltowing unbounded panegyrics on the vir tue and wisdom of Elizabeth. They have even been fo extremely ignorant of the tranfactions of this reign, as to extol her for a quality which, of all others, she was the leaft poffeffed of; a tender regard for the conftitution, and a concern for the liberties and privileges of her people. But as it is fearce poffible for the prepoffeffions of party to throw a veil much longer over facts fo palpable and undeniable, there is danger left the public fhould run into the oppofite extreme, and fhould entertain an averfion to the memory of a princefs, who exercifed the royal authority in a manner fo much contrary to all the ideas which we at prefent entertain of a legal conftitution. But Elizabeth only fupported the prerogatives which were tranfmitted to her by her immediate predeceffors: the believed that her fubjects were entitled to no more liberty than their ancestors enjoyed: the found that they entirely acquiefced in her arbitrary adminiftration: and it was not natural for her to find fault with a form of govern ment, by which the herfelf was invefted with fuch unlimited authority. In the particular exertions of power, the queftion ought never to be forgot, What is beft? But in the general diftribution of power among the feveral members of a conftitution, there can seldom be admitted any other question, than

What

to

8

What is ufual? Few examples occur of Princes, who have willingly refigned their power: none of those who have, without ftruggle, allowed it to be extorted from them. If any other rule than antient practice be followed, factions and diffentions muft multiply without end: and though any conftitutions, and none more than the British, have been improved even by violent innovations, the praise which we beflow on thofe patriots, to whom we are indebted for our privi Jeges, ought to be given with fome referve, and furely without the leaft rancour against those who adhered to the antient conftitution.'

That Elizabeth only fupported the prerogatives which were tranfmitted to her by her immediate predeceffors, we will not difpute; but we deny, that in the general diftribution of power, no other question can be admitted than what is ufual? From our Hiftorian's reafoning on the fubject of prerogative, one might be apt to conclude, that he confidered it as an inherent and independent privilege annexed to royalty; and as fomething intended to gratify the perfonal pride, pleasure, or intereft of Kings. Whereas, in fact, the prerogative of Princes are not rights abfolutely and irrevocably vefted in them, but only entrufted with them during fuch time as they fhall be judged neceffary to fupport their adminiftration for the good of the people. The fame power which conferred those privileges on them, may undoubtedly modify or revoke them, whenever the changes of time or accident fhall make new regulations neceffary in the ftate, for the benefit of the community. The rights of princes are but the rights of the people reflected, and the former cannot in reafon be entitled to any other prerogatives, than fuch as are neceffary to maintain their dignity and authority for the common interest.

Our Hiftorian obferves, that if any other rule than antient practice be followed, factions and diffentions muft multiply without end.' To which we anfwer, that Princes who govern with prudence, justice, and lenity, will not be guided by bad precedents, but good principles. We may add, that whatever prac tices fovereigns purfue, be they conftitutional or arbitrary, yet the people will never be factious, while they perceive the general tenor of the Prince's adminiftration to be juft, prudent, and profitable for the whole. But when they find the government throughout to be oppreffive and injurious, it is natural and reafonable to oppofe practices, which tend to their general prejudice. It is obfervable, that in this fentence our Hiftorian speaks of antient practice, whereas he had before acknowleged, that Elizabeth only fupported the prerogatives which were tranfmitted to her by her immediate predeceffors.' With regard to

thofe

thofe recent precedents tranfmitted by her immediate predeceffors, they may, as appears from what we have faid before, more properly be called innovations: and even as to antient practice, though it may ferve as an apology for the tyrant, it lays no obligation on his opprefled fubjects to fubmit to tyranny, be it ever fo antient, when they are in a capacity to refift. We agree with the Hiftorian, however, that the praise we bestow on those patriots to whom we are indebted for our privileges, ought to be given with referve. They who temper zeal with discretion, rather commend actions than applaud men. It is not within human penetration to pry into the heart, and discover the fecret fprings and motives which actuate individuals. But on what ever principles thefe patriots founded their oppofition, the oppofition itself, though in many refpects wrong conducted, cannot be too highly extolled.

After all, as to Elizabeth, it must be confeffed, that her ufurpation was the more tolerable, fince, though the mode of her government was tyrannical, yet the end was truly patriotic. The tyranny of her reign, and thofe immediately preceding, was the refult, as we hinted in the introduction to our review of the first volume, of the inftitutions framed by Henry VII. He depreffed the nobility by his policy, awed them by his wifdom and vigour, fo that they were not in a capacity to refift his encroaching power: and the Commons, in his and the reigns immediately fubfequent, had not acquired ftrength fufficient for oppofition. In this Queen's reign, by the affiftance of commerce and arts*, which neceflarily enlarged their property, and confequently their power, they feem to have had ability for refiftance, but, generally fpeaking, they had no inclination. Though he was frequently imperious, yet fhe knew how to practice affability, and flatter the people by profeffions of love and confidence. If the infringed the conflitution, by raifing money in an illegal manner, with other acts of arbitrary power; on the other hand, the repaired those breaches, by refusing money when it was offered her, and by discharging her predeceffors debts, to the amount of four millions, an incredible fum for that age t. By thefe acts of public juftice, and by many obliging points of condefenfion, fhe foftened the rigour of her abfolute fway. In fhort, fhe ufed all methods to affure and convince the people, that whatever he did, was for the general good.

This increafe, as we fuggefted in our laft, was owing to the inftitutions of Henry VII. who dilengaged a number of idle hands from military dependance, and threw them into commerce, &c.

The Hiftorian doubts of this, and thinks 300,000 the most likely fum. But the act, not the fum, is matter of illustration.

We