MR EDITOR,

I AM one of those Proprietors of St Andrew's-square who have been frequently alluded to of late in your Magazine, as well as in certain other publications, as having been the means of preventing the Naval Monument, in honour of the memory of the late Lord Melville, from being erected in that which, I agree with you in thinking, is the best situation for it, either within or in the neighbourhood of this city. I have not the least intention of entering into any discussion on the subject, nor do I think it would be reasonable to request of you to admit any additional arguments, either on the one side or the other, relative to a matter which has already occupied fully enough of your valuable Miscellany. At the same time, I must confess, that I am anxious that such gentlemen as may choose to favour the public with their speculations, should be fully acquainted with the facts of the case before they begin to reason upon the subject; and the more so, that, from the language employed by a gallant member of the Naval Committee, whose letter appeared in the last Number of your Magazine, and from certain other circumstances which have recently come to my knowledge, I am fully convinced, that, however strange it may appear, the Committee are at this moment in a state of considerable ignorance of the history and progress of their negotiation with the proprietors of St Andrew'ssquare. I am aware that, in point of fact, no official answer was transmitted by the proprietors of the Square to the last communication of the Naval Committee. This was doubtless a great omission on the part of the gentlemen who ought to have returned such answer. From not having been a member of the last Committee appointed by the proprietors, I am not personally responsible for the neglect; and the truth is, that I was not aware of it till after I had read the " General Report," which was published by the Naval

Committee on 6th March last. Even after that, I merely considered it as a piece of neglect in point of etiquette; for I had reason to know that the secretary to the Naval Committee had constantly had access to the whole of our minutes; nor was it till I read the letter from "One of the Committee," that I came to be satisfied that this omission had been of more importance than I had previously imagined. I cannot persuade myself that the negotiation would ever have been broken off, had the Naval Committee been as well informed of our proceedings as we were with regard to theirs, nor that they would have neglected as they did a communication which was made to them by "a learned gentleman shortly before they adopted their last resolution, (unless, indeed, they considered themselves bound by their agreement with Sir Patrick Walker,) had they known, that it was not with any proprietor of the square that any change of measures originated, and, that after they themselves had agreed upon an ultimatum, point after point was conceded by the proprietors, with no other view than that of consulting the feelings and desires of the Naval Committee, before any one of the members of the square ever thought of protesting against the erection of the pillar.

*"

As I said before, I have no intention of arguing the matter; but trusting that you will agree with me in thinking, that in fairness and justice to all parties concerned, the facts of the case ought to be known to the public, I hope you will have the kindness to indulge me with inserting the following extracts from the minutes of the proprietors of the square, to which I will annex no farther explanation than seems to me to be necessary to render them intelligible to such persons as did not hear the verbal statements by which they were ac

companied, and from them I think you will be satisfied that the following is a correct detail of the facts of the

case.

1st, The negociation was opened by a printed letter, dated 9th December 1818, and signed by the secretary to the Naval Committee; in which he asked permission of the Proprietors to erect the pillar in the square under certain conditions, which were all of them highly reasonable and proper.

On the 21st of the same month the Proprietors of the Square held a meeting, for the purpose of taking this letter into their consideration, where the only differences of opinion among them were, as to whether the pillar should be erected in the centre, or at the west gate of the Square, and whether an answer should be returned to the Naval Committee, consenting to the erection, before or after it should be ascertained whether the absent Proprietors would concur with those who attended the meeting.

At this meeting, all the gentlemen who have ever been stated as objectors, excepting one, were present, and it was unanimously agreed, that the proposal of the Naval Committee should be approved of, provided this general consent was got; and several meetings of the Proprietors, and of their Committee were held for the purpose of forwarding the object in view.

2d, It had been signified, that it would be as cheap, and that the pillar would be stronger, if it were built with a stair in the inside, than it would be if it were solid, and that the stair would also be convenient when it should be necessary to repair the pillar. It was suggested, at one of our meetings, that in order to secure the privacy of the Square for the sake of the children of the Proprietors, and to prevent strangers from getting within the area, under the pretence of ascending the stair, the door of the Pillar should be built up, and should never be opened excepting when repairs were wanted. It was also thought, that gas lights might be combined with the pillar in such a manner, as to prove ornamental to it, and useful to the Square.

