A pleasant stroll of two miles through a shaded lane on the sides of which at suitable intervals, wooden benches are placed for the benefit of pedestrians, brings you to Highgate. These seats under the old oaks are favorite spots, where congregate comfortable looking nurses around whom cluster children of all ages, from the rosy Miss of two years to the stately gentleman of eight. We never cease to admire the English nurses. They have an especially maternal manner and appearance. Blue of eye, red of tint, broad of shoulder and kind of tongue, they are the centre of that solar system, round which toddle and tumble in eccentric orbits, those wonderful planets-little children.

Such notices as this on the wooden benches serve to protect them: "Do not abuse what is intended for the public benefit." Similar notices preserve the flowers and shrubs in all the London parks. In conspicuous places on boards in large letters the visitor reads: "It is hoped that the public will abstain from destroying that which is cultivated for the public gratification." This is perfect; the aim of every society is that each one should be always his own constable and end by not having any other.

On the opposite side of the Hill from Hampstead and near its base in front of a Tom and Jerry Shop, fixed in the ground, on the road side, is a small gray stone which marks the spot where the celebrated Whittington halted to rest and ruminate over his hard fate when leaving London for the country and where he heard the peals of the Bow bells, which seemed to utter the gentle and heart cheering admonition, "Turn again Whittington, Lord Mayor of London town." Everywhere in this neighborhood you observe in the shop signs how highly the memory of this civil patriot and munificent benefactor of the poor is still appreciated. One establishment is called "The Whittington." Another "The Whittington Cat." Another "Whittington and his Cat," nor should we omit to add that one of the most thriving reunions of the London middle-classes bears the name of the "Whittington Club."

The Hill is crowned by Highgate church, from the cemetery of which a wide prospect of the surrounding country, including the metropolis, is obtained. Highgate, like its neighbor, has long been a favorite haunt of Londoners, but by reason of its closer proximity to the city, is rapidly losing its ancient rural characteristics and becoming a modern town. As an evidence of its remarkable healthfulness, it is said that not a case of the plague occurred here during the period when it scourged London in the reign of Charles II.

The unfortunate Arabella Stuart, who was like Lady Catherine Gray, in close proximity to the throne, and whose only crime was

marrying the man she loved, was for so.ne time imprisoned in a house still standing at Highgate. She disguised herself in a suit of men's clothes and escaped. Taking a boat on the Thames, she soon got aboard a French barque lying off Gravesend, where she wished to await the arrival of her husband, Lord Seymour, then a prisoner in the Tower, with whom the projeeted flight had been concerted. Her friends dissuaded her from this course and the barque dropped down the river and into the channel where anchor was cast. Meanwhile Seymour escaped from the Tower and proceeded down the river, but not seeing the French barque, engaged another vessel to land him at Calais, to which place he made good his escape. His absence from the Tower was soon discovered and several ships of war sent in pursuit-one of which overtook the barque containing his wife, which after a short engagement was captured and Arabella Stuart returned to London where she was confined as a State prisoner in the Tower. She bore her fate with cheerfulness, when she heard that her husband was safe in France. but her spirit was soon broken by grief and solitary confinement, and she became insane and died in this condition after four year's imprisonment.

At the period of the restoration Seymour returned to England and was created by Charles II, in grateful recognition of his fidelity, Earl of Hertford. He ever cherished a romantic affection for the Lady Arabella and named his eldest daughter by his second wife after her.

CHAPTER XI.

A LONDON LAW COURT-THE ENGLISH ON AMERICA-THE DUKE OF SOMERSET—THE LAND LAWS, &C —THE COURTS OF QUEEN'S BENCH AND EXCHEQUER-NOMINATION OF SHERIFFS-LORD MAYOR'S BANQUETS-THE RIGHT HON. WM. CUBITT, M. P., LORD MAYOR OF LONDON A VILLAGE GRAVEYARD CURIOUS EPITAPHS.

When returning one day through Westminster Hall, from a visit to the House of Commons, we were struck with the countenances of a number of persons lounging in the neighborhood of a door, upon the left hand side and half way down the vestibule. "Easter term has just begun," said our companion, Dr, Norton Shaw, "let us take a look at the court."

"Easter term has begun!" What a tremendous meaning these simple words have for that unfortunate class of human beings called clients. Almost unconsciously we stopped to scrutinize the wretched people pressing towards the temple of judicature. Almost every passion which can excite the human mind was depicted in the countenances of that miserably agitated crowd. There was the eager, grasping creditor, gloating over the prospect of making good his "pound of flesh," and there his hapless victim, despair pictured in every line of his countenance, and there the sly, sinister-visaged scoundrel waiting the result of his cruel plans to over- reach the unwary victim. On every side the wretched victims of the law's uncertainty and delay, of the pettifogger's rapacity, the knave's talent for stirring up dissension, creating discord, and transferring to his own pockets the substance of the ignorant, helpless and unwary who have fallen into his hands and are at his mercy.

