Page:Protestant Exiles from France Agnew (1st ed. vol 3).djvu/243

 1784, August 30th. Paul Columbine, Esq., aged 85, descended from an ancient family in the Province of Dauphiny in France, from whence his father, a man of probity, piety, and learning, withdrew at the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, and having taken early a degree abroad, practised physic in this city. This, his youngest son, by temperance, industry, and moderation, through a long and blameless life, had merited and obtained the best and sweetest of human blessings, health, competence, and content.

(5.) Page 291. Right Hon. William Saurin, M.P., Attorney-General for Ireland (born 1758, died 1839.)

(6.) Page 292. Right Hon. Sir John Bernard Bosanquet (born 1773, died 1847), Justice of the Court of Common Pleas. [Edward Foss, in his Biographical Dictionary of the Judges of England, says of Mr Justice Bosanquet, that he was selected as arbitrator between the Crown and the Duke of Athol, to fix the amount of the Duke’s unsettled claims on resigning the sovereignty of the Isle of Man. “He published, without his name, a Letter of a Layman on the connection of the Prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse, embodying in a small compass, a great amount of research. He was a very considerable linguist, of accurate and various learning, and particularly fond of scientific emiuiries.”]

(7.) Page 292. Right Hon. Louis Perrin, late Justice of the Court of King’s Bench, Dublin. [Of the same stock was John Perrin of London, the successful French Teacher and Author, who dedicated his Fables Amusantes to the Prince of Wales on the 4th May 1774.]

(8.) Page 293. Francis Masères, Fellow of Clare Hall, Cambridge, and (1750) Senior Medallist, F.R.S., F.S.A., Cursitor Baron of Exchequer (born 1731, died 1824.)

(9.) Page 294. Anthony Chamier, Esq., M.P., F.R.S., Under-Secretary of State (born 1725, died )

(10.) Right Hon. Isaac Barre, M.P., formerly Lieut-Colonel (born 1726, died 1802).

A pamphlet was published in London in 1777, entitled “Characters, containing an impartial review of the public conduct and abilities of the most eminent Personages in the Parliament of Great Britain, considered as statesmen, senators, and public speakers.” A section is devoted to Colonel Barre, and is highly laudatory — but mentions one inconsistency in his public conduct, and his explanation of it, thus:— “The Resolutions in the Committee of the whole House, in the beginning of the spring session 1774, having (we fear) fatally spawned that celebrated law, called The Boston Port Bill, as the firstborn of those measures which have produced the present civil war in America, it met with the Colonel’s support, contrary to every anterior and subsequent opinion of his in Parliament. This was matter of surprise at the time; and there were some who did not hesitate to impute so sudden and unexpected an alteration of sentiment to motives which have since governed several others who then stood high in the estimation of the public, but who have since flatly belied all their former professions, or have at least learned to be persuaded that they were mistaken or misled. The observation here made was not barely confined to the suspicions or murmurs of people without doors; it has frequently been objected to him by several of the members of Administration in debate, when he has arraigned in the most unqualified terms the measures of Government and charged their authors with ignorance, temerity, and injustice. We have heard them more than once retaliate on him in nearly the following words:— ‘The Boston Port Bill (no matter whether a wise, an expedient, or an equitable measure) drew the nation into this war. Why did you support it so warmly, with all those powers of oratory and ratiocination which you so eminently possess? Everything which has since followed grew out of that measure. If it was a wise measure, why not continue to support it? if a bad one, why for a minute lend it your countenance?’

“The Colonel’s answer can only be properly decided upon by the monitor residing within his own breast. He has repeatedly said on those occasions, ‘that the minister gave him and his friends, both in and out of Parliament, the most full and specific assurances that