ed apartment, where he had lodged for fome time before, deftitute, not only of every thing fuitable to her high rank, but even unprovided with the common neceffaries of life. A few days before her death, tho' then reduced to the last extremity with pain, fhe took the facrament in one of the churches of the city of Edinburgh. Upon the very day she expired, or the day before, the called the defendant, her only furviving fon, to her bed-fide, and there having folemnly blessed him, and having expreffed the warmeft anxiety and concern for his welfare, fhe recommended him to God as her fon, in the most tender and pathetic manner. Thus died lady Jane Douglas."

We are well warranted in saying, that the Tournelle process before the criminal judges in France (with the circumstances attending it, particularly the monitoire emitted by the archbifhop of Paris, commanding all perfons who knew any thing of the matter under pain of damnation and excommunication) was a cruel and unfair proceeding. One particularity attending it, we think, has not been urged with fufficient weight in the defendant's favour. It is remarked with fome degree of plausibility, that Sir John and Mrs. Hewit, who was lady Jane's confident, ought to have gone to France, to have cleared up all fufpicions with relation to the births. They who urge this feem to be ignorant, that the evidences for the plaintiff In the Tournelle procefs were fixed, and could not retract what they had faid; and that if fir John and Mrs. Hewit had contradicted them, as they certainly would have done upon oath, they might have been put to the torture; for such is the practice of that court. Add to this fir John's perpetual poverty, and his great age, which equally difabled him from undertaking the journey, and the dread he might lie under of his French debts.

We should now proceed to give fome extracts from the speeches before us, but we judge it improper for the following reafons. First, that they are not complete, we have authority to fay. Secondly, they have been already retailed in every news-paper throughout England. Thirdly, we muft quote the whole or none, as it would be highly unjuft to exhibit one fide of the queftion without the other. Fourthly, we have not room for fuch extracts. And lastly, we do not think it either decent or fafe to give our opinion in a cafe which is to be determined by the highest court of judicature in this kingdom.

A Co

IX. A Concife Narrative of the Proceedings in the Douglas Caufe: with Remarks upon the Memorials. In a Letter to a Friend. Pr. 1s. 6d. Griffin.

HIS narrative has an appearance of accuracy.

8.v0.

We fhall

Therefore, ive way of fupplement to the quotation in

the preceding article, lay before our readers fome transactions that paffed after lady Jane's death, which may ferve to throw farther lights upon this important, but intricate affair.

'Lady Jane, through a noble pride, had declined to take any step towards proving the birth of the defendant, after the removed to Britain. She knew it was incumbent upon those who called it in question, to prove that the child was an impoftor; "which she knew was impoffible, for Mr. Stewart owned the child as his, and knew it, and God knew that the child was hers, as well as the herfelf did."-Mrs. Greig's depofition. She made no fecret, however, to her friends, of the place of the birth, and of the man-midwife who affifted at it.

In a

long converfation which Mr. Loch, writer in Edinburgh, deposes to have had with lady Jane upon the fubject of her children, she gave him a particular and full hiftory of the delivery, which he took down from her own diction in a scroll which is in procefs. The fcroll bears, "that lady Jane Douglas was delivered in the house of madame la Brun, Sanbourg, St. Germain, Paris the 10th of July, 1748; that Mr. Pierre la Marre, a man-midwife, affifted her at the birth; madame la Brun and her daughter, a widow lady that lodged in the fame house, and Mrs. Hewit, being prefent.

In August, 1750, lady Jane wrote to Mrs. Tewis, in whofe houfe fhe had lodged at Aix in 1747, and 1748, informing her of the illiberal fufpicions which had been induftriously raised and propagated by her enemies, in order to destroy her with the duke her brother, and ruin her poor helpless children. She concluded with begging her to make a judicial declaration of all that she knew of her pregnancy and fituation while at Aixla Chapelle. Mrs. Tewis immediately fent her three notorial declarations emitted at Aix, by herself and two others, which were produced in this action, and indeed are fo strong and convincing, that the proof of pregnancy might reft upon them alone.

'On the death of lady Jane, lady Schaw, widow of fir John Schaw, of Greenock, bart. and grand-mother to the hon. Mrs Napier, took the defendant under her protection. This lady, whofe memory Mr. Douglas will ever gratefully revere, not bearing to see the son of her late friend left deftitute, and

well

well convinced of the falfhood of the malicious reports which had been raised to his prejudice, generously took him into her house, and gave him an education fuitable to his birth and rank. Mr. Stewart fucceeding to the eftate of Grandtully, by the death of his brother, Sir George Stewart, came to Scotland, where the first thing he did, was to execute a bond for fifty thousand marks, in favour of Mr. Douglas his son, which he wrote all over with his own hand, from the fcroll made of it by Mr. Loch, his agent; who, with his fon, and Sir John's fervant, were witneffes. Mr. Loch affirms, that Sir John at firft propofed to grant bond for a larger fum, to which he objecting, as being too great a burden upon the estate, Sir John answered, that he was refolved to provide for the defendant, not as a younger fon of the family of Grandtully, but as the iffue of his marriage with lady Jane Douglas. Mean time the fufpicions of the defendant's birth increased daily—and those very circumstances, which, to the unprejudiced and disinterested, impress conviction of lady Jane's innocence, were used, by artful mif-conftructions, as ftrong arguments of the reality of the impofture.

Among the numerous mif reprefentations, which feem to have been made about this time to the duke, of his fifter, may be ranked the celebrated letter, fo remarkable for its rufticity and afperity of expreffion, written by a gentleman, now a noble lord, who is fo well characterized in Rodomantado, in a late agreeable tale.

