for the Queen, are kept in utter ignorance of the sentiments of the real people. Prominent among such persons must be many of the witnesses for the Queen.

JULIUS.

LETTER XV.

TO LORD HOLLAN D.

MY LORD,

November 1, 1820.

I HAVE just read, with astonishment and regret, your very unqualified declaration," that you were determined to vote against the Bill now pending in Parliament, on principles which you had frequently stated to the House." Were you, my Lord, sitting as a Legislator alone, such a declaration might be proper and appropriate; but have you forgotten, my Lord, that, bound by the oath and honour of a Peer of England, you conjoin at this moment the character of Legislator and Juryman? The country, my Lord, demands an aye or nay from your lips, on the vitally important question of the guilt or innocence of the Queen. It will not tolerate any evasion of an express verdict on that point.

What, my Lord, have the principles so often stated, to do with the substantiation or non

substantiation of the charges against her Majesty? Beware, my Lord, of attempting to escape from the grievous duty of exposing the conviction of your conscience, by expressing hostility to the mode of investigation through which that conviction has been implanted. An unqualified vote against the second reading of the Bill, given from any other consideration whatsoever but that of an absolute conviction that the charges against the Queen have not been proved, would involve the giver in a violation of his oath, a breach of his honour, and an utter dereliction of his duty to his King and his Country.

The expediency of the Bill, my Lord, you may debate; its conformity to the spirit and letter of the Constitution you may question; in Committee its clauses you may discuss; but nothing, my Lord, ought to shield you from rendering an express verdict on the alleged criminality of our accused Queen. Unless you, my Lord, and your party, do this, you will neither mete justice to your King and Country, nor acquire credit to yourselves: a protest may register your dislike of the mode and manner of searching after the truth, but a verdict

(mark that word, my Lord!)-a verdict must record the result of that search.

You and your followers are now sufficiently warned; and if party MUST prevail, to the prevention of entire unanimity with your political opponents, a special and explicit verdict alone can in anywise satisfy an anxious and deeply interested people.

JULIUS.

LETTER XVI.

TO THE QUEEN.

UNHAPPY CONVICT,

November 27, 1820.

TILL guilt be stripped of its audacity, it is morally impossible that it should command the tender offices of commiseration. Were your loins girt about with sackcloth, and yourself in the dust, we should pity the penitent, and administer consolation to the broken of heart. But when a convicted criminal dares us to our teeth-when she defies God and man to make warning of her atrocious misconduct ;—when, with the hectoring of an Amazon, and the impudence of a Gascon, she beards on his very throne her injured Sovereign and Husband, then is it high time to lift the robe that enshrouds the leprosy beneath, to depict sin in its worst colours, to brand it by its most appropriate names.

Under this oppressive conviction, Madam, I feel myself compelled to satisfy the scruples of