Imágenes de página

consistent with the delicacy and honour of a gentleman; for at every period of his life, his honour was truly "Castilian." Without patronage, political or professional, he rose to considerable eminence; and in the year 1783 became a member of the House of Commons, and continued in Parliament until 1794. In that assembly he was equally respected by the Minister and the Opposition; he did not look to party or promotion, and was at all times ready to resist any encroachment upon the Constitution, either by the Crown or the people ; he did not look abroad for casual applause, he looked within for approbation, and found it there; such he conceived to be the proper discharge of his parliamentary duty.—As a law yer, no man considered his client's case with more care and attention; if he felt the justice, or legal right of his client's claim, he was more zealous than if he entertained a different opinion, for no desire for professional fame, or being the successful advo cate, could induce him to misstate facts, or misrepresent circumstances to the Court; candour and truth, according to his idea, were indispensable to the independence and dignity of the Bar. He was free from envy and jealousy, for he always felt as if he partook of the individual success of his brethren: of the younger part of the profession, and those of friendless merit, he took particular notice, speak ing of them on proper occasions, and, if engaged in the same cause, drawing the attention of the Court to their observations; young men of this description were often at his table, and by that means became known to persons of distinction and rank. In 1794 he was appointed a Baron of the Exchequer; and surely no appointment to that office ever met with more public and private approbation. From Michaelmas term 1800, until Trinity term 1801, he was a Lord Commissioner for the custody of the Great Seal. In the last year he was appoint ed Master of the Rolls; he continued in that office until 1806, which, from severe attacks of the gout, he was obliged to resign. As a Judge, he was most patient; every advocate was heard with attention, and the junior branch with parental kindness ; for to all concerned, his wish was to "do justice for truth's sake, and his conscience." Soon after the resigna

tion of his office, he retired to his native county, where he died; and never was any person more sincerely lamented by all who knew him, and particularly by his domestics, who in their master always found a friend. Soon after his promotion to the Bench he had the gratification of seeing his Son distinguished at the Bar, and in the Senate, for his talents and his various and elegant attainments, and who, at the early age of 35 years, was appointed a Baron of the Exchequer, having previously filled the office of Solicitor-general.-Let us now look at Sir Michael Smith in private life: in his family, no man could be more truly what a master, husband, and parent ought to be, kind, loving, and indulgent; his conversation and example entertaining and instructive ; and his temper and habits even and cheerful. To his friends he was affectionate, constant, and generous'; to the distressed, humane and charitable; and in communicating favours and kindness he was delicately attentive to the feelings of those who were assisted and relieved. His manners were those of a gentleman; not ceremonious, but kind, affable, and courteous, for he considered that the best direction for politeness was to be found in the Christian precept, "Do unto others as you would they should do unto you." He was familiar with the best writings of the poets, orators, and historians of ancient and modern times; by these he improved his mind and his heart. His speeches and judgments were correct, logical, and most appropriate in expression; and in his conduct you might observe that warmth of friendship, love of his country, and invincible integrity, so well described in the literary productions of Greece and Rome. As a speaker, in public, his manner was rather cold, though occasionally_impressive; his language was not fitted for popular attraction, and, like fine painting, could be only estimated by persons of judgment and good taste. His illness was short, but severe; he bore it with meekness, and a full reliance on the truth and promises of the Gospel, for his belief was sincere and practical. His son (now Sir William Cusack Smith) attended him in his illness and last moments with filial piety, and had the instructive consolation of seeing how "a Christian can die."

On the resignation of Sir Michael

Smith, the Irish Bar presented the following address to him:

"Sir, In departing from the Bench, you will permit the sincerest esteem and unqualified approbation of the Bar to accompany you into your bonourable retirement. We cannot forget, and we are happy to acknowledge, that by your mild, gracious, and unassuming deportment, the dignity of the high situation you filled, was sustained without austerity or arrogance and that the well mixed qualities of the scholar, the lawyer, the gentleman, and the judge, conciliated affection, and impressed respect. Scorning to offer the gross incense of adu. lation, but desirous to render a just tribute to merit, we entertain an ardent hope, that though your judicial functions have ceased, your example may have operation, and that the chief blessing of the Country, equal justice, may continue to be dispensed with an integrity above suspicion, and with manners void of offence."

His Answer.

"Gentlemen, I thank you from my heart, for this kind and affectionate address, the terms of which excite a feeling to which to language of mine can do justice. To acquire and deserve the esteem and approbation of that enlightened and liberal profession to which you belong, was the first ambition of my early life; to have obtained them, which your address assures me of, will be the pride and comfort of my declining age. It is now more than seven-and-thirty years since I first had the honour of being enrolled as one of your respectable body; and during the whole of that long period I never ceased, nor while life and memory remain shall I cease, to love, esteem, and admire, the spirit, talents, and liberality of the Irish Bar. May they be perpetual! is, and to the last moments of my existence shall be, the fervent prayer of

"Gentlemen, your ever obliged, faithful and affectionate humble servant, MICHAEL SMITH. Harcourt-street, July 12, 1806."

