1808.] 
expressed personal esteem during a visit 
which he paid to the prelate in question. 
The public are well acquainted with 
the political principles of the then bishop 
of Chester. They were publicly avowed 
in a speech, delivered in parhament, and 
appear to have savoured of the obsolete 
creed of passive obedience and non-resis- 
tance, 
could not possibly be contemplated in a 
favourable point ot view by his lordship ; 
and those men who were considered by 
some as the saviours of their country, 
and the liberators of a large portion of 
the human race; when beheld through 
different optics, appeared as rebels and 
perturbators of the public repose. The 
Marguis of Lansdowne, then Earl of Shel- 
borne, replied in a bold and energetic 
harangue ;-and it was thought by some, 
that the layman, on this occasion, got the 
better of the ecclesiastic. This might 
chiefly proceed, however, from the popu- 
lavity of the cause, advocated by thé for- 
mer, as well as from the jealousy with 
which mankind behold a christian priest 
inculcating <loctrines that do not altoge- 
ther correspond with those mild, peace- 
ful, and humane maxims, which consti- 
tute the true spirit, as well as the true 
glory of his faith.* 
~ But whatever the principles or profes- 
sions of the reverend prelate might be, 
certain it is, that they proved no bar 
either to his own advancement, or that of 
his family. In 1777, Dr. Markham was 
translated to the archbishopric of York, 
and was thus rewarded with the second 
dignity inthe Anglican church, which he 
held during the almost unexampled pe- 
riod of thirty years, as we have reason to 
believe, without censure, and even with- 
out animadyersion, 
We have perused the debates during 
the regency, without being able to find 
the name of the learned prelate prefixed 
to any speech. It was otherwise, how- 
* The bishops of St. Asaph and Peterbo- 
rough took the opposite side of the question, 
and the latter concluded a very ablé and ani- 
mated speech, against the prosecution of the 
Americana war, with the following remark : 
‘¢In every exertion of power, ‘civil or na- 
tural, it is right too to consider what is, and 
what is not, practicable ; it was‘he glery, as 
well as the policy, of imperial Rome, at the 
Summit of her greatness; it has in more mo- 
dern times been the peculiar boast of Great 
Britain, and may it be her practice to the end 
of time: 
ce 
Per populos dare jura volentes.”* 
Montnuiy Mac,, No. 165, 
Memoirs of the late Archbishop of York. 
The conduct of the Americans - 
- than described. 
563 
ever, during the trial of Mr. Hastings, to 
whom he had doubtless great obligations; 
for the governor general had appointed 
one of his sons to the respectable and 
profitable situation of President at Be- 
nares, in 1781, when he was only twenty- 
one years of age. 
On the “one hundred and third day 
of the trial,” when Mr. Burke, who had 
formerly lived in habits of intimacy with 
the archbishop, was conducting the cross 
examination of Mr, Wombwell, “ rela« 
tive to the salaries and pensions that had 
been paid to English gentlemen in Oude, 
from the Nabob’s treasury,” the archbi= 
shop of York, after evincing no small 
degree of impatience, exclaimed, with a 
very strong and point@d emphasis, that 
the conduct of the manager was “‘illibe- 
ral |” 
This sally escaped witheut reply, ale 
though not without observation; and at 
a subsequent period, when the interro 
gation of Mr. Auriol took place, “ the 
archbishop started up with much feeling, 
and said, it was impossible for him silently 
to listen to the illiberal conduct of the 
manager; that he examined the witness 
as if he were examining, not a gentleman, 
but a pick-pocket; that the dliberality 
and inhumanity of the managers, in the 
course of this long trial, could not be ex- 
ceeded by Marat and Robespierre, had 
the conduct of the trial been committed 
to them.” 
The situation of Mr. Burke, on this oc- 
casion, may be far more easily conceived 
Whoever recollects 
the irritability of his temper, and the 
violent gusts of passion to which this ce- 
lebrated man was occasionally subject, 
must wonder at his self-command at a 
moment like the present, when the ho- 
nour of the committee of impeachment, 
and the dignity of the commons of En- 
gland, was thus outraged. His reply 
was, “that he had not heard one word 
of what had been spoken, and that he 
should act as if he had not.” 
On Tuesday, May 28, 1793, Mr. Ba« 
ker, knight of the shire for Hertford, rose 
in his place, and complained of a gros$ 
libel, 1 the “ World” of the preceding 
day, which we have already copied. 
‘“¢ It attributed words,” he added, “to 
a certain person, which he thought im- 
possible for the person named to have 
used. The libel would therefore rest 
upon the assertors; but wherever it should 
ultimately rest, it would be for that house, 
by a future proceeding, te shew that they 
45 would 
