The offerings to Thy throne which rise,
Of mingled praise and prayer;
Are but a worthless sacrifice
Unless the heart is there.
Upon Thy all-discerning ear

Let no vain words intrude:

No tribute-but the vow sincere ;—
The tribute of the good.
My offerings will indeed be blest,
If sanctified by Thee;

If Thy pure spirit touch my heart
With its own purity.

O may that spirit warm my heart
To piety and love;
And to life's lowly vale impart
Some rays from heaven above.

A.

AGAIN has Death visited our palaces. We have the painful task, this month, of recording, the decease of His Royal Highness, the Duke of KENT, who expired at Sidmouth, after an illness which but lately assumed a threatening appear ance, on Sunday the 23rd instant. This event has produced a deep impression on the People, of whom the departed Prince ever gloried in representing himself as one. Our public charities have lost in him a Benefactor and Patron. His name is in the mouths of all the children in the Schools for the Poor of all Denominations, which, after the example of His Royal Father, he took a manifest pride in encouraging. He was also the warm friend of religious liberty; and the Roman Catholic, the Protestant Dissenter and the Jew could always reckon, in their schemes for the security of their freedom or the extension of their privileges, upon his countenance, and upon his vote as a peer of the realm.

The Duke's usefulness was much impeded, and we fear his happiness diminished, by the embarrassed state of his affairs, of which a painful exposure was lately made. Having read the official statement, we are of opinion that His Royal Highness was scarcely blameable, and that he was treated through successive administrations with a neglect and a

R. F.

rigour which would not have been shewn to any other subject; to none, at least, not out of favour with the Court.

EDWARD, Duke of KENT and STRATHERN, fourth son of George III. was born on the 2nd of November, 1767. At 18 years of age, he was sent to Germany, and resided successively at Luneburgh and Hanover, until he had almost completed his 20th year. He then passed two years at Geneva. His next removal was to Gibraltar, with his regiment. He was afterwards in North America and the West Indies, and again at Gibraltar, of which he was appointed Governor. His bravery as a soldier has been much extolled; but he was a rigid disciplinarian, and on that account unpopular in the army.

His Royal Highness married at Coburg, May 29, 1818, her Serene Highness VICTORIA MARIA LOUISA, youngest daughter of the late reigning prince of Saxe Coburg, widow of his late Serene Highness the Prince of Leiningen, and sister of his Royal Highness, Leopold, Prince of Saxe Coburg, the surviving husband of the lamented Princess Charlotte. The only issue of this marriage was a daughter, named ALEXANDRINA VICTORIA, who was born at Kensington Palace, May 24, 1819.

1819. December 4, at Woolwich, Mr. JOHN RAILTON, in the 49th year of his age, leaving a wife and eight children to lament the loss of him. A fortnight before the termination of his valuable life he was in good health, and, with the sprightliness of disposition natural to him, enjoyed the pleasures of social intercourse with his affectionate family. So true it is, that in the midst of life we are in death; that, when in our full strength and all the vigour of our powers, and surrounded by earthly enjoyments, we are liable to be cut down like a flower. Possessing a sound understanding, he had by steady and persevering exertions attained respectability. For more than twenty years his religious principles had been firmly established. He was fully convinced of the truth of the Unitarian doctrine, and a fearless professor of it. Though he knew of no other Unitarians in Woolwich, feeling the value of what he believed, he was anxious for the establishment of an Unitarian place of worship there; and above a year before his death was instrumental, in connexion with the Unitarian Fund Committee, in procuring a small chapel for Unitarian worship, in which he assisted in conducting the service when a minister could not be obtained. The opening of this place of worship excited much opposition among the reputed orthodox, many of whom loaded the Unitarians with the bitterest reproaches. This led him sometimes to say, "Thanks be to God! we live in a country where they have not the supreme command, otherwise we might fall victims to their vindictive and intolerant spirit." His leisure time was principally employed in reading the Scriptures and other religious books, and in instructing his family, whom he endeavoured to lead to habits of piety, integrity, sobriety and prudence. In this course he looked to God for the enjoyments of this life and of the life to come. He gave pleasing proofs that the religion of Jesus affected his heart and influenced his mind; that he regarded it as the only safeguard of man. Had he been spared, there is reason to believe his usefulness as a Christian would have increased. The unity and infinite benevolence of God were to him a rich source of consolation: he said, they preserved him from perplexity in religious worship, and from the dread of futurity. The gospel he regarded as the most invaluable of the Divine gifts. With such views, and influenced by such principles, we may cherish the hope that he was habitually prepared to meet his God. In society he shewed frankness of manner, liberality of sentiment, and undeviating integrity. Dignified without pride, and cheerful without levity, in his intercourse with the