These suggestions, together with the proposal, that the pillar should be erected at the side of the Square, were communicated to the Naval Committee; and on the 9th of March 1819, they VOL. VII.

entered into the following resolution : "The Committee, having considered the extract of the minute of the Committee of Proprietors of St Andrew's Square, of date the 8th instant, hereby instruct their secretary to inform the Committee of Proprietors, that the Naval Committee cannot agree to the modifications proposed by the proprietors of the Square, relative to the introduction of gas, and building up the door of the monument."

3d, The different gentlemen who had proposed the modifications which I have mentioned, having been privately informed of this resolution of the Naval Committee, and being sincerely desirous to throw no obstacle in the way, withdrew their respective proposals. At the same time, in agreeing to a door being made in the pillar, it was thought advisable, that measures should be adopted to prevent the indiscriminate access of strangers. And whether the idea was correct in a legal view or not, it was also deemed necessary that this should be done before the pillar was erected, for this reason, that any condition agreed to beforehand by the Proprietors among themselves would have been binding upon them, and might have been enforced at any time by a minority, or even by one of their number; whereas a regulation made after the pillar was finished, would have been liable to constant alterations at the pleasure of every meeting of proprietors, or of persons obtaining authority from non-residents, however small the number of such meeting might be.

This explanation will explain the next resolution of the Committee of Proprietors, which was entered into on 20th March, 1819, in these terms: "The Committee unanimously agree, that no gas-light shall be combined with the pillar; and that the door of the pillar shall be under lock and key, and entirely under the control of the Proprietors, and never opened excepting for necessary repairs, and that any individual proprietor shall have the power of a veto against opening the door, excepting for repairs.'

4th, This explicit offer was as explicitly accepted by the Naval Committee, by a minute dated on the same day, in which they state, that they consider the transaction with the Proprietors of the Square to be closed. Their minute was in these terms: having

H

communicated the following resolution of the Committee of Proprietors," (Here was engrossed the resolution last quoted,)" The Naval Committee were of opinion, that having already agreed that every thing connected with access to the pillar should be subject to the rules and regulations of the Proprietors, what is now proposed, sanctioned by the Proprietors at large, ought not to be objected to by them; and as the point as to the gas is now yielded, the Committee consider that all matters may now be considered as adjusted betwixt them and the Proprietors, though the Naval Committee will not proceed with their operations until the Committee of Proprietors shall have had an opportunity of consulting with their constituents."

appa

5th, The matter being thus rently closed, a general meeting of the Proprietors of the Square was held on the 29th March 1819, when one of the gentlemen, who is stated as an ob jector, moved, that the transaction so entered into should be approved of, and that measures should be taken for rendering the veto effectual. No Proprietor of the Square stated any ob jection, but the secretary to the Naval Committee, who had always been permitted to attend the Square meetings, and a member of the Naval Committee, who held a proxy from the Royal Bank, as proprietors of two houses in the Square, moved that the veto should not be agreed to. That there may be no suspicion of misrepresentation in this statement, I insert the motions precisely as they were made.

-Moved, That the meeting do approve of the report of the Committee, now read, that the proposed Pillar be erected in the centre of the Square, and that the entrance to the same be by a door, secured by a lock and key: That there shall be affixed to the Pillar, so soon as it is constructed, a rodconductor, to prevent risk from lightning. That it is reasonable and proper, that the Proprietors of the Square, having thus consented to every thing proposed by the Naval Committee, should, at the same time, take such measures as may be necessary, to secure the same exclusive use of the Square, to themselves and their families, that they have hitherto and do at present enjoy: That this can only be secured, by providing effectually, for keeping the door of the Pillar shut at all times, excepting in cases of necessity: And therefore, that a minute to be signed by all the Proprietors, be immediately engrossed in the sederunt book of the

Square, providing, that each individual proprietor shall at all times have an effectual veto, against the said door being opened, on any condition, without his consent and approbation, excepting when the same shall be necessary for the purpose of repairs.

