these important documents. Facts which were established at Tripoli during the
year 1829, and established to the entire satisfaction of the consuls of Britain,
the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, and Sardinia, develope a system of treachery and plunder regarding the major and his property, which almost amounts to the incredible. It seems to have been fully made out, that the very guide (Babani,) who set out with the traveller from Tripoli, was under the secret direction of Hassunah D' Ghies, son of the prime minister of the Tripolitan bashaw, and the conspirator against the major's life—that by his (D' Glues') instructions the ferocious Bourabouschi, the eventual murderer, was appointed to be the conductor of the major from Timbuctoo, and that into his (D'Ghies') hands the major's papers (fourteen inches long by seven thick,) were put by another of his emissaries shortly after the murder. In short, it was afterwards
fully ascertained that this packet was secreted iu Tripoli in the month of July
or August, 1828.
The most amazing part of the tale of treachery yet remains to be told. It would further appear that the documents referred to were given by D' Ghies to the French consul at Tripoli, the baron de Rosseau, and that during the greater part of the major's journey this official from France had been in secret correspondence with the conspirators—that he exerted himself in securing the flight of Hassunah D' Ghies after the treachery had been discovered, and gave protection to, and tampered with his brother Mohamed, who made the disclosure.
It were out of place, in this memoir, to detail the strong chain of evidence by which these allegations are supported. A masterly summary of it will be found in the Quarterly Review, No. 84. Suffice it to say, that neither M. Rosseau nor the French government did anything to acquit themselves of the fearful charge there preferred against- them. Till removed, it must stand a foul blot upon their national honour.
LAING, Malcolm, a lawyer and distinguished constitutional historian, was born in the year 1762, at Strynzia, his paternal estate, situated on the main-land of Orkney. He received the rudiments of his education at the humble but respectable grammar school of Kirkwall; a seminary which is generally attended by about a hundred boys, the sons of the neighbouring proprietors and farmers. When he had reached the proper age, he was sent to the university of Edinburgh, then superintended and attended by men of great talent. Along with many of the latter class, he joined in the establishment of the Speculative Society, an institution whose subjects of discussion were perhaps to a certain extent guided by his peculiar tastes, and certainly coincided remarkably with those in which he afterwards distinguished himself.
In 1785, he passed as a Scottish advocate: we do not know whether he had any predilection for the practice of the law, or whether he made choice of the profession, for the mere respectability of the title, and the opportunity it might afford of attracting notice as a politician; but assuredly, notwithstanding his very high talents in general, and his peculiarly great powers as a reasonev or special pleader, he never was much employed, or known as a distinguished practising barrister. It will scarcely account sufficiently for this circumstance, that the manner in which he delivered his powerful arguments was neither majestic nor pleasing, that "his speeches were uttered with an almost preternatural rapidity, and in harsh and disagreeable tones." If he could speak and compose with facility—and in parliament he was considered an able speaker—such arguments as he might have used did not require the extraneous assistance of manner, even for a jury; while almost the whole pleading in Scotland at that period was addressed to the judges, from whose well-practised intellects, reason and powerful argument only could find attention. Laing has shown in his writings