world, he did not lose sight of the character he had to support, and the duties he had to fulfil as a Christian. He would discuss subjects with entire freedom, without any tincture of acrimony. Those who shared his friendship saw that his religion was no less that of the heart than of the head. Among his other pursuits he had studied the English constitution, and none could more warmly admire its excellence. He abhorred tyranny of every kind, arbitrary sway, and the extravagances of democratic fanaticism. His loss will be long severely felt, and his memory long cherished with affection by his mourning widow and offspring. They will never forget the lessons he taught them both by precept and example. His warning was short: in his last moments he discovered no terror, and almost imperceptibly breathed his last. On Saturday, December 11th, his remains were deposited in the silent tomb. Woolwich.

T. R.

Dec. 6, DAVID JENNINGS, Esq., of Fenchurch Street and of Hawkherst, in the county of Kent, grandson of Dr. Jennings, a respectable Dissenting minister, and grand-nephew of Dr. Lardner. Mr. Jennings was Chairman of the Land and Assessed Taxes for the City of London, and was a Special Commissioner under the late Property Tax. He was an active supporter of the principal Dissenting Institutions; and on account of his zeal and his dexterity in managing public business, was usually put into the chair at committees. He published in 1792, "Hawkherst; a Sketch of its History and Antiquities." 4to. He put up a monument to Dr. Lardner in Hawkherst Church, for the inscription on which, see Mon. Repos. III. 364. In the same Volume, p. 487, is a record, less honour- i able to Mr. Jennings's name, of his attempt to prevent Dr. Kippis, from being the biographer of Lardner.

1820. Jan. 10, in the 56th year of her age, Mrs. EGELSOME, of Golden Place, Oxford Road, Manchester. It will be difficult, in endeavouring to embalm the memory of this most excellent woman, to use terms at once appropriate and equal to her merits, without incurring the charge of partiality from those who were strangers to her worth. It has fallen to the lot of few to experience the fluctuations of fortune, and the sorrows of domestic privation which she sustained, and to none who, under every reverse and check of hope, could have continued the unabated exertion, the renewed efforts, which her resolution evinced.

She was the great granddaughter of Robert Dukinfield, Esq., the father of

the Baronet of that name, and once famous as a Colonel in the Protector's army. Her grandfather and her uncle, the late Rev. W. Buckley, of Dukinfield, sustained, with unvarying credit and respectability, the important duties of the ministry, for more than half a century, at Dukinfield Chapel. (The grandfather succeeded the celebrated Mr. Angier, of this place, and the uncle, with the intervention of some who remained but a short time with the congregation, succeeded his father.) Conscious that her [ own character ought not to depreciate the credit of being so respectably allied, she sustained with dignity, she combated with unabated efforts, the obstacles which accumulated disappointments presented. Though often plunged in deep distress, her mind remained firm, and her conduct displayed inflexible perseverance.

She was the mother of a numerous family, and once had reason to look forward, through commercial prosperity, to an ample provision for them all. In this expectation her hopes were frustrated, and about the same time her eldest child, a most amiable and accomplished daughter, fell a victim to that tyrant

"Whose shaft flew thrice, and thrice

her peace was slain," in the gloomy succession of after bereave

ments.

Her second daughter and her eldest son became then the objects of her renewed solicitude. The boy was apprenticed to a liberal profession, and the daughter's education directed to qualify her for the instruction of others. Scarcely were her fine talents sufficiently matured, and a seminary reared, in which they began to display themselves to no common advantage, before disease began to threaten their total extinction. Previous, however, to these fears becoming realized, the son of her hopes, one whom she had destined to take his younger brothers by the hand, returned sick from his master's employment, and, to the inexpressible regret of all who knew him, sunk prematurely to the grave. The loss of a child, and sometimes of many children, becomes the lot of most parents to endure; but to lose one designed to

sustain the double character of a brother and a parent to the younger branches of the family, was a stroke of overwhelming bitterness. Such was the case of this afflicted mother: and her recovered firmness under this trial had scarcely erected itself before the death of her accomplished second child sapped the foundation of it for ever. On the evening of the funeral of this beloved daughter, she declared, prophetic of her own dissolution, that the then assembled friends would soon be called together again to pay her remains the sad respect they had that day bestowed upon her daughter.

Six children survive her; the eldest of whom, the present Miss Egelsome, well qualified for her arduous undertaking, will place herself at the head of that seminary which has heretofore been so ably conducted by her sister, herself, and her revered and beloved mother. The child of one so tried cannot be said to be inexperienced; the witness of so much talent and virtue cannot be unprepared for the duties now devolving upon herself.

