lug Chronicle,' well deserve to be con sulted.
It ought to be mentioned that the seven persons appointed in 1705 by the 4 & 5 Ann. chap. 8, and again in 1707, by the 6 Ann. chap. 7, to administer the govern went along with other persons whom the new king or queen should have named, in case of his or her absence at the time from the kingdom, are styled Lords Jus flees iu the act, although called regents by Burnet, and in the common accounts. These Lords Justices (twenty-six in all), who actually came into office on the death of Queen Anne, 1st August, 1714, and con tinued till the arrival of the king on the 18th of September, enjoyed more exten sive powers than any others that have been appointed at least in modern times. They were authorized, in the name of the successor, and in his or her stead, to use, exercise, and execute all powers, autho rities, matters, and acts of government, and administration of government, in as full and ample manner as such next suc cessor could use or execute the same if she or he were present in person within this kingdom of Great Britain," until such successor should arrive, or otherwise de termine their authority. The only re strictions laid upon them were, that they were not, without direction from the "queen or king," to dissolve the parlia ment; and that they would subject them selves to the pains of high treason if they gave the royal assent to any bill or bills for repealing or altering the Act of Uniformity, or the Act for the Establishment and Maintenance of the Presbyterian Church Government in Scotland, We are not aware that these facts have ever before been put together. The most
important of them have been derived from the Report of the Committee appointed by the House of Commons in 1788, "to examine and report precedents of such proceedings as may have been had in the case of the personal exercise of the royal authority being prevented or interrupted by infancy, sickness, infirmity, or other wise," which is printed in the Journals of the House, vol. xliv. pp. 11-42. See also, besides the other sources that have been already referred to, an article "On the I Regency Question," in the Edinburgh Review, No. xxxv. (for May, 1811), pp. 46-80. And some particulars may be gleaned from the accounts of the proceed ings in the two Houses of Parliament on occasion of the King's illness iu 1788, as reported in the Parliamentary History,' vol. xxvii. pp. 653-1297 ; and from the discussions on the Regency Bill from the beginning of November, 1810, to the mid dle of February,1811,which nearly fill the 18th volume of the Parliamentary De bates.' One of the speeches which at tracted most attention on the latter occa sion for its argument and research was afterwards published in an authentic form ; that delivered on the 31st of De cember, 1810, by John Leach, Esq. (af terwards Vice-Chaueellor).