ERSKINE, THOMAS, Lord ERSKINE, was the youngest son of Henry David, tenth earl of Buchan; and was b. in Edinburgh, 10th Jan., 1750. Although his father, at the period of his birth, was reduced to an of £200 a year,,lie transmitted to him the blood of a race which had been prolific in men of great ability, and had been ennobled before the era of genuine history. The countess, who was the daughter of sir James Stewart, of Goodtrees, in the co. of Midlothian, was not only a godly Presbyterian and a skillful housewife, but a gifted and accomplished woman. After E. had attended for some time the high school of Edinburgh, the family removed to St, Andrews, at the grammar school of which place, and subsequently at the university, though never it would seem as a matriculated student, Thomas E. received the rest of such education as fell to his share. His desire was to study for a profession; but his parents, who had sent his eldest brother, lord Cardross, to Leyden, and were educating his second brother, Henry, afterwards the well-known Harry E:, for the Scottish bar, could not afford the expense of a third learned education, and sent him to sea as a midshipman. In this capacity he served for four years, until the death of his father, when ha pur chased a commission in the first royals, and was for some time stationed at Minorca, where he employed his leisure time in the study of English literature. On his return to London, his birth, his acquirements, the elegance of his manners, and volubility of his conversation, led to his being warmly received in the best circles. It was then that he had the controversy with Dr. Johnson on the respective merits of Fielding and Richardson which Boswell has recorded; and that he published a pamphlet on the pre vailing abuses in the army, which, though anonymous, was well known to be his, and obtained a great circulation. E. now grew tired of the army as a profession, in which he saw little chance of promotion; and while in this humor, an accidental interview which he had withlord Mansfield at an assize court, determined him to prosecute the study of law. E. was admitted a student of Lincoln's Inn, 26th April, 1775, and on the 13th Jan., 1776, he entered his name on the books of Trinity college, Cambridge, as a gentleman commoner. Many anecdotes are told of the privations which E. underwent when studying for the bar—how he lived on "cow-heel and tripe," dressed so shabbily as to be quite remarkable, and boasted that out of his own family he did not know a lord. Such stories, though probably exaggerated, proved that he endured considerable privations—considerint his rank—in fitting himself for the legal profession. Lord Campbell says, that " during Easter and Trinity terms he excited a great sensation in the dining-hall by appearing with a student's black gown over the scarlet regimentals of the royals; probably not having a decent suit of plain clothes to put on." Though E. was aided by his aristocratic connection, his rise was still very wonderful., Without the
advantage of a business training, or what, probably even in those days, was far more important, a business connection, he rose into practice with almost unprecedented rapidity. After his first speech, the attorneys actually flocked round him with their retainers, and in telling the story, he used sometimes to bring the number which he received before quitting Westminster hall up to sixty-five I His two first clients were -officers in the navy—capt. Baillie, who held an office in Greenwich hospital, against whom a rule had been obtained calling upon him to show. cause why a criminal informa tion for a libel reflecting on lord Sandwich's conduct as governor of the charity, should not be filed upon him; and admiral Keppel, who was tried by a court-martial at Ports mouth for incapacity and misconduct in an encounter with the French fleet off Ushant; and in both cases E. derived benefit from his own early connection with the service and the special information which he thus possessed. Admiral Keppel sent him two £500 notes as a fee. From this time forth, E.'s good fortune as an advocate was unin terrupted. In 1783, he was returned to parliament for Portsmouth. Four years and a half after he was called to the bar, he had cleared £8,000 to £9,000, besides paying his debts, he had got a silk gown, business of at least £3,000 a year, and a seat in parlia ment, and had made his brother lord advocate. In parliament, on the other hand, lie failed so egregiously in his first speech as to leave scarcely any hope in the bosoms of his admirers, and what is very singular, his failure and lord Eldon's took place the same night. To some extent the phenomenon was accounted for by Sheridan's remark when he said to him: you are afraid of Pitt, and that is the flabby part of your character." But notwithstanding his political mortifications, his professional career went on with increasing brilliancy. In 1786, lie was made attorney-general to the prince of Wales, by whom he was warmly patronized, but towards him and every one else he exhibited that manly independence which was the best part of his character. The fact of his appearing as counsel for Thomas Paine is more to his credit, than even the brave and honest speech which he made in his defense; whilst his removal in con sequence from his office is, as lord Campbell has said, a lasting disgrace to those from whom the measure proceeded. Throughout the political trials which occurred in this country at that troubled period, he enacted the same manly part. When E. was pro posed for the woolsack, an office far beyond his legal attainments, the king, George III., in consenting, exclaimed: "'What! what! well! well!—but remember he is your chan cellor, not mine." Yet his decisions as lord-chancellor, according to lord Campbell, are not so much bad as superficial, though by some equity practitioners they are spoken of as the apocrypha. E. was engaged in the defense of queen Caroline. He died 17th Nov., 1823.