The limits of the present notice preclude any development of character except what the events already mentioned point out. If this task was faithfully executed it would furnish materials equally interesting and important. From her the most affluent might derive salutary distrust in their greatest prosperity, and the most indigent, lessons of economy and forethought in their narrowest circumstances. Perhaps one trait of her character ought not to be omitted, and it is this—she never neglected herself. Always neat in her appearance, and of the most unassuming and retired demeanour, the correctness of her language, and the propriety of her manners, never sunk below that of the gentlewoman. She seldom uttered a murmur, or ventured a complaint. Her attendance upon public worship was exemplary-her devotion ardent and enlightened. Her Christianity was the gold that had sustained the heat of the furnace—her robe that which had been dyed in much tribulation.

W. H.

Jan. 26, at his house in Rutland Place, Mr. JOHN PEARSON, aged 46.

Report on the Criminal Laws. REPORT.-The Select Committee appointed to consider of so much of the Criminal Laws as relates to capital punishment in felonies, and to report their observations and opinion of the same, from time to time, to the House; and to whom the several petitions on

the subject were referred, have, pursuant to the orders of the House, considered the matters to them referred, and have agreed upon the following Report:

Your Committee, in execution of the trust delegated to them by the House, have endeavoured strictly to confine

themselves within the limits prescribed to them by the terms of their appointment. In some cases they have laid down restrictions for themselves, which the letter of the resolution of the House did not impose. They have abstained from all consideration of those capital felonies which may be said to be of a political nature, being directed against the authority of Government and the general peace of society. To the nature and efficacy of the secondary punishments of transportation and imprisonment, they have directed no part of their inquiries, because another committee had been appointed to investigate them, and because no part of the facts or arguments to be stated in this report will be found to depend either on the present state of these secondary punishments, or on the degree of improvement of which they may be found capable. With many extensive and important parts of the criminal law-such, for example, as that which regulates the trial of offenders they are entirely satisfied; and they should not have suggested any changes in these departments, even if they had been within the appointed province of this committee. On other parts of the subject-as, for example, in the definition and arrangement of crimes -they have recommended a consolidation of the laws respecting only one class of offences, and have presumed only to express a general opinion of the utility of the like consolidation in some other cases. They wish expressly to disclaim all doubt of the right of the Legislature to inflict the punishment of death wherever that punishment, and that alone, seems capable of protecting the community from enormous and atrocious crimes. The object of the Committee has been to ascertain, as far as the nature of the case admitted by evidence, whether, in the present state of the sentiments of the people of England, capital punishment in most cases of offences unattended with violence, be a necessary, or even the most effectual security against the prevalence of crimes.

1. In the first place they endeavoured to collect official accounts of the state of crimes, and the administration of criminal law throughout the kingdom, from the earliest period to which authentic information reaches. The annual returns of commitments, convictions, and executions, first procured by addresses from this House, and since required by statute, go no farther back than 1805. Accounts, though not perfectly satisfactory, of the same particulars from London and Middlesex, from 1749 to the present time, have been already laid before Parliament, which, with an official summary of the returns of England and Wales from 1805,

will be inserted in the appendix of this report.

A full and authentic account of convictions and executions for London and Middlesex, from 1699 to 1804, obtained for the latter part of that time from the clerk of arraigns at the Old Bailey, and for the former part from the officers of the city of London, is inserted in the appendix. The Corporation of the city of London have shewn on this occasion a liberality and public spirit worthy of acknowledgment; and it is to be hoped that they will continue their researches as far back as their records extend, and thus complete returns probably unparalleled in the history of criminal law.

The deputy clerk of assize for the home circuit has laid before your Committee a return of commitments, convictions, and executions on that circuit, which comprehends the counties of Herts, Essex, Kent, Sussex and Surrey, from 1689 to 1718, from 1755 to 1784, and from 1784 to 1814. The returns of the intermediate period, from 1718 to 1755, he will doubtless furnish very soon. From this important return it appears that, for the first 30 years which followed the Revolution, the average proportion of convictions to executions was 38 to 20; that from 1755 to 1784, it was 46 to 13; and that from 1784 to 1814, it was 74 to 19. It is worthy of remark, that the whole number of convictions for murder on the home circuit, in the first period, was 123; that the executions for the same period were 87; that in the second, the convictions for the same offence were 67, and the executions 57; and that in the third, the convictions were 54, and the executions 44. If the increase of the population, during a prosperous period of 130 years, be taken into the account, and if we bear in mind that within that time a considerable city has grown up on the southern bank of the Thames, we shall be disposed to consider it as no exaggeration to affirm, that in this district (not one of the most favourably situated in this respect) murder has abated in the remarkable proportion of 3, if not 4, to 1.