2d, "That immediately upon these signatures being obtained, the Committee of Proprietors be empowered, and directed to communicate these resolutions to the Naval Committee; and to obtain from that Committee, the necessary obligation or writing, for vesting the property of, and control over the Pillar, in the Proprietors of the fore the month of May, 1821, and for proSquare; for finishing the same, in or beviding a fund for keeping the same in repair, in all time coming.

"Mr

-" (the Secretary of the Naval Committee), " moved, and dopted the following motion, which was seconded by Mr

that the door shall not be opened on any condition, without the consent and approbation of a majority of the Proprietors of the Square, and that the concession of the site requested, shall not either directly or indirectly, confer any right either of property or of servitude, in or over the Square, in terms of their circular, of the 9th December, 1818.

"This motion was withdrawn, and (the same gentleman) moved to approve of the report, excepting as to the veto, and to remit to a Committee, to consider the most of access to the Pillar." expedient arrangement relative to the mode

6th, Though the veto had been agreed to by the Naval Committee, yet seeing that it was objected to by their representatives in our meeting, the gentleman who had proposed it, said, that to bring the matter to a close, he was willing to put his motion in the following manner: "That the meeting do approve of the report of the Committee now read; that the proposed pillar be erected in the centre of the Square, and that the entrance to the same be by a door secured by lock and key; that there shall be affixed to the pillar, as soon as it is constructed, a rod-conductor, to prevent risk from lightning."

This motion then proceeded to state as before, that it was reasonable and proper to secure the privacy of the Square; and, instead of proposing that the minute for that purpose should enact an absolute veto in each proprietor, it bore" that a minute to be signed by all the Proprietors be immediately engrossed in the sederunt book of the Square, providing that the said door shall never be opened on any condition, without the consent and approbation of three fourths of the resident Proprietors, excepting when the same shall be necessary for the purpose of repairs."

Then followed a repetition of the in

structions to the Committee to communicate with the Naval Committee, upon which (the same member of the Naval Committee who had adopted the first amendment) again moved" to approve of the report, excepting as to the veto, and to remit to a Committee to consider the most expedient arrangement relative to the mode of access to the pillar."

"The meeting resolved, before approving of the report, to remit to a Committee of Proprietors to consider the most expedient arrangements relative to the access of the pillar, with power to communicate to the Naval Committee.

7th, The Naval Committee, at their next meeting, sanctioned the opposition which had been so made by their secretary and member. Their minutes of 31st March 1819, bear,

"The minute of last meeting having been read, it was resolved, on the motion of seconded by and unanimously adopted, That Saint Andrew's-Square should be the site of the Pillar, provided

men, who wished to approve of the suggestion of the Naval Committee,

were,

1mo, "That the gentlemen of the Naval Committee shall satisfy the Committee of Proprietors, herein after named, that the proposed Pillar be completed on or before, the 21st day of May, 1821.

2do, That the Stones and Mortar of the Pillar shall be completely prepared out of the area of the Square, according to the proposal of the Naval Committee.

3tio, That the rights of the Proprietors to the inclosed area, shall not be altered in any respect, by giving their consent to the building of the Pillar.

4to, That in no event shall indiscriminate access to the public be allowed: And that a set of rules respecting the access shall be made out, and approved of by a meeting of the Proprietors of the Square, to be specially called for this purpose, who shall name a Committee of resident proprietors, to give effect to the rules so laid down.

And in the event of this resolution not

being agreed to, the Committee are of opinion, that the site of St. Andrew's-square should be given up."

8th, The Committee of Proprietors of St Andrew's Square agreed to this new proposal, by a majority, at a meeting held on 5th April 1819, two of their number, who dissented,signifying, verbally, that though, for the sake of unanimity, they would give up the veto, they still meant to insist that, whatever the regulations to be adopted with regard to the door of the pillar might be, they should be settled before it was erected, so as to have the force of a condition, instead of being postponed till afterwards, which would have rendered them mere rules, alterable at all times at pleasure.

