210 
main link by which it is connected with 
the law and the crown. As for the 
house of commons, it is hustled by Mr. 
Burke among the revolutionary societies, 
as one of their own family. Thus the 
institutions which respect our posthu- 
mous security, are held up as of most 
immediate importance; those which 
chiefly concern our federative and diplo- 
matic intercourse with foreign countries, 
are ranked next in domestic value; the 
body which gives force to our courts of 
justice, stability to our Jaws, and co- 
hesion to our landed opulence, sinks 
into a subordinate confederacy; and the 
great assembly of the united represen- 
tatives of the people, the source of all 
legislation, the pledge of voluntary obe- 
dience, the nursery of our statesmen, 
the confidant of our grievances, and the 
depositary of our hopes, is scarcely made 
an object of attention. 
Mr. Burke suggests an oratorical ex- 
cuse for what he perceived to be absurd; 
and plainly intimates that his relative 
commendation had rather been propor- 
tioned to his actual sense of the danger, 
than of the value, of the institutions dis- 
cussed. Buthere a grave and elaborate 
historian has adopted these freaks of 
rhetoric, resorted to for a transient pur- 
pose, as permanent rules of apprecia- 
tion, and canons of historical criticism. 
Still the bias, though real, is not very 
prominent. 
Bating this perverse and dangerous 
leaning of opinion, Dr. Bisset’s History 
is highly praiseworthy. It narrates with 
greater detail and completeness than 
Matfarlane, Belsham, or Adolphus, the 
transactions of the present reign. ‘The 
parliamentary matter is not confined to 
the political, but embraces the statisti- 
cal legislation and debates. The influ- 
ence of literature on public proceeding 
is not overlooked. ‘The foreign cam- 
paigns and continental operations re- 
ceive their due share of investigation 
and narrative. The style is natural, yet 
elegant; the information abundant, yet 
select; the criticism loyal, yet liberal. 
In short, it appears to us ‘more likely 
than any of the rival histories to annex 
itself to Hume and Smollett, as the 
regular and generally received conti-. 
nuation of the History of England. One 
source of popularity in history-writing, 
is habitually to take part with the con- 
stituted authorities, and with the na- 
tional spirit. Rulers when they have 
erred, a people when they have erred, 
HISTORY, POLITICS, 
AND STATISTICS. 
are still grateful to those who become 
the apologists of their error, and the 
explainers of their decision:this art of — 
ingratiation is much practised by Dr. 
Bisset. He is commonly the panegy- 
rist of event, the preconizer of destiny ; 
he rows with the stream; he fans in its 
own direction the gale of public opi- 
nion; and turns away from the cotem- 
porary scene, like Augustus, with a 
request to the spectaters to appland. 
He is the reverse of a discontented 
historian, but is candid even to the fac- 
tious. 
A preliminary dissertation rapidly 
sketches the state of party and events 
prior to the war of 1756. The first 
chapter continues this preparatory mat- 
ter in greater detail to the accession of 
George the third. The first volume 
extends to the dissolution of the par- 
liament in 1767. It deserves notice, that 
when the affairs of the India company 
came before this parliament, in Novem- 
ber 1766, Lord Chatham denied the 
right of the company to have territorial . 
possessions, as such were not conveyed 
by their charters, and were foreign to 
the nature and object of a trading com- 
pany; and he maintained that Govern- 
ment, for its great expence in the pro: 
tection of that company, was entitled 
to the territorial revenue of Hindostan, 
for the purpose of indemnification. ‘These 
observations apparently imspired the 
scheme of that India bill, which Burke 
and Fox produced sixteen yéarsvafter: 
wards. 
In the second volume (at p. 45) there 
is a diverting misprint. Junius is de- 
scribed as accusing Lord Mansfield of 
jacobinism. 
‘Lhe first political symptoms of a re- | 
ligicus heterodoxy, now so much ex- 
tended, are thus noticed by Dr. Bisset. 
«Sir Henry Houghton made a motion te 
relieve the dissenters from subscriptions and 
the penal laws, but was warmly opposed by 
the high-church gentlemen. The dissenters, 
it was said, by omitting to subscribe, had 
violated the law of the land ; and the trans- 
giessors, not satisfied with being excused, 
desired the law to be changed in order to 
accommodate a change in their opinions. A. 
total exemption from subseription would _ 
open the way to heresy and inhdeiity. The 
dissenters were a respectable body, and a cer- 
tain regard was due to their opinions; but 
the present bill, imstead of proposing the 
mere relief of pon-conformists, was a project 
for encouraging schism, and ultunarely de- 
stroying the church of Lygland; many of 
ss 