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

Driffield, or Dry field, lies in the Hundred of Crothorne and Minety, about three miles south-west of Cirencester. Rumbald, Chancellor of England (temp. Edward the Confessor), granted this Manor, and the advowson of the Living, to the College of Cirencester, and they continued in the Abbey from the foundation to its dissolution. In the 37th of Henry VIII. the house (till then a seat of the Abbot of Cirencester) and lands of Driffield, St. Ampreys, and Kemsford, &c. were granted to Humphrey and George Browne, in exchange for lands at Waltham, in Essex. Sir Humphrey Browne died seised thereof the 4th of Elizabeth, and left four co-hèiresses. Rudder, in his History of Gloucestershire, says, Roger Townshend, who married the eldest, had livery in right of his wife 5th of Eliz.-One of the heiresses dying soon after, livery was granted to Mary Browne the 9th of Elizabeth-and livery of another 3d part to Christiana Browne 14th of Elizabeth." In Bigland's Hist. of Gloucestershire is the following statement: "In 1546 these lands (Driffield, St. Ampreys, &c.) passed by Mary the elder co-heir of Sir Humphrey Browne, of Ridley Hall, Essex, and one of the Justices of the Common Pleas, to Thomas Wilford, esq. prior to 1608: to whom succeeded Sir John Pretyman. John or George A'Aungier, or Hanger, a Merchant in London, purchased the manorial Estate, extending over the whole parish, of Sir John Pretyman, of Lodington (Leicestershire), in the reign of Charles the Ist. ‘in 1651'.”— And Atkyns gives much the same account in his Hist. of Gloucestershire.

The late Lord Coleraine pulled down this venerable mansion and offices, which together measured about 320 feet in length, in 1803, or rather sold the materials by auction, for the purchasers to take down the house. The estate was said to be about 40007. a year value.

I have not been able to learn in what manner and in what year the Driffield Estate came into the possession of the Pretyman family. Sir John Pretyman, Knt. who, in 1638, was buried in the old Church of Driffield (in which a Monument was erected to the memory of him and "Mary his wife," who died the same year,

but which Monument was not replaced when the Church was rebuilt by the first Lord Coleraine in 1734),


was certainly son of a William Pretyman of Bacton, co. Suffolk, where his ancestors had long been seated, and was Lord of the Manors of Bacton and Thorndon. He appears to have removed to Driffield soon after the decease of his son Robert Pretyman, by his first wife Dorothy (daughter of Sir Robert Drury, Knt. of Rougham, in Suffolk, and who was buried in Bacton Church in 1607), and to have sold the reversion of his Bacton property, when he left Suffolk, to a Henry Pretyman, whose grandson Henry re-sold this estate back to the elder branch of the family-a part of which is still in the possession of the Bishop of Lincoln, the present head of the Pretyman family; the Bishop having taken the name of Tomline a few years ago, in compliance with the will of Marmaduke Tomline, Esq. who left him a considerable estate in Lin colnshire upon that condition.

It might be supposed that Driffield passed to Sir John Pretyman by his marriage with Mary, one of the coheiresses of Sir Humphrey Browne, and relict of Thomas Wilford, Esq. Mary being the name of Sir T. Pretyman's wife buried at Driffield in 1638. But various authorities (Heralds' Office, MS. Brit. Museum, Nichols's Leicestershire, &c. &c.) assert that Sir John Pretyman married Dorothy Drury, before mentioned (the articles of this marriage are still existing); Mary the daughter of Sir John Bourchier, of Bentley, in Yorkshire, or of Barnsley, in Gloucestershire; a sister of Matthew Bacon of Welby, in Norfolk; and a daughter of Francis Greene of Welby. No dates, however, are given for these marriages, and mistakes may have arisen from there having been other John Pretymans living about that time.-On the other hand, the Brownes and the Pretymans were certainly much connected about that period. Sir Richard Browne, Baronet, and clerk of the Council, "married Elizabeth, daughter of Sir John Pretyman, Knt. May 20th, 1631." Sir John Pretyman left a legacy to "his daughter Elizabeth Browne," by his will dated a short time before his death. She died in 1652, aged 42, and was buried at Greenwich, leaving one daughter and heir, Mary, married to John Evelyn, Esq.-Sir Richard Browne died in 1683, aged 78. Christopher Browne, of Dept

ford, left the wardship of his grandson, Richard Browne, to William Pretyman, when he died in 1645, aged 70. This William Pretyman was the second son of Sir John Pretyman, Knt. of Driffield, and brother to Sir John Pretyman, Baronet, of Nova Scotia, who sold Driffield, and went to reside at Lodington on his marriage with Elizabeth, daughter and sole heiress of George Turpin, of Knaptoft, Leicestershire. This William Pretyman resided at Bromefield Mansion, in or near Deptford, in 1645, and held the demesne lands by lease from the Commissioners of the Revenue, and was Patron of the Living of Driffield in