9th, A meeting of the proprietors of the Square was held, at which even the resolution, with regard to three fourths, was dropped, and no other security for the privacy of the Square required, than that four resident gentlemen should give their consent, in writing, before any person was admitted into the inside of the pillar. The resolutions proposed by those gentle

On the part of those who wished to have the management previously fixed on a definitive basis, Mr proposed the following amendment to the 4th resolution:

"That the key of the Pillar shall never be entrusted to the custody of the square-keeper, or any other servant of the square: That no person shall have access to the Pillar at any time, without the consent in writing of a majority of a Committee of seven resident proprietors, appointed for the purpose, being specially obtained thereto, and that a minute be entered in the sederunt-book, and signed by all the proprietors, or their proxies duly authorised, binding the proprietors to each other: That every individual proprietor shall, at all times, have a valid and effectual veto against any other, or more, or indiscriminate access, being allowed to the Pillar, than is herein provided, excepting for the purpose of repairs."

This amendment was negatived by a majority of 10 to 9; whereupon the mover of it inserted a protest in the minutes, in precisely the same words, and "intimated that he would take all such measures as he might deem necessary, to prevent its being erected on any other condition."

Other matters were talked of during the course of the discussions, but as they dont appear in the minutes, and were, besides, of a nature which would tempt me to break my resolution not to argue, I shall say nothing about them here.

I trust you will now be able to judge whether the negotiation was broken off because one party proposed new or frivolous conditions, or, as "one of the Committee" expresses it, "made illiberal opposition," and stated "futile objections," or because the other party departed from a condition which they had at one time agreed to by an entry in their own minutes, officially communicated to the Proprietors of the Square, and did not choose to accept of the very important modifications in

their own favour which were offered of that condition. And I have only farther to add, that it was not till after all this, that another proprietor, wearied out and disgusted with the number of meetings and disputes which there had been with regard to it, and especially. with this refusal to abide by the terms which had been at one time distinctly agreed to, gave in a protest against the erection of the Monument in the square.

APROPRIETOR OF ST ANDREW'S-SQUARE.

In this volume is contained an abstract of Professor Brown's System relative to the Physiology of the Mind. It was meant to serve as a text-book for those attending his Lectures, and therefore the successive parts of the subject are discussed with a good deal of brevity, but, at the same time, with so much clearness, as to render the book by itself an agreeable and satisfactory vehicle of the author's leading doctrines, and to make the reader regret to find that it is broken off abruptly at a very interesting part; Dr Brown having been unable to finish what is set forth in the table of contents. For the sake of our readers, we shall endeavour to give an account of some of these new and remarkable speculations, of which till now there was no print ed publication, to diffuse them beyond the limits of his class-room, and which cannot fail to be read with admiration for those penetrating talents, from which science must no longer hope to receive farther benefits. The language throughout is remarkable for precision, and for the dexterity and elegance with which it is used for the purposes of reasoning. It is well known, that Dr Brown was in the habit of introducing, in his Lectures, many illustrations beautiful as conceptions or pictures; but in the present publication these are almost entirely withheld, so that the reader finds few pauses or relaxations from abstract reasoning.

In what manner Dr Brown's ideas, at the outset, differ as to one important point, from those of former writers

on the same subject, the following remarks upon the nature of consciousness will show.

"Consciousness has been generally considered as a peculiar power of the mind, of which all our various feelings when present, are to be distinguished as objects, in the same sense as light is not vision, but the object of vision, or fragrant particles not smell. but the object of smell.

"This view, which appears to me very manifestly erroneous, seems to be a part of that general error with respect to the mind, which, after endowing it with many Powers,

that are truly nothing more than certain relations of uniform antecedence of states of mind to other states of mind or to bodily movements,-learns to consider these Powers each a sort of empire over phenomena, of almost as separate entities, and assigns to which it is itself merely a name, expressive of a certain uniformity in the order of their succession.

"Consciousness, in its widest sense, is truly nothing more than such a general name, expressive of the whole variety of our feelings. In this sense, to feel is to be conscious, and

not to be conscious is not to feel.

exists, from moment to moment, is all that can be known of the mind; and it cannot, at the same moment, exist in two different states, one of consciousness, and one of some other feeling wholly distinguishable from it. Whatever its momentary feeling may be, simple or complex, a sensation, a thought, an emotion-this feeling or momentary state of the mind, which is said to be only the were something different from a state in object of consciousness, as if consciousness which the mind exists, is truly all the consciousness of the moment.

"The series of states in which the mind

"I am conscious of a particular fecling, means only I feel in a particular manner.