In the thirty years from 1755 to 1784, the whole convictions for murder in London and Middlesex were 71; and in the thirty years from 1784 to 1814 they were 66. In the years 1815, 1816 and 1817, the whole convictions for murder in London were 9, while in the three preceding years they were 14. Most of the other returns relate to too short a period, or too narrow a district, to afford materials for safe conclusion with respect to the comparative frequency of crimes at different periods.

In general, however, it appears that

murders, and other crimes of violence and cruelty, have either diminished or not increased; and that the deplorable increase of criminals is not of such a nature as to indicate any diminution in the humanity of the people. The practice of immediately publishing the circumstances of every atrocious crime, and of circulating in various forms an account of every stage of the proceedings which relate to it, is far more prevalent in England than in any other country, and in our times than in any former age. It is on the whole of great utility, not only as a controul on courts of judicature, but also as a means of rendering it extremely difficult for odious criminals to escape. In this country no atrocious crimes remain secret; with these advantages, however, it cannot be denied, that by publishing the circumstances of all crimes, our modern practice tends to make our age and nation appear more criminal than, in comparison with others, it really is.

to be altogether disproportioned to the offence, your Committee conceive themselves warranted in confidently recommending its abolition. But they have also adverted to another consideration: if, in addition to the intrinsic evidence of unwarrantable severity in a law, which arises from the comparison of the act forbidden with the punishment threatened, they find also that the law has scarcely ever been executed since its first enactment, or if it has fallen into disuse as the nation became more humane and generally enlightened, your Committee consider themselves as anthorized to recommend its repeal, by long experience, and by the deliberate judgment of the whole nation. In the application of this latter principle, they have been materially aided by the documents which have been mentioned. Where a penal law has not been carried into effect in Middlesex for more than a century, in the counties round London for sixty years, and in the extensive district which forms the Western Circuit for fifty, it may be safely concluded that the general opinion has pronounced it to be unfit or unnecessary to continue in force. The Committee are aware that there are cases in which it may be said, that the dread of the punishment has prevented the perpetration of the crime, and where, therefore, the law appears to be inefficacious only because it has completely accomplished its purpose. Whatever speciousness may belong to this reasoning in the case of conspicuous crimes, and punishments ge-" nerally present to the minds of men, it never can be plausibly applied to rare and obscure offences, to penal enactments, of which it requires a more than ordinary degree of professional accuracy habitually to recollect the existence. Your Committee have endeavoured to avoid all cases which seem to them to be on this ground disputable. From general caution, and a desire to avoid even the appearance of precipitation, they have postponed cases, which seem to them liable to as little doubt as some of those to which they are about to advert.

2. In considering the subject of our penal laws, your Committee will first lay before the House their observations on that part which is the least likely to give rise to difference of opinion. That many statutes denouncing capital punishments might be safely and wisely repealed, has long been a prevalent opinion. It is sanctioned by the authority of two successive Committees of this House, composed of the most eminent men of their age, and in some measure by the autho rity of the House itself, which passed several bills on the recommendation of their Committees. As a general position, the propriety of repealing such statutes seems scarcely to have been disputed; respecting the number and choice of them, different sentiments must always be expected. Your Committee have not attempted a complete enumeration, which much time and considerable deliberation would be required to accomplish. They selected some capital felonies, for the continuance of which they cannot anticipate any serious argument, and which seem to them to serve no purpose but that of incumbering and discrediting the statute-book. Various considerations have combined to guide their choice: sometimes mere levity and hurry have raised an insignificant offence, or an almost indifferent act, into a capital crime; in other acts, the evil has been manifestly and, indeed, avowedly temporary, though it unfortunately produced a permanent law. Where the punishment of death was evidently unnecessary at the time of its original establishment, and where, if it was originally justified by a temporary danger, or excused by a temporary fear, it has long been acknowledged

It has sometimes been said, that the abolition of penal laws which have fallen into disuse is of little advantage to the community. Your Committee consider this opinion as an error. They forbear to enlarge on the striking remark of Lord Bacon, that all such laws weaken and disarm the other parts of the criminal system. The frequent occurrence of the unexecuted threat of death in a criminal code tends to rob that punishment of all its terrors, and to enervate the general authority of the government and the laws. The multiplication of this threat in the laws of England has brought on them,