With a soothing sense of relief that we were non-litigant and non expectant, the thought occurred to us whether it was possible that any human being but a hungry attorney could look upon that picture of passion, of hopes and fears, and not feel that ignorance is bliss in everything connected with suits in law and suits in equity.

During a protracted residence in the mother country, we heard so much derogatory of American courts, of the practical denial of justice in them that we formed a high opinion, indeed, of what was always held up to our admiration in contrast therewith—

namely, the British tribunal. It was a common thing to hear American courts spoken of as if such a thing as justice was altogether unknown to them. Returned cockney tourists, big with travelers' stories and virtuous indignation, declared that in the United States, more particularly in New York, it was not only the common, but the right thing, to bribe judge and jury, and to suborn witnesses. Shocking accounts of James Fisk's connection with the Erie railroad swindles were related, and of the manner in which he was encouraged and protected in them by the New York courts. With agreeable merriment, the Tammany ring robberies of the city treasury, New York, and the "brilliant career" of Boss Tweed were enlarged upon, and also the operations of Jay Gould, James McHenry and other railroad "financiers," as well as the "eccentricities" of Gen. Belknap and the whisky rings. All the facts were given with an extraordinary amount of fiction until the whole affair seemed very much like "Yankee Doodle," with variations. The substance of all these horrible narratives was that there was a total denial of justice in American courts, a collusion between judge, jury, witnesses, lawyers and suitors for the purpose of robbing litigants and enriching themselves on the spoils. Brigandage in Spain and Italy was represented as a flea bite in comparison with the luxury of going to law, in America. A suitor when entering a New York court was said to take leave of hope as Dante represented was the case with the lost soul when entering the infernal region. So much in this spirit, vein and humor had been said in our presence, if not addressed to us--when addressed to us, of course, always in the politest manner-by our mellifluous and self satisfied British cousins, and always in contrast with what our modest relatives asserted was the unsullied purity of their own beach and bar, that we confess we approached the portals of one of England's principal courts with a respect much akin to

reverence.

Years have since passed away and a long residence in Britain satisfies us that there was no occasion for emotion on approaching the courts of Westminster; that in fact, justice is about as indiff. erently administered in that venerable pile, as in our own much abused tribunals. Probably no where in the world is such high flown nonsense talked about justice as in England, and probably nowhere is it more difficult to obtain substantial, cheap, immediate redress for wrong or injury. The truth is there can hardly be said to be such a thing as a well defined and understood law governing any case. Shelves groan with books of precedents, but these conflict as often as they agree. Miles of statutes have been enacted, but one half of them contradict the other half. Hundreds of thousands of subtle and acute intellects have thought out "cases," but

The re

each is designed to upset some case which preceded it. sult is that instead of an easily understood, clear, comprehensive code of laws, the English are burdened with a veritable labyrinth. of obsolete phrases and still more obsolete ideas, among which justice is eternally losing her way. No man can hope to do more than master certain parts of this inchoate and useless jargon, and so from age to age the abuse grows larger and larger, the courts become more and more expensive, and suits of all kinds more costly, more hazardous and more unsatisfactory when they are concluded. As laws are made by lawyers, it is difficult to understand where reform is to come from. It is this which really bars the way to judicial reform, either partial or extensive. But until there is reform in these matters and English justice becomes a little more just, and bears a less resemblance to trickery it behooves Englishmen to cultivate more modesty in their comments upon what they term the shortcomings of the American system. Whatever bold front John Bull may show to the "intelligent foreigner" in favor of the stability of all British institutions, public opinion in England is ripe for a change not only in the land laws, but in the entire system of laws, both municipal and constitutional. A few year's residence in the country satisfied us on this point There is not an intelligent man of business in England who has ever been engaged in legal transactions, who does not know to his cost the petty pieces of legerdemain by which solicitors, for example, divide with accountants every divisible fragment of a bankrupt's estate, leaving the unfortunate creditor in payment of his debts, a lithographic copy of the accounts, and the memory of a swindle. While the law makers are selected from the class who themselves fatten on the law, who can expect they will permit, much less foster, any measure which they fear will curtail their own incomes. This much we venture to remark on this important subject-some of it was applicable a few years since to our own country-and without intending to cast wholesale censure and accusations of fraud and folly against a whole body of men. Yet we repeat that it is not going too far to assert that lawyers favor the present obscurity of the law, and will always exert the whole of their vast influence to keep it involved. The means of their living they imagine is inextricably associated with its inextricableness. To simplify statutes and make criminal and civil offences less the jungle they now are, would be in their opinion to make lawyers a luxury instead of a necessity. And for this reason, for no other, the profession in England has always been found voting against reform and impeding judicial progress. It is much to be regretted that the prejudice against everything American is so great that they do not try our experiment of codifying and sim

if