By fuch means as thefe, the duke, now fatisfied of the impofture, was prevailed on, without any violence to his inclination, to confirm the deed of fettlement in favour of the family of Hamilton. The matter was, now, become highly ferious; and lady Schaw, zealous for the intereft of the defendant, refolved to make enquiry into the truth of the birth, and undeceive the duke at once.

Accordingly, in May 1756, Mrs. Napier, lady Schaw's grand-daughter, having a converfation with Sir John on the fubject of the defendant's birth, laid before him the neceffity of taking fome fteps in order to remove the doubts which had been entertained of lady Jane's delivery. She therefore begged him to give her, in writing, an acount of the particulars relating to the birth-as the name of the house, street, midwife, &c.affuring him, that immediate enquiry should be made into every circumftance. Sir John, whofe memory, naturally imperfect, was now much impaired by age and distress, told Mrs. Napier, that, about the time of lady Jane's lying-in, they had changed houfes fo often, that he could not, with certainty, fix at prefent upon the houfe where the delivery happened;

pened; but that he would reflect upon it at home, and give her a note of all. these circumstances. But the lady infisting on a memorandum of fuch names as he could recollect, he wrote, in her prefence, a note, of date May 13, 1756, in which, among other names, Michelle's is affigned as the place of delivery. It will be remembered that they did not come to Michelle's, till after the delivery. But it will also be remembered, that this lift of names was forced from Sir John, when, it is plain, he had no distinct remembrance of the place where the delivery happened. This note was fent by Mrs. Napier to lady Fanny Stewart, the wife of Sir James Stewart, of Goodtrees, bart. who was then at Spa, with a request, that she would get fome enquiry made into thofe particulars for eftablishing the reality of Mr. Douglas's birth. Sir James immediately wrote to Mr. John Gordon, principal of the Scots college at Paris, requefting him to make the enquiry; and, for that purpose, sent him a copy of Sir John's note, wherein, as was obferved, the house of madame Michelle was specified as the place of delivery. Enquiry was accordingly made at Michelle's by principal Gordon-but the refult was not fatisfactory. He learned that Sir John and lady Jane had actually lodged there-that she had, when there, the appearance of a woman recently or lately delivered; but that no delivery had happened in that houfe. This account was transmitted to Sir James Stewart, and by him to Mrs. Napier, and lady Schaw.

'Mean while, Sir John, reflecting upon the particulars of the birth, discovered a material error in the note of May 13, delivered to Mrs. Napier. He therefore made out a new note of particulars, and gave it to Mrs. Napier, in all probability, long before lady Fanny's letter arrived, giving an account of the fruitless enquiries at Michelle's. In this fecond note, madame la Brune's houfe, Fauxbourg St. Germain, is fpecified as the place of delivery, the fame which had been specified in 1752 by lady Jane in Mr. Loch's fcroll, which fcroll Sir John never faw. Mrs. Napier, upon this fecond note, meant to have founded another letter to lady Fanny Stewart; nay, I think, she depofes, that the actually wrote to France before fhe fet out for England; but that the letter had not come to hand.

Be that as it will, the enquiry was not profecuted further at this time; and a train of events, which followed, proving favourable for the defendant, feemed to fuperfede the neceffity of fuch an enquiry.

The family at Douglas. Caftle had undergone a remarkable revolution. Stockbriggs, the inveterate enemy of lady Jane and her children, was dead; the duke had overcome his averfion to fociety, and was married; and the influence of the adherents of the family of Hamilton, was greatly diminished. At

the

the perfuafion of the dutchefs, the duke left his retirement, and refided, during the winter, at Edinburgh. He enlarged the circle of his acquaintance; divested himself of the contracted ideas which he had acquired during his recefs; and perceived how much he had been abused by the minions who poffeffed his ear. At this favourable juncture, the dutchefs commenced a keen advocate for the defendant She explained to her hufband the motives of the partizans of the family of Hamilton, to raise reports fo injurious to the unfortunate lady Jane; and convinced him of the falfity of many of the ftories that had been told him She concluded with urging him, in the moft affecting manner, to acknowledge his nephew, and cancel the fettlement which had been extorted from him.

But the duke's prejudices were too deeply rooted to be removed at once The dutchefs continued her importunities the duke was difpleafed, and a misunderstanding enfued. On recollection, however, he found he had been in the fault - he was reconciled to the dutchess, and promised to make enquiries concerning the birth. Mrs. Hewit, who accompanied lady Jane to Paris, and was prefent at her delivery, was ftillalive, in hired apartments at Edinburgh- The duke faw and converfed with her often; and from her ftrong, uniform, and confiftent account, was, at length, convinced of his fifter's innocence and honour, and the legitimacy of the defendant. The generous Douglas, after dropping a tear to the memory of his unfortunate, much-injured fifter, immediately cancelled the writings by which he had fettled his eftate on the family of Hamilton, and devised it to his nephew Archibald, the defendant.

The duke did not long furvive this fettlement; and Mr. Douglas was ferved heir to his deceased uncle. In serving heir, or proving propinquity, it is common to bring a proof of what is called Habite and Repute, only; that is, a proof that the claimant is generally believed to be the son of fuch and fuch parents. In the prefent cafe, to remove the ftigma which the. late injurious fufpicions had thrown upon the character of his mother, the claimant brought not only an ample proof of Habite and Repute, but of the pregnancy at different places, and the actual delivery at Paris, by the teftimony of a witness who was prefent at the birth. Upon fuch proof was the verdict of the jury founded, ferving the defendant neareft and lawful heir of tailzie, and provifion in general, to the deceafed Archibald, duke of Douglas, his uncle."

"

We shall not, for the reafons specified in the preceding article, give any farther extracts from this narrative, which is drawn up favourably for the defendant Mr. Douglas. It is, however, proper we should acquaint the public, that about four thousand

quarto