: led him to disregard the first attack of a malignant fever which laid him in the grave, in spite of every effort to save so valuable a life. He died October 1788 on board his fhip in Revel, and was interred with all military pomp in that city, where her imperial majesty has ordered a marble monument to be erected to his memory, brought from Italy at a great expence, as a mark of her regard and regret. The admiral's history before his entrance into the Rufsian navy, (where his actions are upon record,) may be comprised in a very few words. That he, like his great countryman captain Cook, whom he much resembled in humanity, courage, and serenity of mind on all occasions, as well as indefatigable exertion and perseverance in whatever he undertook, rose by exemplary conduct and profefsional knowledge, from an apprentice in the merchants service, to an officer in the royal navy, and quitted it with the rank of lieutenant to enter into the Rufsian service as post captain, where, it must be said, as a mark of his good sense, love of his native country, and the gallant corps he left in pursuit of fortune, that at the height of naval rank and honours bestowed by Catherine, and in all the blaze of Russian chivalry with which his uniform was covered, he ever gloried in the title of LIEUTENANT IN THE BRITISH NAVY, and never would quit it till the day of his honourable death, equally felt by the sovereign, the service, and his friends; amongst which number, one of the most sincere, and who speaks from twenty years personal knowledge of his worth, was ARCTICUS. THE POET AND CUPID. For the Bee. THE following poem was transmitted to the Editor some time ago as an original, with a long, and not undeserved, encomium upon it. As he suspected it had not been originally intended for him, he delayed inserting it for some time. It is now inserted verbatim as he received it. SAYS Venus one day to her vagabond son, "Where so fast, you sly rogue, with these darts do you run? 66 'By the grace of a limb, or the glance of an eye? "Is woman your aim? Prithee tell me the truth. • What boots it to you by my arrows who dies? 'But since, like your sex, you are curious to know, I'll tell you the bus'nefs that takes me below: A poet there lives in the air of Lambeth, (Resum'd the soft queen, as the question'd again,) With your joys and your woes will you never have done? "And when did the bard not invoke you my son? "Should the Muses refine his susceptible heart, 66 66 By your flames fhall he burn? must he die by your dart? "Yet regard me for once :-I'm in search of a dove * Euphrosyne, or the Grace of the soul. Her grief he regards with a laugh and ha! ha! "Tis but little you know of the matter, Mama! (Rejoin'd the young rogue ;) don't you know it was I • Gives one grace to earth, while the skies have their two. • The poet shall pray, but his pray'r shall be vain, (He never knew pleasure who never knew pain,) To-morrow he dies; and I'll barb ev'ry thorn • With the stings of her pride, and the points of her scorn; • In Laura's lov'd person strike home to his heart, • And EUPHROSYNE's self fhall determine the dart.' CLIO. A MODERN BELLE'S CONFESSION. You may talk of soft pafsion, and love's potent dart, II. Ye soldiers so brisk, and ye courtiers so gay, III. Your beauty it is not, nor eyes darting fire, By the length of his purse, not the length of his head. IV. We laugh in our sleeve at the am'rous gallant, V. An equipage grand is the joy of our life. Where's the woman for that who would not be a wife? And if horses can't fly I can mount a balloon. H. HIGHFLYER. ON THE PRIVILEGE AND POWER OF JURIES. LAW INTELLIGENCE. The King v. Robertson and Berry. THIS cause is of importance, chiefly because of the peculiarity of the verdict returned by the jury, and the discussions to which that has given rise. The case was briefly as follows: James Robertson and Walter Berry were indicted by the lord advocate for Scotland, of having been guilty, the said James Robertson of printing and publishing, and the said Walter Berry of publishing, with a wicked and malevolent intention, some time in the month of June last, a treasonable and seditious pamphlet entitled the Po-fee litical Progrefs of Britain. Being brought before an afsize, the pannels pleaded not guilty of the charge; and the whole facts and circumstances being submitted to a jury, the gentlemen of the jury, after mature deliberation, returned a verdict all in one voice, " finding it proven, that the said James Robertson did print and publifh, and the said Walter Berry did publish only, the pamphlet libelled on." When this verdict was returned to the court, the counsel for the pannels contended, that from the nature of the verdict given, it became necefsary for the court to absolve the pannels, and dismifs them from the bar, on this footing, that the jury had not found any part of the indictment proven, that could imply the smallest share of guilt. They neither had found that the pamphlet libelled was of a treasonable or seditious tendency, nor that the pannels had printed or published it with a wicked or malevolent intention, but simply, that they had printed VOL. xiv. April 24. and published the pamphlet libelled on; but there surely could be no harm in printing and publishing any writing which was not found to be of a dangerous tendency. The counsel even contended, if the jury had found the pamphlet libelled on was of that dangerous nature, could the pannels be declared guilty of a crime that inferred a severe punishment, since, for any thing that appeared, it might have been done with an innocent and harmless intention? The court demurred; ordered memorials to be given in to them before sentence should be pronounced, and postponed deciding upon it to a future day. When that day arrived, they again, without any cause afsigned, postponed it till another, and another, and another day; which gave reason to believe, that the court had met with difficulties it could not easily get over, hich excited the public attention in a high decree. On Monday the 18th March, the court met for the fourth time upon this cause, and the judges separately delivered their opinions on this subject at great length; of which the following, it is hoped, will be found to be a fair abstract. It seemed to be in general the opinion of the court, that since the jury had not thought proper to give a clear and decisive verdict, finding the whole matter libelled either proven or hot proven, or finding the pannels guilty or not guilty; but had chosen to return a special verdict to the effect above stated: that therefore the court considered it in the same light as if the jury, declining to exercise the functions of jury men, had thus legally divested themselves of that character, and had devolved it upon the court, which was now called upon to step into the place of the jury, and to exercise the same functions in this case as the jury themselves were entitled to exercise, while they continued to act in that character. |