1831.] Monthltj Review of Lilerature. 209 



Dibdin regards as a bishop in futuro — we had one or two of his in the first 

 volume. But the jewel of the batch is Bishop Huntingford's Sermon on False 

 Philosophy, which, the false philosophy we mean, as whatever is false, de- 

 serves, of course, no quarter. But what docs the Bishop brand with this same 

 epithet ? Sundry shadows of his own raising, apparently. Look at some of 

 the points. It is false, because it (the Bishop's false philosophy) asserts that man 

 in society retains all his natural rights — that all men are equal — ttuit man is 

 perfect — that human institutions can be perfect — that, because the use of a thing 

 is good, the abuse is so — that men are to obey their passions instead of their 

 reason — that nothing is to be admitted as true but on mathematical demonstra- 

 tion, &c. ; — giants, the reader sees, which the good Bishop sets up, to Tom- 

 Thumb down again, while Dr. Dibdin shouts lo Triumphe ! 



Lardner's Cabinet Library, George IV. 



The second volume of this animated sketch of the late king's life and reign, 

 brings the story down to the peace of 1814. The work is written in a spirit of 

 ultra whiggism — which still means only aristocratic whiggism — as far from 

 radicalism as the poles asunder — but who, of whatever party he be, scniples 

 now-a-days about turning inside-out the conduct and motives of public men, 

 from the king to the constable ? The author, like his friends, the whigs, has a 

 strong disposition to be decisive and dictatorial, and writes occasionally with more 

 point and piquancy than authority. Erskine gets roughly handled. When the 

 Grenville ministry was patched up in ISOG, there was a friendly contention 

 between Lords EUenborough and Erskine — each claiming the chief-justiceship, 

 and yielding to the other the higher honours of the chancellorship. Lord 

 Erskine's personal vanity would have preferred the seals, precarious as they 

 were ; but, with the consciousness that he was ignorant both of the principles 

 and practice of equity, he trembled for his fame, and affected the modesty of 

 concession. Lord EUenborough, with his characteristic frankness, cut the 

 matter short, by saying, " Why, Erskine, I know as little of equity as you do 

 yourself." Frequent and recent instances prove that a mere common lawyer 

 may be suddenly transformed into an equity judge ; but at the same time it 

 follows as a corollary, that the learned profession has its share of charlatanry, 

 when, with the notorious want of previous study and experience in that 

 branch of jurisprudence, these sudden transitions can be made with safety and 

 advantage. 



After the breaking up of this ministry, expressly on the Catholic Question, 

 Lord Erskine took the first opportunity of making his profession of protestant 

 faith. The writer thus notices it : — 



" Lord Erskine, in the House of Peers, in a strain of distempered folly, which 

 excites wonder, coming from one who had been chancellor and a cahhiet mumter, 

 mixed up the history of the military and naval service bill with that of his 

 own religious education, and made his confession of faith in a tone of drivelling 

 or canting egotism. ' I am one,' said he, ' who really entertains the pro- 

 foundest reverence for God, religion, and all professors of the christian 2^>'o- 

 testant faith. No man, my lords, can be more religious than I am. 1 need not 

 excei)t the worthy and pious prelates in whose presence 1 speak. I glory in 

 this declaration — would to God my life were as pure as my faith. I hope to 

 see all natiims collected under the benign shade of the gospel. I regard the 

 Romish religion as a gross superstition, now visibly on the decline, and so far 

 from being indulgent to it, I wish that inconvenience should be felt, though no 

 injustice suffered, by its professors.' It would be hard to say whether this dis- 

 tinction savours more of pettifogging or of persecution. Lord Erskine was one 

 of the many men over-rated, as others are under-rated, in their day. He was a 

 sort of shining ephemeron. His faculties never reached the views or the elo- 

 quence of ])oiitical deliberation. Even his speeches at the bar, jn-cconited as they 

 have been, will not save him from oblivion. His rhetoric, as preserved in tlicm, 

 is so Bupcrficial, that his powiT must have consisted in the contagious feivour of 



M M. New Scries.— Vol. XII. No. (58. Y 



