Note 65:3 — Chapter X · (continued 2)

An account of all the books in which the constitutional principles of the history have been ably impugned, would only be reminding the reader of many works with which he is probably already familiar. But among the marked productions of this series, if he desire to have a calm appreciation of the merits of Hume's historical criticism, by those who have gone over the same ground, he will peruse the historical works of Hallam, and the treatises of Dr. Allen, including his articles in The Edinburgh Review , and his "Inquiry into the Rise and Growth of the Royal Prerogative." If, however, he wish to have all Hume's tergiversations sifted and exposed with forensic acuteness, and the zeal of an able and vigilant prosecutor,—to have before him, in short, the whole "case" of the British constitution against Hume, let him read Brodie's "History of the British Empire." It will gratify all the admirers of his book to know, that Mr. Brodie is occupied in the preparation of a new edition of his great work, which will, no doubt, be marked by all the same qualities which distinguished the first, increased by farther study and enthusiastic research. It is a singular incident in literary history, that immediately after the appearance of the first edition, filled as it is with a prodigious array of notes and references, the subject was gone over by Godwin in his "History of the Commonwealth," with but slight reference to Mr. Brodie's book; but in such a manner, from the structure of his narrative and otherwise, as to show that he had scarcely any other book before him.

This is not the place for a discussion of Mr. Brodie's charges against Hume: they are honestly supported by references, and will stand or fall on their own merits. But there is one instance in which Mr. Brodie's acuteness has led him farther than every one can follow him. Thus, speaking of a particular passage of Hume, he says, "he has given the very words of Perinchief, whom he yet durst not quote; and his pencil-marks are still at the place in the copy belonging to the Advocates' Library." This statement, to the effect that there exists evidence of Hume having read passages which he has designedly avoided citing, is frequently repeated; and if one would absolutely assure himself that Hume had read the passages, by reference to the copies of the books in the Advocates' Library, he finds one or two scores drawn across the margin with a pencil! The distinguished historical critic, who has noticed this circumstance, must make some allowance for the inferior acumen of ordinary readers, if they should fail to discover why this simple score must of necessity be David Hume—his mark.

Mr. Brodie's book is particularly valuable as a criticism on Hume's notions of the old prerogative in relation to the Star Chamber, the Court of High Commission, Martial Law, Impressments, and Forced Loans.