different views from the government at home, on a subject, to them, of the most delicate nature, did not comply fully with what was required. The law which they enacted was accordingly rejected by the crown, and as the governor was forbidden to assent to such a bill as the assembly was willing to pass, none of the projected improvements were carried into effect in that island.

Ameliorations in the condition of the slaves, had been proposed, by encouraging marriage, preventing the separation of families, receiv. ing the testimony of slaves, under certain circumstances, establishing a system of manumission, and placing the rights of those retained in slavery, under the protection of an officer, specially appointed for that purpose. Many provisions, recommended to the legislature, had been incorporated, though in a form more or less modified, in the law, that had been disallowed in England; but it appears, from a despatch of Mr. Huskisson, of the 22d of September, 1827, that the great objection to the Jamaica statute, was the restraint imposed on dissenting teachers. "I can

the religious liberty of any class of his majesty's subjects."

The general views of government seem to have undergone no alteration by the change which took place, during the following session of Parliament, in the person intrusted with the chief direction of the colonial department. Sir George Murray availed himself of an early occasion, after his entrance into office, to declare his intention to pursue every practical plan of reform in the West India islands; and he even ventured to express the hope that the time would arrive, and at no very distant period, when there would not be a slave within his majesty's extended dominions.

The system adopted, with respect to the British empire in India, is of the most extraordinary character. There are from a hundred to a hundred and fifty millions of persons subject to the government of a company of merchants, whose functions are partly political and partly commercial. In the former, they are, however, regu. lated, to a limited extent, by the powers vested in the board of con. trol, named by the crown, and the president of which is a cabinet minister.

As the charter of the East India company will expire in 1834, its privileges, so far at least as they directly affected the interests of the

British public, began, in 1829, to be a subject of parliamentary discussion. It was said, that India was competent to supply all the articles that America could furnish; and that in bringing rice, cotton and tobacco, from that country, two hundred thousand additional tons of English shipping might be employed. To do this, however, it was necessary to open fully the India trade to private enterprise. Previous to 1814, the commerce with that country was a strict monopoly in the hands of the company. By the act of 1813, the general commerce with India was opened to British mer. chants, subject to certain restric. tions; but the trade with China, including the tea trade, was, as theretofore, confined exclusively to the company. Private ships were not even allowed to go to China, to freight for parts of the world other than England. It was said, that in the preceding year, eleven

ships belonging to the United States, came into the Thames, were loaded with English goods, sailed for China; from whence, after hav. ing made a profitable market, they went with their return cargoes where they pleased. The trade between China and the continent of Europe, in which tea is exchanged for manufactured products, it was further stated, was, carried on principally by the Americans. The good effects of a free trade with India, were inferred from the advantages that had at. tended the partial opening of it to private merchants. In 1814, the British exports to countries beyond the Cape, were only in value £1,600,000; while in 1828 they amounted to£5,000,000. The chancellor of the exchequer promised to afford the house a full opportunity of going into an investigation of this subject, at their next ses sion.

THE Civil history of France, presents us with many revolutions in its internal administration, of a character, similar to those to which we have adverted in our summary of English affairs.

We concluded our account, in the last volume, with the dissolution of the chamber of deputies, and the elections consequent on that event. This appeal to public opi. nion, resulted in the entire discomfiture of the Villèle party. The decree, which put an end to the old chamber of deputies, was accompanied by another, well calculated to alienate all the disinterested elec. tors, that still remained attached to the ministry. The right of making peers at pleasure, is an undoubted prerogative of the crown. When, however, it is exercised for the purpose of effecting a political object, in a monarchy limited by the power of the legislature, of which these

peers are to form an integral part, the spirit of the constitution is clearly violated. The case of the creation of twelve peers at once, which occurred in England, in the reign of Queen Anne, would be an unfortunate precedent to adduce at the present day, even in the country in which it had its origin.

By one ordinance, seventy-six peers were, on the 5th November, 1827, added to the upper house of the French legislature. Many of these new lords were obscure individuals; some of them were taken from the lowest order of the provincial nobility; and want of hereditary distinction in the others, was only compensated for, by the entire devotion which, as members of the late chamber of deputies, they had manifested to the party in power. In looking over the names, we scarcely find any one, save that of Soult, calculated to recall the