shment of the several stamp-duties, applied to the
augmentation, and the appropriation of their produce in such a manner,
that the crown cannot alter the application of the sums thus granted in
parliament. But on this occasion, no attempt was made in favour of the
independency of the judges, which seems to have been invaded by a late
interpretation of, or rather by a deviation from, the act of settlement;
in which it is expressly ordained, that the commissions of the judge?
should continue in force _quamdiu se bene gesserint_; that their
salaries should be fixed, and none of them remove-able but by an address
of both houses of parliament. It was then, without all doubt, the
intention of the legislature that every judge should enjoy his office
during life, unless convicted, by legal trial, of some misbehaviour, or
unless both houses of parliament should concur in desiring his removal:
but the doctrine now adopted imports, that no commission can continue
in force longer than the life of the king by whom it was granted; that
therefore the commissions of the judges must be renewed by a new king
at his accession, who should have it in his power to employ either those
whom he finds acting as judges at his accession, or confer their offices
on others, with no other restraint than that the condition of new
commissions, should be _quamdiu se bene gesserint_. Thus the office of
a judge is more precarious, and the influence of the crown receives a
considerable reinforcement.

Among the bills that miscarried in the course of the session, we may
number a second attempt to carry into execution the scheme which was
offered last year for the more effectual manning the navy, preventing
desertion, and relieving and encouraging the seamen of Great Britain. A
bill was accordingly brought in, couched in nearly the same terms
which had been rejected in the last session; and it was supported by
a considerable number of members, animated with a true spirit of
patriotism: but to the trading part of the nation it appeared one of
those plausible projects, which, though agreeable in speculation, can
never be reduced into practice, without a concomitancy of greater evils
than those they were intended to remove. While the bill remained under
the consideration of the house, petitions were presented against it by
the merchants of Bristol, Scarborough, Whitby, Ivingston-upon-Hull, and
Lancaster, representing, that by such a law, the trade of the kingdom