An old Driffield Register, begun in 1560, mentions the baptism of a John Pretyman so early as 1583; of a William Pretyman in 1587, and of a Jane Prety man in 1588; and the death of a William Pretyman in 1602, and of an Elizabeth Pretyman in 1604; and the next entry of the Pretyman family is the baptism of "Thomas, son of John, 1620." It seems not improbable, therefore, that William Pretyman had possession of Driffield, either by marriage or purchase, previously to Sir John Pretyman-especially as Sir John Pretyman and Robert his son (who must have had property independent of his father) purchased Thorndon of a John and a Thomas Pretyman in 1614, where it is supposed he or his son Robert resided for some time-perhaps till the death of Robert, as, in 1629, Sir John Pretyman, for himself, and as executor to his son Robert, sold the Thorndon Estate to a Mr. Bishop.In a Deed dated 1636, Sir John Pretyman describes himself as "the only surviving son of William Pretyman, of Bacton, and the brother and heir of William Pretyman, late of Gray's Inn." Sir John Pretyman's father (William Pretyman) died in 1593 or 1594. Was his elder brother William of Gray's Inn, the former possessor of Driffield, and the same William buried there in 1602 The writings belonging to the Driffield Estate would probably name the successive owners, and fix the dates relative to the interval between the death of Sir Humphrey Browne and the year 1651, when it was purchased by the Hanger family, who now hold it—or information might perhaps be obtained from the



family papers of the Brownes, or the Pretymans; if, contrary to the too frequent practice of indiscriminate destruction, any such papers exist.

The communication of farther particulars relative to Driffield Abbey, or to the families who have possessed it previous to 1651, through the channel of your Miscellany, will oblige Yours, &c.




London Institution, October 18. our pursuit after knowledge, you must be aware, explanations may sometimes be required, and doubts may arise, which can best be satisfied by inviting discussion. Allow these reasons as my apology for troubling you with these remarks.

In a note affixed to Dr. Cogan's "Ethical Treatise on the Passions," I find the following passage:

"This embarrassment would have been avoided, had Mr. Locke uniformly maintained that distinction between to will and to desire proposed in the text, and which common phraseology fully authorizes; or, in other words, had he considered will as uniformly expressive of a determination of the mind to act according to some motive which neces sarily includes in it the power of acting, for, as he says, we may desire to fly, but we cannot will to fly except we have the power *."

Continuing the same Note, I find as follows:

"We desire to be relieved from something which makes us unhappy, and we will to make use of the means if they be in our power."

[ocr errors]


Now, I would ask, does not the Doctor, in his last explanation of the word will, differ from his former definition? For if, as he says, to "will is distinguished from to desire, by including in it the power to act," how can he employ the expression will to make use of means," while at the same time an obstacle may arise, "if they be in our power," which would prevent the fulfilling of the act, and thereby reduce it (according to the Doctor's own definition) to desire. I may have misunderstood the Doctor's meaning, but I cannot help thinking it requires some further elu

cidation on this head.

It is certainly much to be regretted

*Note N. p. 479.

that Metaphysical Writers have never yet been able to agree among themselves as to the precise signification of the various terms employed by them in their disquisitions. In every treatise that appears on this subject, we find ourselves obliged first to study the meaning attached by the Author to the particular phraseology he has adopted, and which is often found materially to differ from the definition of terms applied in other similar Works that have preceded it, and which we must therefore necessarily unlearn in order not to create confusion in our minds.

Thus, for the word idea, made use of by Mr. Locke, we find Mr. Hume endeavouring to substitute impression. Dr. Reid certainly prefers conception, and again, Dugald Stewart generally employs the term notion.

Surely in common language all these words have not the same meaning. Which then is to be preferred, as most expressive of the signification intended?

This, and several other similar instances that might be enumerated, appear to me as strong impediments which materially arrest our progress in the study of the Philosophy of the Human Mind. They would, however, I think, be removed if some one of acknowledged abilities (and the Literary World is not wanting in such) could be induced to favour the Publick with something in the form of a Dictionary of Metaphysical Terms, which might serve as a standard to all future writers on this abstruse subject. I am in hopes that some one of your Readers will favour me with the explanations I require, and that you will have the goodness to pardon the intrusion of Yours, &c. G. L.

[blocks in formation]

IF your Simplex Correspondent (vol. sult a Book, in which I have no doubt LXXXVII. ii. p. 312, b.) will conhe places an unlimited confidence, "Walker's Sufferings of the Clergy," he may find there (and in other Publications) that the "amiable and benevolent Bp. Goodman," over whose case he so pathetically mourns, as "felt the puritanical venhaving geance of the canting Persecutors” of his age, was a determined Papist. Yours, &c.



[ocr errors]
« AnteriorContinuar »